Columbia Pictures | Release Date: November 14, 2008
6.3
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 587 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
294
Mixed:
212
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 characteres (5000 max)
4
DanSJan 10, 2009
Plot, editing, and acting aside, I'm surprised no one seems to be complaining about the rapid-fire attempted rapes near the end. I'm not a huge Bond fan, but part of the fun of these movies is the cartoonishness. Moon-based lasers? Plot, editing, and acting aside, I'm surprised no one seems to be complaining about the rapid-fire attempted rapes near the end. I'm not a huge Bond fan, but part of the fun of these movies is the cartoonishness. Moon-based lasers? Fun. Slightly disturbing brutality? Not so much. Expand
1 of 2 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
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
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
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
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
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
5
BaraS.Nov 5, 2008
Nothing special I must say. After great Casino Royale I expected something even better but no. Nothing like that happened. Evil guy is not so evil. Olga Kurylenko is very nice girl but she´s not charismatic Eva Green. Actions Nothing special I must say. After great Casino Royale I expected something even better but no. Nothing like that happened. Evil guy is not so evil. Olga Kurylenko is very nice girl but she´s not charismatic Eva Green. Actions are easy to forget. My expectations weren´t fulfilled. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
GabrielJ.Dec 11, 2008
well I
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
4
SMDec 30, 2008
Although Quantum of Solace was kind of a continuation to Casino Royal, the latter was at least ten times more thrilling and thought-provoking than the former, and I guess this pretty much explains why everyone is disappointed with this new Although Quantum of Solace was kind of a continuation to Casino Royal, the latter was at least ten times more thrilling and thought-provoking than the former, and I guess this pretty much explains why everyone is disappointed with this new Bond movie. However, there is still enough excitement to watch it once. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
6
TomHMar 24, 2009
Spectacular scenes and good rhythm.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
5
CutSceneApr 4, 2009
The most action-oriented Bond movie that I can remember seeing. I don't have a problem with that, but I do have a problem with the way the scenes were done. I literally can't watch the action scenes in the movie. I get so The most action-oriented Bond movie that I can remember seeing. I don't have a problem with that, but I do have a problem with the way the scenes were done. I literally can't watch the action scenes in the movie. I get so frustrated by following whats going on through the cut-scene-orama that it makes me angry. Did anyone who made this movie actually watch it when they were done? That was a rhetorical question because the answer is obvious. No. My advice - dont drink 26 cups of coffee before you edit the next Bond movie. Thanks. Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful
6
CiaranGJun 29, 2009
With absolutely no explanation of what is going on from scene to scene, what could potentially be a very interesting storyline becomes a mess of over-dramatic action scenes. James Bond just happens to find himself in exotic places on boats, With absolutely no explanation of what is going on from scene to scene, what could potentially be a very interesting storyline becomes a mess of over-dramatic action scenes. James Bond just happens to find himself in exotic places on boats, planes and fast cars but with no explanation... Also, for the first time, I get the feeling that this James Bond is as bad as the other villains! James Bond is supposed to be the hero, not the revenge-seeking murderous d*ck. Action scenes are fun to watch and they happen in a good variety of locations around the world - this is all that saves this film. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
4
wetwebworkNov 14, 2008
Slept through most of this. Am I in a position to rate it? Perhaps not, but you shouldn't fall asleep in a Bond film. If any film should keep you awake, it should be a Bond.
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
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
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
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
5
RichardT.Nov 15, 2008
Action but no sex for England.
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
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
4
JasonR.Nov 16, 2008
Hugely disappointing. No character development. Terrible editing. Wow, they really blew it.
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
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
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
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
5
HarryP.Nov 2, 2008
This has got to be the worse James Bond film i have ever watched.... Pierce was a better bond.. But even Casino Royale beat this... this just isnt Bond.
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
5
AnthonyFJul 16, 2009
Never have I been this critical with any Bond film. The Man with the Golden Gun was pretty bad, but this one was just off the charts. Never have I seen a Bond film suffer from an identity crisis this bad. The film is a mess. The Never have I been this critical with any Bond film. The Man with the Golden Gun was pretty bad, but this one was just off the charts. Never have I seen a Bond film suffer from an identity crisis this bad. The film is a mess. The screeplay's a mess, the action scenes are a mess and even the climax is a mess. I don't think James Bond needed to be restarted, I think he needed a good screenplay thrown his way. Expand
1 of 2 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
5
DeVr33zAug 30, 2010
A huge disappointment after the stellar Casino Royale. Hopefully the next 007 film can try to bring back the Bond we all know and love. I don't like this brooding antihero guy.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
