Columbia Pictures | Release Date: November 14, 2008
6.3
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 591 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
294
Mixed:
216
Negative:
81
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
9
tompDec 10, 2008
Ignore the critics, this is one of the best bond films ever.
0 of 2 users found this helpful
8
MarkWDec 9, 2008
The first Bond film I liked was Casino Royale the second is Quantum of Solace. I just can't stand the cheese associated with most Bond films so the last two instalments are a welcome relief. Still I guess I can understand why Bond fans The first Bond film I liked was Casino Royale the second is Quantum of Solace. I just can't stand the cheese associated with most Bond films so the last two instalments are a welcome relief. Still I guess I can understand why Bond fans are bitter, there are plenty of intelligent films out there so perhaps the Bond franchise should stick to what the Bond fans like. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
EricO.Dec 6, 2008
I've literally just returned from watching this Bond movie, and while walking out of the theater, my dad commented on what he considered to be the lame plot. Listen- no one should go to a Bond movie expecting a coherent plotline; in I've literally just returned from watching this Bond movie, and while walking out of the theater, my dad commented on what he considered to be the lame plot. Listen- no one should go to a Bond movie expecting a coherent plotline; in fact, they've never had coherent plotlines. Honestly, Daniel Craig is the best Bond since Connery and I don't think anyone can seriously dispute that. The girls in QOS are perfectly acceptable and the locales are exotic, as should be expected. The major flaw with this film is the quick-cut method and hand-held camera work used by the director during action sequences. Stuntmen were injured while making this Bond film, Craig lost part of his finger during an action sequence, but damned if you can tell what's going on at any point while the action takes place. As Bond films are all about the action sequences, the quick-editing and shaky hand-held camerawork destroys a good portion of the film as a whole. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful
3
JackS.Dec 4, 2008
I'm not joking around, what the hell was the point to that movie? It has to be the worst 007 movie ever. The only movie that isn't written by Ian Flemming (he only mad the charecters not the story) turns out to be the worst. I know I'm not joking around, what the hell was the point to that movie? It has to be the worst 007 movie ever. The only movie that isn't written by Ian Flemming (he only mad the charecters not the story) turns out to be the worst. I know they could have made something so much better then that. What was the point to all that action? What is the bad thing thats going on right now? Why is there cars chasing eachother? Is that charecter good or bad? What is Greene trying to do with the world? So many questions are unclear once the movie is over. Everyone who saw it that I know said that they were lost the whole movie. It totally needed more talking and explaining for people to understand what is going on that whole movie. It can't pick off the first movie right when it starts. It is confusing and you have no clue what was going on most of the time until the end. And even still you are still lost in questions what was going on that movie. It was confusing, the action was pointless, it was nothing like the tranditional Bond movies. Ian Flemming is the writer of 007... there is no one else like him. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
PeterHDec 2, 2008
Terrible movie. While Craig has an aura of intensity about him which makes him a wonderful bond, the plot was absolutely terrible. At the beginning I thought that there would be more of a focus on the secretive 'company', but they Terrible movie. While Craig has an aura of intensity about him which makes him a wonderful bond, the plot was absolutely terrible. At the beginning I thought that there would be more of a focus on the secretive 'company', but they barely went into that. While I do not like films that are pointlessly dragged out to the extent of wasted time, this was at the opposite extreme; being too short to fulfill the plot or send any message to the audience. It was like trying to fit a 400 pound guy into small size clothing - it does not work. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
TomCDec 2, 2008
What Craig gains in the way of brutish subtlety means a loss of the charm and fun people expect from Bond films. Quantum is perfectly average, reaching the quota for explosions and attractive women, however; the plot is convoluted while What Craig gains in the way of brutish subtlety means a loss of the charm and fun people expect from Bond films. Quantum is perfectly average, reaching the quota for explosions and attractive women, however; the plot is convoluted while falling short of being intriguing, the action scene directing is frustratingly scrappy and most disturbingly it seems that the formally flirtatious attitude of Bond films has been abandoned. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
AronJ.Dec 1, 2008
As time goes on, and more bond films come out, the more they strey from who james bond is supposed to be, james bond is becoming more like rambo and Quantum is exactly that, just not james bond anymore, although watchable if you like action movies.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
JohnDDec 1, 2008
After readiing the reviews I was expecting to be disappointed, but this Bond movie is one of the most exotic, intelligent and action-packed of all. Some really great sequences - all properly done - (no CGI) - and the close-up / quick cut After readiing the reviews I was expecting to be disappointed, but this Bond movie is one of the most exotic, intelligent and action-packed of all. Some really great sequences - all properly done - (no CGI) - and the close-up / quick cut MTV-style editing places the viewer right in the mayhem. Yes, it's brutal and there are absolutely no Moore-esque one-liners or gadgets, this is a Bond for adults. Recommended. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
ASNov 29, 2008
After watching this movie, I've come to realize that many people (and especially critics) just didn't get it. It's part two of Casino Royale. It is a two-movie storyline that explains why he is who he is and why the love of a After watching this movie, I've come to realize that many people (and especially critics) just didn't get it. It's part two of Casino Royale. It is a two-movie storyline that explains why he is who he is and why the love of a woman will never again pull him away from his "job". It wasn't that the plot was weak as many as said. It was simply just an extension of the first movie's plot to wrap up James Bond's introduction to us in this format. There were obvious signs that the next movie will be a new plot in a more traditional Bond way. The first two movies set up who this Bond is...now we go forward. By the way, the entertainment value of this movie is still very high. It is such a good way to introduce the best bond of a new generation. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
LarryNov 28, 2008
On balance, no better or worse than "Casino Royale." Had its strengths, plus real weaknesses. Craig is a special Bond, as was Connery. The development of his relationship with 'M' has been excellent, probably the best element of On balance, no better or worse than "Casino Royale." Had its strengths, plus real weaknesses. Craig is a special Bond, as was Connery. The development of his relationship with 'M' has been excellent, probably the best element of two movies. Plot was thin, but not nearly as confusing as I'd been led to believe. Really disliked the denouement scenes in the weird desert hotel. Lacked cleverness and the action was forced on the viewer rather mindlessly. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
JamesNov 28, 2008
Extremely poor plot and very far fetched, even for a bond flick. The director expects us to believe bond miraculously survives multiple certain death situations with giving even a hint as to how. I had hopes that the bond franchise had Extremely poor plot and very far fetched, even for a bond flick. The director expects us to believe bond miraculously survives multiple certain death situations with giving even a hint as to how. I had hopes that the bond franchise had wisened up given a more human nature of casino royale, but they have gone terribly of the rails this time around. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
10
MatthewR.Nov 27, 2008