jwt7000Nov 20, 2012
This movie is a toss-up since License to Kill. A corny and weak plot so unimaginable winds up being concentrated on something else. Also the movie is short despite five good action scenes and there's nothing else special in this one.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
CaestusMar 11, 2013
Quantum of Solace dont live up to its expatiation, having a poor pace and bad editing. An average action film.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
CRLAug 4, 2011
Quantum of Solace was not a 'bad' film, but pales in the light of Casino Royale. It had huge potential with one of the best Bonds ever and what could have been an excellent plot, but in the end falls a bit short with too much action and notQuantum of Solace was not a 'bad' film, but pales in the light of Casino Royale. It had huge potential with one of the best Bonds ever and what could have been an excellent plot, but in the end falls a bit short with too much action and not enough clever story; enjoyable in itself but nowhere near the stellar mark of its predecessor. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
J-ShapAug 27, 2011
Daniel Craig still shows himself as one of the best Bonds ever, and I applaud the filmmakers for wanting to veer away from the campy days of yore, but this Bond film is so morose, in a bad way, that it comes across as a bland actionerDaniel Craig still shows himself as one of the best Bonds ever, and I applaud the filmmakers for wanting to veer away from the campy days of yore, but this Bond film is so morose, in a bad way, that it comes across as a bland actioner disguised as something more. Quantum of Solace is an average film, and that's arguably the worst thing one can be. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
StevenFFeb 19, 2013
It was always going to be difficult following the raging success of 'Casino Royale', but to throw out this messy and flash bang action film with a downright boring and far too realistic plot, it just felt top heavy.
I love films that take a
It was always going to be difficult following the raging success of 'Casino Royale', but to throw out this messy and flash bang action film with a downright boring and far too realistic plot, it just felt top heavy.
I love films that take a realistic turn, Batman Begins being the best example, but with this mediocre plot of water and large deserts with hotels and perverted soldiers inside, this was not meant for James Bond, gone is the smooth and fluid dialogue and controlled action of Daniel Craig's debut, and in its a place an explosive and a cut too many action flick that was a step back, but that doesn't mean its a bad film.
Starting basically where the last film left off, we open with a pulsating chase in Bonds Aston Martin, being pursued through various close call cliffs by Alfa Romeo's, and this sets up the film for what it is, an action rampage. After a betrayal brings Bond and M back to London in an attempt to investigate the organisation known as Quantum, Bond rescues Camille (Olga Kurylenko) who was the victim of a failed assassination from her boyfriend, and main antagonist Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric).
M continues to be weary of Bond after the events of the first film, obersving his continuing reckless and raging behaviour, Daniel Craig expertly carries this film, and for all its failures, he is the one shining light. His ability to convey Bond's emotion through excessive violence is certainly a step away from what is expected of this British spy, but for this realistic nature of conveying human emotion, Craig must be lauded.
There are plenty of set pieces and explosions to rival the Die Hards and Bournes of this world, but this is the faltering moment of the film, because Bond simply isn't an adrenaline junkie or a flat out superhero, he is an MI6 operative doing his job, and Solace seems to forget this.
The writing is spot on, but the plot and story is messy to the point of there being very little point to many of the characters in the film, the appearance of the beautiful Gemma Arterton as MI6 agent Strawberry Fields just seems pointless.
It certainly isn't a bad film, its still miles apart from the later Brosnan days, but it is still unfortunately further a field than Casino Royale, its weak, slow, and sometimes just too much of a good thing.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
pauljohnsonOct 7, 2012
It's not great, but its not terrible either. The plot feels confused at many points as to what it wants to be in terms of its themes and story goals, and as a result it feels like a string of under-developed plot points. Some characters, suchIt's not great, but its not terrible either. The plot feels confused at many points as to what it wants to be in terms of its themes and story goals, and as a result it feels like a string of under-developed plot points. Some characters, such as Fields are largely pointless, and Greene as the villain is not threatening at best, and just uninteresting at worst. Not that the actor does not do a good job with the material he had. Craig and Dench save the film with their stellar performances in their roles, and Craig especially in his role as the brooding, vengeful Bond. On the whole, it just feels confused as to what it wants to be, but its entertaining enough to hold your attention. Oh, and the song for this film is awful. Roll on Skyfall. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
spadenxDec 31, 2011
It really sorted of abandoned all plot in exchange for good action sequences. I did like however that Craig was able to show a more serious side then he did in the previous film, Even though it made his character come off a bit of an emo (butIt really sorted of abandoned all plot in exchange for good action sequences. I did like however that Craig was able to show a more serious side then he did in the previous film, Even though it made his character come off a bit of an emo (but thats because of the poor script, not Craig himself). Also the film was pretty much a knock off of The Bourne Ultimatum. The action sequences reminded me a lot about that film and it made Quantum Of Solace look cheesey.

Overall the film is a huge step down from the first film, I expected better.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
imthenoobJan 2, 2013
No where near as good as the previous Bond film. Pretty much lacks in every area - Acting, Plot, Villain sucks, and the action isn't as good either. A bit disapointing imo.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
bosnianNov 12, 2012
Loses a lot of the emotion of Casino Royale as well as character development and story. Villain is forgettable and finale underwhelming. Still, far from a bad movie especially in the sea of below average action movies out today.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
beingryanjudeSep 4, 2014
Coming off the heels of the wonderful Casino Royale, Quantum is a surprising disappointment. Clearly, our director and Daniel Craig felt a tad bit too confident and lost their way.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
SatiricalewokNov 8, 2014
This film is a mess. There are good features, the theme song is one of the best yet, Daniel Craig is yet again very good. But really the film is needlessly hard to follow, it feels awfully disjointed and the villain is not a charismatic one.This film is a mess. There are good features, the theme song is one of the best yet, Daniel Craig is yet again very good. But really the film is needlessly hard to follow, it feels awfully disjointed and the villain is not a charismatic one. This would all be fine if it was enjoyable during the film, but it's not really, it's a bit boring. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
SpangleMar 12, 2016
Quantum of Solace is a bit of a mess. Its action is over the top and makes it look as though Michael Bay took over direction at some point given its affinity for hard to follow action and explosions. The story is a bit much and I did not loveQuantum of Solace is a bit of a mess. Its action is over the top and makes it look as though Michael Bay took over direction at some point given its affinity for hard to follow action and explosions. The story is a bit much and I did not love the revenge angle too much. If the story was more fleshed out, I think the film would have benefited. As it stood, the film was too short. Olga Kurylenko's character has very little to do here other than look good, aside from the minor sub-plot that feels shoehorned in. That being said, that is where the negatives just about end. The non-action direction from Marc Forster is quite stylish, and the acting from Daniel Craig and Judi Dench is fantastic. Quantum of Solace has style for days and is not afraid to use it, but it truly is style over substance here with a pretty worthless plot. Quantum of Solace is an entirely mediocre effort from director Marc Forster. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
axelkochNov 3, 2012
A big step back after Casino Royale. The action isn't really rememberable (like the parkour fight in its predecessor) and the actors are bad. You have to put feelings into it to make Daniel Craig endurable - like in Casino Royale. It's just aA big step back after Casino Royale. The action isn't really rememberable (like the parkour fight in its predecessor) and the actors are bad. You have to put feelings into it to make Daniel Craig endurable - like in Casino Royale. It's just a sequel to it, which is a short movie but is longsome. 'Quantum Of Solace' is not that bad because you can enjoy it as a moderate action movie but they could've done way better. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
SamblixAug 14, 2012
Bond is angry. Quantum of Solace shows Bond like never before, setting out on a mission of vengeance and a lot of explosions. Daniel Craig again portrays Bond in a new light, darker, grittier, angrier yet this movie falls short in comparisonBond is angry. Quantum of Solace shows Bond like never before, setting out on a mission of vengeance and a lot of explosions. Daniel Craig again portrays Bond in a new light, darker, grittier, angrier yet this movie falls short in comparison to it's predecessors. Where Casino Royale showed us a new Bond isn't necessary a bad thing, Quantum of Solace shows us that, too much of the same thing, is. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