Most people reviewing this film really don't seem to understand it at all. This film is a character study at its core. It serves as the bridge between what Bond was and what he will be for the foreseeable future (I hope). It is Most people reviewing this film really don't seem to understand it at all. This film is a character study at its core. It serves as the bridge between what Bond was and what he will be for the foreseeable future (I hope). It is excellent in every respect, even moreso than Casino Royalle, which I thought was fantastic. For those of you who miss hollowed out volcano bases and giant lasers in space, go watch Moonraker to your hearts' content. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
teriwanTNov 27, 2008
Worst Bond movie ever? I think not! In fact, I think that was Die Another Day. Ring any bells? Thank you Daniel Craig for reinstating my faith in the franchise. Sure, this film is not perfect, but its a definate step in the right direction. Worst Bond movie ever? I think not! In fact, I think that was Die Another Day. Ring any bells? Thank you Daniel Craig for reinstating my faith in the franchise. Sure, this film is not perfect, but its a definate step in the right direction. My only two complaints about this one are that the villian could have been more menacing and the action scenes not so poorly edited. Otherwise it was a very enjoyable night at the movies for me. I like the fact that they are moulding the character closer to Ian Flemmings original ideas of Bond and not the horrible cheese-and-wine character that Brosnan portrayed with his stupid remarks and lame jokes. Can't wait to see what they will do with the next installment! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
JakeENov 24, 2008
Great movie, action was fluent, and the story was driven. It was smart and inolved great emotional fluctuation that seemed to combine together for a great fun movie. Craig is an awesome bond.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JIMBNov 24, 2008
this movie is by far better than the all the horror mivies being made today. at least bond uses more realistic toys in the new movies and not all the old gimimicks, car that dissapear, watches that can left 2 people without taking your arm this movie is by far better than the all the horror mivies being made today. at least bond uses more realistic toys in the new movies and not all the old gimimicks, car that dissapear, watches that can left 2 people without taking your arm off? Hope the new writers keep it real in the future as well. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JohnnyG.Nov 24, 2008
What's wrong with a little action? Not as good as Casino Royale of course, but still good nonetheless. I had low expectations due to hearing poor reviews from people who had high expectations, so when I went into the film I left feeling What's wrong with a little action? Not as good as Casino Royale of course, but still good nonetheless. I had low expectations due to hearing poor reviews from people who had high expectations, so when I went into the film I left feeling very relieved and anything but dissappointed. True, I have not scene any bond film other than a Brosnan's or Craig's, but I have to admit, for what this film was, it was a good one. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
DorothyL.Nov 23, 2008
As a woman, I was looking forward to seeing Bond in another speedo, admiring his gorgeous physique and relishing in the delight of some outrageous plot to rule the world. Sadly, I was disappointed. The plot was weak, the bad guy looked As a woman, I was looking forward to seeing Bond in another speedo, admiring his gorgeous physique and relishing in the delight of some outrageous plot to rule the world. Sadly, I was disappointed. The plot was weak, the bad guy looked creepy and there was no seduction. It was all action and not much else. I still think Daniel Craig is the second best Bond, after Sean Connery and hope that the next installment will be a true Bond movie, not an action movie about someone getting revenge for a lost love. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
skNov 23, 2008
Very very poor bond movie. Bad story, and honestly quite a boring movie to watch. Makes the awesome Casino Royale look like a classic.
1 of 2 users found this helpful
0
DavidW.Nov 22, 2008
One terrible scene after another. Action set pieces are incoherent. The drama is dialed down. Craig's muscles are the most impressive thing on display. For the Bond movie with the biggest budget, this was a waste of a lot of money.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
ScottENov 22, 2008
Like many of the other reviewers the story line was much too thin, even for a bond movie. The bad guys were totally forgettable. Their entire diabolical scheme is never even close to coming to fruition which doesn't lead to any sense of Like many of the other reviewers the story line was much too thin, even for a bond movie. The bad guys were totally forgettable. Their entire diabolical scheme is never even close to coming to fruition which doesn't lead to any sense of urgency to stop them. The American patsy operatives were boring and added nothing. Would have been better to stay home and watch Casino Royale again on DVD. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
KevinFNov 22, 2008
Remember the good old days when part of the joy of a Bond movie was watching the gorgeous 'dames"...it's a sad commentary on the franchise that the highlight of this movie was again the "Dame". I found myself looking forward to her Remember the good old days when part of the joy of a Bond movie was watching the gorgeous 'dames"...it's a sad commentary on the franchise that the highlight of this movie was again the "Dame". I found myself looking forward to her scenes just because she was the only vaguely human presence in the movie. Don't get me wrong, I loved Casino Royal and thought it was a brilliant re-imagining of the franchise, and I have to say that this movie is well written (I guess that's to be expected when Paul Haggis is involved) but it had no real heart, in both senses of the word. Bond was marginally psychopathic (hard to root for a serial killer) and the set pieces were predictable. God bless Jason Bourne, I think the introduction of a more "Bourne like" texture to Bond is great but I think the director of the next Bond movie would do well to watch the Bourne movies again and figure out that all the great action in the world is hollow unless the audience cares about the outcome and the characters (gosh where have I heard that before) Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
EliC.Nov 22, 2008
Film history will deem this the worst of the Bond movies. Even 'A View to a Kill' , the Bond film generally listed as the worst, is redeemable because of a good song and the presence of Grace Jones. Nothing in this tedious film Film history will deem this the worst of the Bond movies. Even 'A View to a Kill' , the Bond film generally listed as the worst, is redeemable because of a good song and the presence of Grace Jones. Nothing in this tedious film saves it except that I hope that we will still see Daniel Craig in the next film. He surely is a great James Bond. Nothing else in this 23rd in the series works. The music is awful, the plot is lame and the editing makes the action unviewable. At a short 105 minutes, this film need at least 30 more minutes to fill out basic plot. I knew that this film was in trouble within the first 15 minutes. After watching the incomprehensible pre-title sequence, I rewrote the screenplay in my head the way it SHOULD have been scripted. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
VS.D.Nov 21, 2008
Ugh. The story was nonsense. It made so little sense that at one point I wondered if the projectionist had skipped a reel.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
ScottL.Nov 20, 2008
It was not dificult to tell that the was Forster's first time directing an action scene. The scenes were more than a little conrtived and the cuts made you spend more time wondering who was doing what. The acting was merely average. I It was not dificult to tell that the was Forster's first time directing an action scene. The scenes were more than a little conrtived and the cuts made you spend more time wondering who was doing what. The acting was merely average. I never got the feeling that Camille was really all that angry, and Bond seemed more like someone had killed his dog, not his lover. The villain was weak and his scheme was boring. All in all, this is one of those movies where I wish I had my time back more than my money. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
BenjaminG.Nov 20, 2008
Just another Action Movie, not Bond anymore.