cameronmorewoodNov 12, 2012
Not even the writers themselves could keep up with the plot. There's no problem with the action sequences and Daniel Craig is spot on, but at one point, Bond is poisoned. The poison doesn't seem to affect him in the next scene. Big oops.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
Iky009Jan 3, 2014
Se destaca como o mais fraco da era Craig, simplesmente foi o mais mal produzido que seu anterior e seu antecessor uma pena que nem a carisma de Craig tenha salva esse filme mediano.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
DanteTheCynicDec 18, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A love letter to Timothy Dalton's 'License to Kill', Quantum is a great action film, but not so much a great Bond film. To be fair, the film's quality isn't it's fault, because of a writer's strike that was going on at the time. Still, there aren't that many girls or gadgets. Simply a boat load of action. If you've seen the trailer, try to imagine an entire movie of just that: Simple, gritty violence. The main villain is forgettable, but where the film shines is it's modern day answer to SPECTRE, Quantum. The name makes little sense, as it literally means 'Amount', but other than that, the film is pretty decent. A good watch for bond junkies, but it may not be worth more than one or two viewings. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
NerungNov 22, 2012
A decent film but it does not manage to compensate for its bland concept. The story is uninspired and all about the film seems like a standard formula. All in all, the film is okay but still one of the weaker Bonds.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
BradySmithAug 21, 2016
I might be being a little generous giving this a 6. It's not a horrible movie but it's definitely the weakest of Craig's movies. The first half or maybe more has almost no depth, no character, and no intrigue. The action scenes aren'tI might be being a little generous giving this a 6. It's not a horrible movie but it's definitely the weakest of Craig's movies. The first half or maybe more has almost no depth, no character, and no intrigue. The action scenes aren't horrible but they're mostly too over the top and poorly edited. The story, after meandering through a bunch of chases and not really building to anything, does start to pick up at a point. Apparently someone remembered a movie has to have some sort of depth to maintain interest. From there it goes onto a decent yet mostly uninspired path to the finish. The movie has its moments of character and atmosphere peppered throughout the second half but this is basically the definition of a placeholder movie. A watchable but frustratingly by the numbers and only occasionally engaging movie that's nowhere near Casino Royale or Skyfall. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
WalkingDead5640Jul 10, 2013
It's not a perfect follow up the phenomenon and just on the average mark. The story is wasted just as the dull villain who may look creepy, does nothing memorable. Other supporting cast are either wasted or good. What this film does deliverIt's not a perfect follow up the phenomenon and just on the average mark. The story is wasted just as the dull villain who may look creepy, does nothing memorable. Other supporting cast are either wasted or good. What this film does deliver is very exciting and outstanding action scenes, with some of the best of the series and touching moments. I still disagree with the fast cut editing like a Bourne movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
cryhardhumorJul 26, 2015
What is so sad about Quantum of Solace is the tremendous step down it was from Casino Royale. The only thing that makes this a Bond movie is Bond himself. All the style, action, and fun is sucked out and replaced by painful mediocrity.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
DibbHansenJul 16, 2013
Another modern Bond film, that is a sequel to 'Casino Royale' mostly disappoints. I find it is the worst of the Bond films, but it has some cool action and good acting in it. The story is terrible, the music is good (except for the awfulAnother modern Bond film, that is a sequel to 'Casino Royale' mostly disappoints. I find it is the worst of the Bond films, but it has some cool action and good acting in it. The story is terrible, the music is good (except for the awful theme song) and the fact that this Bond film relies mostly on Bourne type things, this does not feel like much of a Bond film. So in conclusion, this is the worst Bond film, but it had its good moments- but they were mostly rare. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
manofthemoonJan 17, 2015
Rushed into production and it shows in every way, "Quantum of Solace" is a major disappointment after the excellent "Casino Royale". Directed, shot and cut as though it's a commercial, "QoS" also makes the mistake of trying to compete withRushed into production and it shows in every way, "Quantum of Solace" is a major disappointment after the excellent "Casino Royale". Directed, shot and cut as though it's a commercial, "QoS" also makes the mistake of trying to compete with the Jason Bourne series by dragging story and plot over from "Casino Royale", defeating the strong, stand alone stories that have worked for 50 films so far (as of 2014). Love interests should stay inside each story. The cast are strong against a weak script and terrible direction, to sadly make "QoS" one of the weakest outings in the entire franchise. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
alexthegreatSep 10, 2013
On the positive side, I still enjoyed Daniel Craig's performance as James Bond, the score was excellent, and the action scenes was somewhat creditable, but on the negative side, I had a huge problem about the story, the editing, the pacing,On the positive side, I still enjoyed Daniel Craig's performance as James Bond, the score was excellent, and the action scenes was somewhat creditable, but on the negative side, I had a huge problem about the story, the editing, the pacing, and the main villain became so much bland. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
ThatCooperGuySep 18, 2015
Nearly 40 minutes in, and nothing interesting was happening. The non-stop action is upped, but that diminishes the story, plus the action scenes are poorly shot & horribly edited. There's too much action and not enough dialogue, not evenNearly 40 minutes in, and nothing interesting was happening. The non-stop action is upped, but that diminishes the story, plus the action scenes are poorly shot & horribly edited. There's too much action and not enough dialogue, not even Daniel Craig could save this movie.
Such a disappointing sequel to Casino Royal...
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
RayzorMooseNov 13, 2013
Quantum of Solace is an action packed hot mess.
The entire movie is plagued with absolute horrible direction, compact with terrible cut scenes. It relies heavily on jumpy cameras and snappy one liners that it simply doesn't work.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
eagleeyevikingDec 13, 2013
Although it is action-packed and very entertaining, Quantum of Solace can't help feel like a typical popcorn action flick which derivates from all other action movies.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
Deadly_TravelerNov 7, 2015
Well, in 2015 this web-site told me that this movie is 'new or notable' so I decided to write a review. It's bad. There're so many movies about 007 (LOTS) that I'd rather call it cliche than something new. Movie is absolutely not satisfying.Well, in 2015 this web-site told me that this movie is 'new or notable' so I decided to write a review. It's bad. There're so many movies about 007 (LOTS) that I'd rather call it cliche than something new. Movie is absolutely not satisfying. Plot is trash, all the sh*t happening is trash. Rather no than yes. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
vikesh2206Nov 9, 2014
Although it is action-packed and very entertaining, Quantum of Solace can't help feel like a corny popcorn action flick which derivates from all other action movies.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
MrMovieBuffOct 30, 2015
Yes, it's true what they say. 'Quantum of Solace' is a silly, choppy action movie that felt less like a Bond movie and more like a Bourne movie.