2 of 4 users found this helpful
4
DH.Nov 20, 2008
Daniel Craig's physical presence and intensity is definitely a plus for the current Bond series. The action was fast but the plot was a bit vague, giving the impression it was all over too quickly without really knowing what happened. Daniel Craig's physical presence and intensity is definitely a plus for the current Bond series. The action was fast but the plot was a bit vague, giving the impression it was all over too quickly without really knowing what happened. the main drawback I noticed was the subtle anti-American undertones; the American intelligence agent with the moustache that was portayed as a bumbling oaf, and the sublte comments about "the Americans just in it for the oil". Also; no "Q". I realize they're trying to get away from the sci-fi gadgetry that went overboard during the Brosnan era, but I don't think they should eliminate gadgetry all together. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
ChrisC.Nov 18, 2008
Very disappointing. I like the new portrayal of Bond, it's way more true to the Fleming novels than the campy crap of the overrated Connery ones and the foppish prettyboyness of Brosnan. And I'm happy to see the end of the random Very disappointing. I like the new portrayal of Bond, it's way more true to the Fleming novels than the campy crap of the overrated Connery ones and the foppish prettyboyness of Brosnan. And I'm happy to see the end of the random devices Bond just happens to come into the exact situation for him to need it. Craig is how Bond should be portrayed. But the action sequences were terrible. They were so contrived they came off like the Peter vs The Chicken sequences from Family Guy. The villains were completely uncompelling, the writing was just lame. It was just a cookie cutter action flick whose main character just happened to be named Bond. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
BrianT.Nov 18, 2008
This was definitely in the lower echelon of Bond films. Daniel Craig is good, but this movie is weakly plotted and has an annoyingly thin story line. Some of the action sequences are murky, making it difficult to tell who's who. I found This was definitely in the lower echelon of Bond films. Daniel Craig is good, but this movie is weakly plotted and has an annoyingly thin story line. Some of the action sequences are murky, making it difficult to tell who's who. I found myself getting restless leg syndrome and it wasn't even a very long movie by Bond standards. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
ChristianT.Nov 18, 2008
I was never a bond fan because lets just face it, the franchise was always campy & ridiculous. I heard Casino Royale was totally different, and boy were they right. What an amazing movie that was, and possibly the best step any franchise has I was never a bond fan because lets just face it, the franchise was always campy & ridiculous. I heard Casino Royale was totally different, and boy were they right. What an amazing movie that was, and possibly the best step any franchise has ever made. I rarely see movies at the theatre anymore but Brandi & I decided to have a date night and we saw Quantum of Solace opening night on Friday (that's how much I liked Casino Royale). If Casino Royale was an A movie, Quantum of Solace was a C. The vibe I get from Daniel Craig in this movie is "get the job done at all costs", but while his confidence and smoothness is very "Bond" I'm afraid it came off as to "Bond". He wasn't "real" like he was in Casino, he wasn't emotionally motivated by revenge. Like Kevin was saying he was killing people but there was no fun in it. He wasn't really volnerable in this movie, either physically by the bad guys or with women (past or present). It was very much like Bourne (in fact I thought they took to many cue's from Bourne), except every time Bourne killed someone it had an effect on him. This movie was unfortunately made up of to much superficial action where you never really believe his life is in danger. There were to many scenes that were cheesy and absolutely impossible to survive to take the whole thing seriously. The ending was also anticlimactic, unlike Casino Royale where there was a delivery that echoed throughout this entire movie. It just seemed like Q of S is plagued by being stuck somewhere in the middle of the Daniel Craig legacy. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JackF.Nov 18, 2008
The starting scenes are just great. The concept of Bond being attacked just after he captures Mr. White is just great. Bond looks cool after the chase and the title song isn't that bad as everyone is saying. But the problem is that many The starting scenes are just great. The concept of Bond being attacked just after he captures Mr. White is just great. Bond looks cool after the chase and the title song isn't that bad as everyone is saying. But the problem is that many Bond formulas are repeated. "Bond style should be continued, not the franchise's formulas." They should retain the Vodka Martini and Aston Martins and Bond Girls(since they are his preferences) , but should keep the formula closer to real espionage. This film is gritty, no doubt, but the action scenes seem to be done for their sake alone. Like the knife scene and the plane scene. The fires and bombings at the climax are too boring and cliched. The good part is Craig's acting and they should let him act more. Judi Dench is of course brilliant and typecast in M's role. Atterton's role should have been longer. After all she was more attractive. Plus, some scenes were just not required. Like the horse race shown in the beginning and the Tosca concert. So, there is brilliance here and there, but overall the movie isn't as good as Casino Royale. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
DanaM.Nov 17, 2008
I really wanted to like this movie. I really did. But this was a disjointed confusing series of chase and fight scenes. It was very hard to connect with any of the characters. I think Bond spoke between twenty and thirty words the whole I really wanted to like this movie. I really did. But this was a disjointed confusing series of chase and fight scenes. It was very hard to connect with any of the characters. I think Bond spoke between twenty and thirty words the whole movie. Did I say the plot was very confusing? Sorry Bond, no gold for you this time Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
BradleeNov 17, 2008
If you wanted to see a James Bond Movie, then this isn't it. No cool toys for Bond, barely any Bond references. Could easily have been any action movie. Bottom line, no toys, no sex, barely any action.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
BenH.Nov 17, 2008
Great addition to the Bond series. I'm not sure why it gets mixed reviews. If you are a fan of the franchise, you'll love this film.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
AramisG.Nov 17, 2008
I like the new direction these Bond movies are taking. More cerebral and violent than older movies. Doesn't spell everything out and leaves lots of avenues open for other sequels (in a good way). If you are looking for stupid gadgets I like the new direction these Bond movies are taking. More cerebral and violent than older movies. Doesn't spell everything out and leaves lots of avenues open for other sequels (in a good way). If you are looking for stupid gadgets and unbelievable villains with silly world domination aspirations you have 30 years of other Bond movies to watch. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
AlexC.Nov 17, 2008
Worst Bond film ever based on many facts: no character development, no depth to the plot, very plain action sequences (with many borrowed from previous films) and way too many loose ends. It seems like all the good scenes were edited out to Worst Bond film ever based on many facts: no character development, no depth to the plot, very plain action sequences (with many borrowed from previous films) and way too many loose ends. It seems like all the good scenes were edited out to leave this skeleton with no meat for a story. Wait for video. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
6
HollyC.Nov 17, 2008
This film is action packed from the start and doesn't really stop the entire way through---which is why I can see many people disliking the film for how little time is given to plotting/characters/plans (they try to shoehorn stuff in, This film is action packed from the start and doesn't really stop the entire way through---which is why I can see many people disliking the film for how little time is given to plotting/characters/plans (they try to shoehorn stuff in, but it can be confusing). I really liked the action sequences though and it's tightly written in that aspect. But I do think Casino Royal was much better. Many draw a comparison with Bourne--especially as QoS doesn't have a lot of the usual Bond elegance/humor/camp and gadgets. It's striped down and a pretty single-minded revenge tale. And really, the Bourne films do that much better. So hopefully Bond will return to his style/panache humor--etc---after this film. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
SteveB.Nov 17, 2008
My main beef is that the action, and there is a lot, is cut so frantically into little snippets that it's hard to follow. In the boat-fight scene, a grappling hook is thrown---where? Onto the other boat? That boat flies off behind--why? My main beef is that the action, and there is a lot, is cut so frantically into little snippets that it's hard to follow. In the boat-fight scene, a grappling hook is thrown---where? Onto the other boat? That boat flies off behind--why? Did it deflate it? Did it catch on something else? Who knows. See this movie and then watch Casino Royale again and you'll be surprised how much better CR is. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
JimG.Nov 17, 2008
Poor plot, character development, and script kept this movie from being what it should be.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JacobV.Nov 17, 2008
I love the new bond who doesn't have outrageous gadgets and could actually be a real guy. This movie is great because you see how one dead end turns into a lead that becomes a whole operation. This movie doesn't sugarcoat anything. I love the new bond who doesn't have outrageous gadgets and could actually be a real guy. This movie is great because you see how one dead end turns into a lead that becomes a whole operation. This movie doesn't sugarcoat anything. Bond is ruthless and remorseless. He kills everything. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
MichaelTNov 17, 2008
Not sure why this film is receiving mixed reviews. I thought it was great, and Daniel Craig was awesome. It was a bit different than other Bond movies, but not in a bad sense.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
JacobCNov 17, 2008
Theres a plot...but its thin, and there is virtually no ending. Also, major questions go unanswered for the viewer, but not James Bond. If you've seen the movie, you know what I mean.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
PeterONov 17, 2008
Good but not enough fun, bring back the gadgets.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
kvanNov 17, 2008
Time to retool the franchise again. The plot was horrible, and there was no chemistry between any of the characters. If they didn't bill this as a Bond movie, it would have gone right to DVD.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
MateoZ.Nov 17, 2008
It's a sequel to a reboot on the whole franchise. It's about a Fleming Bond, a blunt instrument still finding his way towards refinement; on a revenge mission (so excuse the absence of puns and cheesy one-liners); a newly installed It's a sequel to a reboot on the whole franchise. It's about a Fleming Bond, a blunt instrument still finding his way towards refinement; on a revenge mission (so excuse the absence of puns and cheesy one-liners); a newly installed double-0 agent (so therefore a killing machine) and a Bond for the millennium. So all of you, relics from the cold war get real and get used to this. We are looking forward to a promising Bond future with Daniel Craig. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
JeremyCNov 16, 2008
Extremely mediocre. It is clear that they were trying to hail back to the old bonds, unfortunately that is not what people want anymore, and it is completely possible to stay faithful without taking ten steps back. There was a complete lack Extremely mediocre. It is clear that they were trying to hail back to the old bonds, unfortunately that is not what people want anymore, and it is completely possible to stay faithful without taking ten steps back. There was a complete lack of continuity in the plot and the action. Casino Royale was great because it was as smooth as butter, the sequencing in Royale made sense and the action was logical. ""SPOILER"" 1. How is anything resolved just because Greene is killed. Quantum is still kicking, and they still own the land in Bolivia. 2. Why is the hotel blowing up??? The garage is directly connected to the reactor? And a car backs up into the fuel cell reactor exhaust at 20 mph and suddenly the entire structure explodes in a fireball? Are they so lazy they can't even think of a good reason for this sequence at the end? If so, I am sad that this is where Bond will be going "" SPOILER OVER "" . Quantum feels like every other spy/action movie that comes out every year, which is not what Bond should be, Bond should blow those out of the water, Quantum doesn't even come close. If Casino Royale were the Empire Strikes Back, Quantum would be Return of the Jedi. Heartlessly comical and disappointing. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
AndrewNov 16, 2008
This is not a bad movie and quite frankly if you have the entire collection this is a welcome addition: who the hell wants another movie similar to all those prior to Casino Royale (II). As to those who did not like the movie, well, change This is not a bad movie and quite frankly if you have the entire collection this is a welcome addition: who the hell wants another movie similar to all those prior to Casino Royale (II). As to those who did not like the movie, well, change is not to everyone's tastes. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
OrsonNov 16, 2008
This Bond sucks as surprisingly as Casino surpassed expectations. The problem? In a first, the action sequences have no rhyme, rythym, or reason. Truly, the first such Bond picture in which these are panful and ineffective to watch. This Bond sucks as surprisingly as Casino surpassed expectations. The problem? In a first, the action sequences have no rhyme, rythym, or reason. Truly, the first such Bond picture in which these are panful and ineffective to watch. Frustrating viewing. he non-action scenes are actually economical gems, but far too brief to enjoy as Bondian. I wish the film would be re-cut before going to DVD. Then I would have something to look forward too (the double DVD release). Instead, I wonder if they even shot enough real action footage to do it. An amazing waste saved only by superior principle actors. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
MattB.Nov 16, 2008
Almost as strong as the first, Quantum delivers from every Bond angle. Contrary to many opinions, 007 upholds the swagger and demeanor required. Forster matches Campbell with quality style in his direction. A MUST see for any Bond fan!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
MartyL.Nov 16, 2008
Daniel Craig *IS* Jamed Bond. Loved the story, loved the action. Hated the cinematography and editing. TO DIRECTORS - YOU HAVE AMAZING SET DESIGN PEOPLE, YOU DON'T NEED TO SHAKE THE DAMN CAMERA TO HIDE STUFF... Please... Give us camera Daniel Craig *IS* Jamed Bond. Loved the story, loved the action. Hated the cinematography and editing. TO DIRECTORS - YOU HAVE AMAZING SET DESIGN PEOPLE, YOU DON'T NEED TO SHAKE THE DAMN CAMERA TO HIDE STUFF... Please... Give us camera shots that lets us SEE the action instead of blurr it!!! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
JamesK.Nov 16, 2008