Daniel Craig still maintains the role magnificently well, doing what he can in a silly action
Yes, it's true what they say. 'Quantum of Solace' is a silly, choppy action movie that felt less like a Bond movie and more like a Bourne movie.

Daniel Craig still maintains the role magnificently well, doing what he can in a silly action film. Olga Kurylenko makes a good Bond girl and Mathieu Amalric is an okay Bond villain. I don't remember him as much as previous villains, especially Mads Mikkelsen ('Casino Royale'), and then Javier Bardem ('Skyfall') four years later.

I am not sure whether 'Quantum of Solace' would have been a much better movie if it wasn't a follow up to the great 'Casino Royale' (2006). It felt more like one of those dumb, gimmicky Pierce Brosnan movies after 'Goldeneye' (1995), this movie reminded me of 'Die Another Day' (2002), I was afraid that this current series of Bond movies would fall into that routine of dumb action and gimmicky moments. After starting off so well in 'Casino Royale' (2006), I feared this movie would end Daniel Craig, luckily he survived this one.

I just hope we never see another dumb action Bond flick ever again.
Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
nozamanAug 8, 2015
My kid's first Bond film, and a bit disappointed I had to be so. Has all the elements of a modern-day action thriller, and few of the elements of, you know, James Bond. There has to be a happy medium between Roger Moore-era camp and joylessMy kid's first Bond film, and a bit disappointed I had to be so. Has all the elements of a modern-day action thriller, and few of the elements of, you know, James Bond. There has to be a happy medium between Roger Moore-era camp and joyless grit, but this film errs toward the later. Craig at least has plenty of screen presence. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
Zanessa250QIJul 5, 2015
Eu pensei que ia dar uma goleada no Cassino Royale (2006) no quesito de ação e principalmente como filme,mas foi um filme completamente fraquíssimo,em tudo o a conclusão foi uma bosta,o suspense uma merda,e o roteiro legal mas cansativo,masEu pensei que ia dar uma goleada no Cassino Royale (2006) no quesito de ação e principalmente como filme,mas foi um filme completamente fraquíssimo,em tudo o a conclusão foi uma bosta,o suspense uma merda,e o roteiro legal mas cansativo,mas pela algumas boas cenas de ação,boas atuações e por incrível que pareça nos deixar grudado até o final, Eu vou dar 6 mais?? Nem fudendo Fraco!!! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
raciocinioOct 21, 2015
The worst Bond of Daniel Craig,any one of Pierce Brosnan s better than this..... So weak,boring and long isn't too long but is so bad that seems which was 10 hours of weakest action and development
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
sicranoApr 8, 2016
.....................................................................................................................................A Very very very very BAD 007 MOVIE,
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
aadityamudharApr 18, 2016
With absolutely no explanation of what is going on from scene to scene, what could potentially be a very interesting storyline becomes a mess of over-dramatic action scenes. James Bond just happens to find himself in exotic places on boats,With absolutely no explanation of what is going on from scene to scene, what could potentially be a very interesting storyline becomes a mess of over-dramatic action scenes. James Bond just happens to find himself in exotic places on boats, planes and fast cars but with no explanation... Also, for the first time, I get the feeling that this James Bond is as bad as the other villains! James Bond is supposed to be the hero, not the revenge-seeking murderous d*ck. Action scenes are fun to watch and they happen in a good variety of locations around the world - this is all that saves this film. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
EpicLadySpongeMay 10, 2016
Sounds lovely as it is and also sounds as much for James Bond, but Quantum of Solace can prove that the series is falling down for its 'doom' for its time.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
FilmMasterEdJan 5, 2016
So shoot me. I left the action rush of this follow-up to the terrific 2006 Casino Royale feeling bummed out by James Bond. Well, not by the Bond of Daniel Craig — he's still one nasty-ass dude, with the kind of rough-edged style that the 007So shoot me. I left the action rush of this follow-up to the terrific 2006 Casino Royale feeling bummed out by James Bond. Well, not by the Bond of Daniel Craig — he's still one nasty-ass dude, with the kind of rough-edged style that the 007 franchise hasn't seen since the glory days of Sean Connery. But the character fun seems to have gone out the window in Quantum of Solace, a fancy-shmancy title (the only thing borrowed from Ian Fleming's short story) for a movie that pours crude oil all over the subtle pleasures and sexy beats that came before.

The new movie picks up a few minutes after the last one. Big car chase (all together now: eww!) as Bond, barely recovered from the death of his lady love Vesper Lynd (Eva Green), burns rubber all over Italy with the wiggling body of Mr. White (Jesper Christensen) in the trunk of his Aston Martin. Cut to Mr. White's interrogation by M (Judi Dench), who finds herself surrounded by traitorous MI6 agents now working for Quantum, an agency bent on (what else?) world domination. So it's Bond on the march, killing everything that moves.

I know, it sounds juicy, but it isn't. Things go on the fritz early — even the new theme song, "Another Way to Die," sung by Jack White and Alicia Keys, sucks. Bond seems to have come down with a serious case of Jason Bourne penis envy, leaping across rooftops from Bolivia to Haiti like a jug-eared Matt Damon.