Bond has come to be understood as bullets, bombs and babes... this is where Quantum of Solace goes awry. Yes, it has all that and more, but the movie feels that the plots only purpose is to be the loose threads (read gossamer) that tie all Bond has come to be understood as bullets, bombs and babes... this is where Quantum of Solace goes awry. Yes, it has all that and more, but the movie feels that the plots only purpose is to be the loose threads (read gossamer) that tie all 130min of bullets bombs and babes together. Is it really so dangerous to let actors act that the safer solution is to blow them up? I would hope not. It is a shame that when Casino Royale so perfectly crafts a bond worthy of Connery himself they let it slip right back into the world of unimaginative garbage worthy of Langsby. I only hope that they decide to work a little story and character into the next film. perhaps instead of 90% action 5%sex 5% story, they could strike a more balanced blend. Better luck next time guys Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
TDNov 16, 2008
Seriously i am not understanding the all over the place actions scenes, it's really too much for you eyes to handle. Reminds me of the second bourne movie, you just can't follow the scene. I also took a 10 min nap during the movie Seriously i am not understanding the all over the place actions scenes, it's really too much for you eyes to handle. Reminds me of the second bourne movie, you just can't follow the scene. I also took a 10 min nap during the movie which is not normal a good sign. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
WilliamC.Nov 16, 2008
Disappointing! The opening theme song was garbage, and the "Bond" theme music never played until the ending credits.Then there's the film itself...Muddled dialog,poorly edited, and seemingly endless action sequences that looked staged Disappointing! The opening theme song was garbage, and the "Bond" theme music never played until the ending credits.Then there's the film itself...Muddled dialog,poorly edited, and seemingly endless action sequences that looked staged and fake. The story line/plot is only evident 7/8's of the way thru the film.I can't blame the actors here , but just about every part of this film is sub-par.Maybe the weakest,dumbest of all the Bond Films.The Broccoli family laid a egg. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
TonyW.Nov 16, 2008
Daniel Craig is excellent as usual as are all the other actors, that is my 7. The director is totally clueless in this installment, the action sequences are big budget but more time is spent showing shaking camera shots than letting us Daniel Craig is excellent as usual as are all the other actors, that is my 7. The director is totally clueless in this installment, the action sequences are big budget but more time is spent showing shaking camera shots than letting us digest what is happening onscreen. I'm astonished that the executives let this movie be released in this form. Maybe a directors cut may be the solution who knows? It's like opening a closet and everything in there is good but it all just fell on your head and gave you a nasty bruise Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
BobK.Nov 16, 2008
High on action shots, but the action depicted is not credible human action but rather more like one of those Chinese action films. The premise of the story seems rather unengaging.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
KimL.Nov 16, 2008
no plot just shootem up mindless violence. the studio put this drivel together to cash in on the success of casino royal. I am sorry I got taken in. I am so disappointed.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
HansH.Nov 16, 2008
Not as phenomenal as Casino Royale, but still extremely entertaining and solid.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
JoshPNov 16, 2008
Anybody knows what is going on in the world today? Water and the access to it is becoming privatized. As for being the subject of a Bond movie, it may not have the sex appeal of gold, space and just general mass destruction, but I think it Anybody knows what is going on in the world today? Water and the access to it is becoming privatized. As for being the subject of a Bond movie, it may not have the sex appeal of gold, space and just general mass destruction, but I think it was appropriate enough. What I think is disappointing viewers is the lack of back story to it all. Which in all fairness wasn't done very well. What I don't agree with is the anger towards Bond not being Bond. Sure...thats how the books were written, but if writers didn't take liberties or adjust for the modern era, you might as well just read a book instead. Bond is evolving(as he supposed to be newer during this inception) and you have to give him time. Hopefully this movie will wrap the "i'm angry because my girl died" and all the fanboys will have a bit more debonair Bond lines next time they will never use on the ladies. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
JohnB.Nov 16, 2008
I don't think bond encountered anyone, that was not mi6, in the first 45 min without killing them, awesome. lots of action, a great film.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
DougN.Nov 16, 2008
Lacks the humor and gadgets of past Bond films. Where is Q, for example? But overall, I liked it. Seems a bit "darker" than any of the past Bond films.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
KevinH.Nov 16, 2008
After the sensational CASINO ROYALE, this is a big disappointment. CR had thrilling stuntwork & coherent plot. Here, we're back to BOURNE-like action sequences that are cut so fast and furious that the audience feels nothing while After the sensational CASINO ROYALE, this is a big disappointment. CR had thrilling stuntwork & coherent plot. Here, we're back to BOURNE-like action sequences that are cut so fast and furious that the audience feels nothing while watching it. And I hope that Daniel Craig didn't do any of his own stunts because the way they were filmed in such fragmented short bursts of confusion, he needn't have taken the risks. Worst opening credits ever; worst Bond song ever. The plot is a mess and when Bond finally gets the villain at the end (nots not a spoiler), it all happens off-stage (suddenly the villain is saying, "Well, I've told you everything I know..."). The ending will thrill those who like explosions but if you want to know WHY anyone did what they did, you're out of luck. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
WilliamB.Nov 16, 2008
Daniel Craig is fine, but this film is too uptight! Sometimes the action set-pieces are confusing and incoherent.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
AndyM.Nov 16, 2008
I'm no rabid Bond fan, so this review won't be based on Quantum's adherence to the books or how it compares Sean Connery's films. In a nutshell, this movie had no great plot. It tried to be intellectual, but the plot was I'm no rabid Bond fan, so this review won't be based on Quantum's adherence to the books or how it compares Sean Connery's films. In a nutshell, this movie had no great plot. It tried to be intellectual, but the plot was just a mess. So one would think action would make up for all of this, right? Well, there is a LOT of action, but I hate how it was shot. The car chase at the beginning has a camera so frantic and jumpy that it's nearly impossible to decipher what's going on. It gets a little better after this, but not much. The "Bond girl" in this movie got a lot of hype, but she wasn't THAT good looking. The complete and utter lack of sex didn't ruin the movie, but it certainly could've helped things. Oh, and there are no gadgets, save for... touchscreen technology, which is so 2 years ago. So why a 5? It's got some stunning scenes (when you can see what's going on) and Daniel Craig plays a cool Bond, so that helps. This is... a rentable, I think. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
WilliamM.Nov 16, 2008
I have to say, as some one who owns and has watched all the movies and the same goes for all the books. I really liked quantum of solace. I'll agree that it wasn't quite as good as Casino Royale. It was a very lean movie, giving I have to say, as some one who owns and has watched all the movies and the same goes for all the books. I really liked quantum of solace. I'll agree that it wasn't quite as good as Casino Royale. It was a very lean movie, giving you only the bare minimum to know what was still going on. And in keeping the Bondisms to a minimum I think was a good idea for the series. I don't hope it stays completely lean like this. But I also want new people like Forster to bring new perspective to an old hero. And for being so different I think it will stand out as either a favorite or as a hated movie. I don't want to always know what James Bond will say or do, and after experiencing as much Bond as possible you start to want to see a new take. It will never be as tongue in cheek as Roger moore's movies were. Or as Smooth as Connery. But it's a new type of Bond just like every new actor to play him has put him in a new light. I just don't want to put limits on my favorite series of all time, I don't want the writers to have to include bond... James Bond, or that he has to order his martini and have three girls per movie. I love the old Bonds, and I will always watch them often, but I want the news ones to be fresh as well. I'll make my last sentence an example from Ian Fleming himself. He wrote many books with Bond, with quite a few staples, but they were never mandatory, which made their occurrences more special. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
JonB.Nov 16, 2008
All the action missing from Casino Royale with about a quarter of the plot.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
CoryNov 16, 2008
Stereotypical action movie-200 hundred guys with machine guns shooting at the main character and nobody can hit him! Even worse, there are way too many characters without introductions that confuse you all movie.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
4
JasonR.Nov 16, 2008
Hugely disappointing. No character development. Terrible editing. Wow, they really blew it.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
NS.Nov 16, 2008
AWESOME AWESOME AND MORE AWESOME! Definitely check this movie out! That action scenes are wicked!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
MichalINov 16, 2008
The movie started good then as it kept going, it became a boring drag and hit the bottom by the time it ended. Even if you watched casino royale and they were only 2 years apart, you still don't feel any emotional connection to the The movie started good then as it kept going, it became a boring drag and hit the bottom by the time it ended. Even if you watched casino royale and they were only 2 years apart, you still don't feel any emotional connection to the characters and their stories unlike what the movie seems like it is trying to accomplish. QoS just doesn't deliver. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
JPS.Nov 15, 2008
This moving is worth seeing. Slow at times. Has action. It has a plot that if you use your imagination you can make this an engaging moving. I vote that you see this at a theater-matinee.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
AndrewR.Nov 15, 2008
Ok but pales next to Casino Royale. Way too frenetic and needed plot help.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
MarkB.Nov 15, 2008
Nearly as good as Casino Royale, and better than any bond movie since Connery. The critics got scared to like this one for some reason. Believe me it is worth your time.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
BenNov 15, 2008
If you want to see traditional bond movies, watch any of the previous 20 installments. If you want to see GOOD movies, watch casino royale and quantum of solace. The poor reviews that quantum of solace has been receiving made me extremely If you want to see traditional bond movies, watch any of the previous 20 installments. If you want to see GOOD movies, watch casino royale and quantum of solace. The poor reviews that quantum of solace has been receiving made me extremely nervous to watch. However, I now realize that most people don't understand a good film when they see it. You'll certainly be disappointed if you are expecting a campy, cheesy, sex driven, and shallow bond. On the other hand, you'll be delighted if youâ??re looking for an emotionally developed character whose personality flaws finally seem human. A deeply disturbed bond who doesnâ??t kill because heâ??s told too, but because he is in every sense, a hero. Gone are the days of evil villains who seek to destroy the world with nuclear weapons and satellites. They are no longer personified character types who seem to over the top to real. Instead we have more sophisticated villains whose corrupt mindsets leads to a far more complicated plot line. Rest assured, a complicated plot line should be a positive and refreshing change. Since when should a villainous corporation have streamlined goals in which every member is working together for the benefit of that goal? Truly human emotions and situations cannot be simple and straightforward. Pay attention, Quantum of Solace was a great movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
ChadS.Nov 15, 2008
Cracked windshield. The black sports car is vulnerable. Like its driver, you see the mileage, you see the wear-and-tear. The superagent doesn't give a s*** if he lives or dies. Both man and machine aren't subjected to the same Cracked windshield. The black sports car is vulnerable. Like its driver, you see the mileage, you see the wear-and-tear. The superagent doesn't give a s*** if he lives or dies. Both man and machine aren't subjected to the same fetishisms of past James Bond movies. They're wrecks. Cracked windshield. Cracked man. "Quantum of Solace" is another killjoy, as was 2006's "Casino Royale". The Aston Martin needs a mechanic. Bond needs a shrink: somebody to cure his vertigo(the filmmaker references the 1958 Alfred Hitchcock film starring Jimmy Stewart and Kim Novak). At times, "Quantum of Solace" feels so different from the patented tropes of past Bond movies, those of the Cubby Broccoli orthodoxy may want Daniel Craig to reorientate us and say the line, that corny line of formal introduction to reassure the true believers of the superagent's 007-ness. "Quantum of Solace" will appeal to an audience who takes its cheese seriously; who believes a film like Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight" is the epitiome of sophistication, just because everybody is so damn glum. The irony behind this new breed of un-Cubby-like James Bond movies(it's sort of like eating broccoli) is that in trying to transcend its genre roots, "Quantum of Solace" tries on another genre for size: the science fiction genre. Craig rewrites the book on the Ian Fleming creation so completely, old-time fans may claim, "That's not him." This sober Bond does indeed seem to be a double, like something out of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers". Political subtext(or sociological subtext, or both), so prevalent in the 1956 original(and the 1978 Phillip Kaufman remake), is prevalent here, too. This accidental "Body Snatchers" remake demonstrates how Democrats, in our current political arena, act more like Moderate Republicans than Liberals. They're friendly to big business, too. Dominic Greene(Mathieu Amalric), the CEO of a supposed eco-friendly corporation, puts on a populist face at fundraisers, but when nobody's looking, he's just another cold-hearted businessman who puts people behind profit. Being both French and an environmentalist makes Greene an amalgamation of Al Gore and John Kerry. Give me a villain like Jaws(Richard Kiel from "The Spy Who Loved Me" and "Moonraker") who simply wanted to kill James, not a community of Bolivians, and above all else, our fun. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
KelvinNov 15, 2008