Put the blame on Marc Forster, a sensitive filmmaker (Monster's Ball, Finding Neverland) who has no experience as an action director and appears to be seriously overcompensating. In Casino Royale, Martin Campbell — a real action man — stopped to savor the distractions in the script co-written by Crash Oscar winner Paul Haggis. Remember the poker game and the sexual teasing in that train scene with Craig's Bond and Green's Vesper trying to guess each other's past histories? Haggis is back, but the mischief is gone. There's a flicker of interest when redhead Gemma Arterton shows up as Fields, an MI6 agent not averse to bonding with Bond, but she's soon gone like the ghost of good times past.

Instead, we get pouty Ukrainian model Olga Kurylenko as Camille, perhaps the dullest Bond girl ever. Camille treats 007 like he has an STD, but she screws the villainous Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric, bugging the eyes he only blinked in The Diving Bell and the Butterfly) to get to Bolivian general Medrano, who did evil perversities to her and her family.

It could have been a hell of a revenge tale about two people, Bond and Camille, who know you kill most effectively when you don't take it personally but who can't help taking it personally. That story is written all over Craig's haunted face. But Quantum of Solace won't trust its own darker instincts. It delivers the popcorn goods, but it ignores the poison eating at Bond's insides. Killer mistake.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
MovieGeeksApr 1, 2016
A reviewer may come to a new James Bond movie — “Quantum of Solace,” directed by Marc Forster and opening Friday, is the 22nd official installment of the series in 46 years — with a nifty theory or an elaborate sociocultural hermeneuticA reviewer may come to a new James Bond movie — “Quantum of Solace,” directed by Marc Forster and opening Friday, is the 22nd official installment of the series in 46 years — with a nifty theory or an elaborate sociocultural hermeneutic agenda, but the most important thing to have on hand is a checklist. It’s all well and good to reflect upon the ways 007, the Harry Potter of British intelligence, has evolved over time through changes in casting, geopolitics, sexual mores and styles of dress.

But the first order of business must always be to run through the basic specs of this classic entertainment machine’s latest model and see how it measures up.

So before we proceed to any consideration of the deeper meanings of “Quantum of Solace” (or for that matter the plain meaning of its enigmatic title), we need to assess the action, the villain, the gadgets, the babes and the other standard features.

The opening song, performed by Jack White and Alicia Keys (an intriguing duo on paper if nowhere else), is an abysmal cacophony of incompatible musical idioms, and the title sequence over which those idioms do squalling battle is similarly disharmonious: conceptually clever and visually grating. The first chase, picking up exactly where the 2006 “Casino Royale” left off, is speedy and thrilling, but the other action set-pieces are a decidedly mixed bag, with a few crisp footraces, some semi-coherent punch-outs and a dreadful boat pileup that brings back painful memories of the invisible car Pierce Brosnan tooled around in a few movies ago.

Picturesque locales? Bolivia, Haiti, Austria and Italy are featured or impersonated, to perfectly nice touristic effect. Gizmos? A bit disappointing, to tell the truth. Technological advances in the real world may not quite have outpaced those in the Bond universe, but so many movies these days show off their global video surveillance set-ups and advanced smart-phone applications that it’s hard for this one to distinguish itself.

What about the villain? One of the best in a while, I’d say, thanks to a lizardy turn from the great French actor Mathieu Amalric, who plays Dominic Greene, a ruthless economic predator disguised as an ecological do-gooder. The supporting cast is studded with equally excellent performers, including Jeffrey Wright and Giancarlo Giannini, both reprising their roles in “Casino Royale.”

And the women? There are two, as usual — not counting Judi Dench, returning as the brisk and impatient M — one (Gemma Arterton) a doomed casual plaything, the other a more serious dramatic foil and potential romantic interest. That one, called Camille, is played by Olga Kurylenko, whose specialty seems to be appearing in action pictures as the pouty, sexy sidekick of a brooding, vengeful hero. Not only Daniel Craig’s Bond, but also Mark Wahlberg’s Max Payne and Timothy Olyphant’s Hitman.

James Bond is a much livelier character than either of those mopey video-game ciphers, but he shares with them the astonishing ability to resist, indeed to ignore, Ms