As a stand alone action film it was okay......... as a Bond film it wasn't very satisfying. Bond has kept people flocking to the cinemas for over 40 years precisely because he is Bond. This film however tries hard to strip Bond of all As a stand alone action film it was okay......... as a Bond film it wasn't very satisfying. Bond has kept people flocking to the cinemas for over 40 years precisely because he is Bond. This film however tries hard to strip Bond of all his Bondness. Take the icon Bond Shilouette that shows Bond shooting a gun as viewed from the gun barrel, its always shown at the beginning of the film.......not this time! In Quantum, though we didn't wait to read all the end credits, I've read that they place that on that scene on the end credits! And what about the famous John Barry, James Bond theme, they never play it! (aside fom a few faint piano notes at the beginning) The director Marc Forster was allegedley a James Bond film fan.....well you could have fooled me! Too many traditional Bond trademarks were missing, essentially making Bond little more than a more world weary version of Jason Bourne, surely no coincidence that the guy who was involved in the action sequences also worked on the Bourne films. Bond doesn't have to try and comete with Bourne, they are 2 very different animals but this latest incarnation of Bond blurs that boundary. Let's hope that next time out they bring back Bond in all his glory and yes that includes the iconic opening Bond Shilouette and the Bond theme music. As they say "don't fix what ain't broke"! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MichaelB.Nov 15, 2008
People haven't seemed to learn that this isnt the classic James Bond films we're used to.. this is a rebirth and its great! The movie starts basically immediately after Casino Royale and its non stop action till the end.. if you People haven't seemed to learn that this isnt the classic James Bond films we're used to.. this is a rebirth and its great! The movie starts basically immediately after Casino Royale and its non stop action till the end.. if you like action movies this is a MUST SEE, if you like James Bond (especially the BOOKS) you'll LOVE THIS. THIS IS FLEMMINGS BOND (read the books) You can't expect the film to be cheesy (lets face it people the old bond is considered Cheezy in the 21st century) the film has to be move with the times or else its doomed to die out like Star Trek did. Watch the film! Ignore the critics, Expect Action and a rough Bond don't look to the old films and expect the same thing! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
MaxB.Nov 15, 2008
Quantum of Solace is an edgy, gritty, and sometimes confusing film. Danial Craig is back with another exceptional performance ad 007. In fact the entire movie is perfectly cast. However, the attempt to transform the movie into a fast paced Quantum of Solace is an edgy, gritty, and sometimes confusing film. Danial Craig is back with another exceptional performance ad 007. In fact the entire movie is perfectly cast. However, the attempt to transform the movie into a fast paced action thriller leaves several fight scenes difficult to follow. The really big flaw of quantum of solace is perhaps what also makes it work. Danial Craig has such a dark and depressed demeanor that his one liners and witty phrases aren't up to the level that we expect of 007. Combine that with a movie that is sometimes very difficult to follow, you get a movie not as strong as Casino Royale. Overall Quantum of Solace does work on a more modern and dark level than any other James Bond movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
DavidNov 15, 2008
You people who are stuck on the old James Bond need to get over it! The old gadgets and sex and just plain sillyness is gone! Here and now in the last couple of movies we have had a real person that is believable. No out of control camera You people who are stuck on the old James Bond need to get over it! The old gadgets and sex and just plain sillyness is gone! Here and now in the last couple of movies we have had a real person that is believable. No out of control camera movement, good action that is believable (well, most of it) and still the good looking women! This was a very good movie and i love the fact that it followed the story of the last. Give it a try! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
ChrisGNov 15, 2008
Great movie, for all of you who complain that hes not "suave", and "charming", go read the original book , yes i mean the guy who invented bond, he was neither of those things. he was a cold hearted prick who left a body count everywhere he Great movie, for all of you who complain that hes not "suave", and "charming", go read the original book , yes i mean the guy who invented bond, he was neither of those things. he was a cold hearted prick who left a body count everywhere he went, they are going back to the more realistic TRUE James bond. please do some research before you say what things are supposed to be. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
saNov 15, 2008
Some PG13 movies are so brilliantly written that they overcome the rating burden, like Dark Knight and Casino Royale. However, a lot of PG13 movies, like Quantum of Solace, feel neutered. The story seemed to drag on forever, we've seen Some PG13 movies are so brilliantly written that they overcome the rating burden, like Dark Knight and Casino Royale. However, a lot of PG13 movies, like Quantum of Solace, feel neutered. The story seemed to drag on forever, we've seen the action scenes before, and the characters felt like throwaways. Bond was just emotionally dead in this movie, like the only thing driving him to live was revenge. No scene was more evident of this then when he throws his friend's corpse in a trash can, and says coldly, "He doesn't care." It reminded me of the suicidal mess that Will Smith played in I Am Legend. Neither character gave us much reason to root for them. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
RonS.Nov 15, 2008
As bad a flick as casino royale was great Roger Moore now once again assumes the mantle of the best bond.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JeffLNov 15, 2008
Forget listening to these reviews. If you liked Casino Royale, this is worth seeing to make your own judgment. To me, it was quite good.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
JohnL.Nov 15, 2008
I'm giving this a 6 because the story was kind of weak....the action is intense and the mood very dark but thats not enough to warrant anything higher..action can only excite you for so long before it gets old..worth watching but I'm giving this a 6 because the story was kind of weak....the action is intense and the mood very dark but thats not enough to warrant anything higher..action can only excite you for so long before it gets old..worth watching but I'm not clamoring to own it and the last movie to do that for me was iron man. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
DavidL.Nov 15, 2008
This is an excellent outing for Bond. Casino Royale, but surprisingly (and despite its ridiculous title), this is better. Bond's character development is good, the action is non-stop and well choreographed, and the relationship between This is an excellent outing for Bond. Casino Royale, but surprisingly (and despite its ridiculous title), this is better. Bond's character development is good, the action is non-stop and well choreographed, and the relationship between Bond and M has never been better. Olga Kurylenko was good as well. I was really blown away by how good the film was, especially compared to the reviews. Also, for the first time Bond is on the right side of the battle with his efforts against an evil corporation and both the US and British governments. Well done. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
JudyTNov 15, 2008
Daniel Craig is great and I like this new refreshing retooling of 007. Judy Dench, Jeffrey Wright and Giancarlo Gianinni were good as always. The plot was thin and the action sequences started just running together. Btu the spirit of the new Daniel Craig is great and I like this new refreshing retooling of 007. Judy Dench, Jeffrey Wright and Giancarlo Gianinni were good as always. The plot was thin and the action sequences started just running together. Btu the spirit of the new Bond was there. I didn't like the ending action sequence but I liked the ending. Also the theme music by Jack White and Alicia Keys was horrible and so was the Bond girl. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
BlakeS.Nov 15, 2008
Gutty Gritty, Daniel Craig second to none as a Bond in this movie. He is all business.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
BrianB.Nov 15, 2008
Daniel Craig continues to push his role in this economical version of bond who acts first and rarely has time to quip. The suave spy in the tailored suit has never been so kinetic and so engagingly brutal.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
DelspencerdeltorroNov 15, 2008
This movie will definitely be a disappointment for Bond fans. It's not even a good movie in general, let alone good enough to be a Bond movie. Although it contains many references to other Bond films, it doesn't actually seem like This movie will definitely be a disappointment for Bond fans. It's not even a good movie in general, let alone good enough to be a Bond movie. Although it contains many references to other Bond films, it doesn't actually seem like it's trying to be one. Almost the entire cast spends the whole film being angry, and the secret organization out to destroy the world is really just causing a drought in Bolivia. Many scenes left more of a "what?" than a "wow!" The classic gun-barrel scene was tacked on at the end of the movie, and it was more angry than suave. The theme song, "Another Way to Die", is pretty good musically, but the title reminds me of the McBane parody from The Simpsons, Die Again Tomorrow. Actually, the whole movie reminds me of this parody, or maybe an action-movie commercial. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
KidNov 15, 2008
Daniel Craig can be Bond, but the directors won't ALLOW him to reach the pedestal. The last great Bond film was 'Goldeneye'......Bond doesn't need the whole 'Fast-paced-too-quick-for-your-eyes' action sequences Daniel Craig can be Bond, but the directors won't ALLOW him to reach the pedestal. The last great Bond film was 'Goldeneye'......Bond doesn't need the whole 'Fast-paced-too-quick-for-your-eyes' action sequences - it needs a plan, even if the plan is slowly revealed in both revelation and action - Bond isn't meant to be the way they have lately portrayed him. He's a smooth-player, charming, and a planner - and as Roger Ebert said perfectly, not an 'action-hero'. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
RichardT.Nov 15, 2008
Action but no sex for England.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
AugustNov 15, 2008
Not as bad as some of you say, and it's NOT Bourne.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
JoeReviewerNov 15, 2008
This movie dragged for so long (30-40 mins.) I thought I was going to slip into a coma and never wake up. I was waiting for the usher to hand out mini pillows. The main villian also came off fairly weak and with no real bond nemesis This movie dragged for so long (30-40 mins.) I thought I was going to slip into a coma and never wake up. I was waiting for the usher to hand out mini pillows. The main villian also came off fairly weak and with no real bond nemesis intelligence or BIG evil plan. The movies ending was horrible. In the end you feel dirty like you need a shower and ripped off the only good thing about it is that it ended. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
TabU.Nov 15, 2008
One of the more emotionally, intellectually stimulating espionage Bond movies to date! Technology is thrown out and the brutal human component of the spy game, the way it was meant to be was lobbed back in to great effect. Except for first One of the more emotionally, intellectually stimulating espionage Bond movies to date! Technology is thrown out and the brutal human component of the spy game, the way it was meant to be was lobbed back in to great effect. Except for first to risky action sequences that had potential but failed, overall this movie rocked. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
wolfiefishNov 15, 2008
License to Kill is now officially (in my opnion) not the worst Bond movie ever made. Quantum of Solace takes that top spot. Bond had never been so banal. If I wanted to watch ultra violence I would have rented a film about footy hooligans. License to Kill is now officially (in my opnion) not the worst Bond movie ever made. Quantum of Solace takes that top spot. Bond had never been so banal. If I wanted to watch ultra violence I would have rented a film about footy hooligans. The action sequences are undecipherable, the dialogue is dull and I've seen better chase scenes from the keystone cops. Boring, boring and even more yawn inducing tat. This film sucks, and should invoke the end of Daniel Craig as Bond. By the way I am a massive Bond fan, and I thought Casino Royale was great, but if this is the way things are going with Bond, then it's time to have a massive re-think. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
RolandB.Nov 15, 2008
I liked it more than Casino...and that is regardless of the action being better.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
JakeH.Nov 15, 2008
Piss poor.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
7
MattA.Nov 14, 2008
Ok... so maybe i'm being a little too nice to QoS. I mean...plot wise... it was messy. It used every excuse to get to the next action scene. The "bad guy" was too low-key and not maniacal in the least. The bond girl was nice... but too Ok... so maybe i'm being a little too nice to QoS. I mean...plot wise... it was messy. It used every excuse to get to the next action scene. The "bad guy" was too low-key and not maniacal in the least. The bond girl was nice... but too self- sufficient. So all in all... it wasn't James Bond. Bond himself didn't even seem to be having a good time at all. However... THIS WAS NOT TERRIBLE! The action was fun...well...for the audience i suppose. The scenes were beautiful. Casino Royal gave us too much and left us wanting more. Quantum gives us some hamburger to fill the rest of us up...when we were eating steak. Go into Quantum, as i did, expecting to see a decent action movie. Don't go in hoping to be on the edge of your seat with the plot however. Just smile at the pretty things going boom. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
JamesS.Nov 14, 2008
What a lousy film. All that $$$ on special effects and great actors -- and story boring, and sound terrible (can't understand half of what actors say). Wish I'd stopped at Casino Royale!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
RyanL.Nov 14, 2008
Serious, focused Bond film, nicely bookending the previous chapter, Casino Royale. It's different from past Bonds, but variety has been what's kept this series going for 45 years.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
DavidA.Nov 14, 2008
This was a Bond movie in name only! No gadgets, little humor and very little character development. I was actually glad the movie got over so I could leave. When you find yourself checking your watch during a Bond movie, you know it's This was a Bond movie in name only! No gadgets, little humor and very little character development. I was actually glad the movie got over so I could leave. When you find yourself checking your watch during a Bond movie, you know it's boring. Good stunts but missing all of the critical elements that makes you look forward to a new Bond movie. Disappointing. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
ChristianP.Nov 14, 2008
I was worried when I saw the bad reviews, but after seeing the movie myself, I am so relieved. It got off to a bad start with the close-up heavy car chase that was disorienting and then the theme song was terribly produced and I saw that I was worried when I saw the bad reviews, but after seeing the movie myself, I am so relieved. It got off to a bad start with the close-up heavy car chase that was disorienting and then the theme song was terribly produced and I saw that Paul Haggis wrote it and cringed. BUT all of my fears were put to rest. Daniel Craig is wonderful as Bond and Judy Dench steals her scenes. The villain is a great 21st century bad guy--weasely and corrupt but still pure evil. I'm a bit confused with all these bad reviews on here! Honestly, what were the big problems?! Just as gritty as Casino Royale. I would love to see the next one be more of a spy/espionage film than an action movie though. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful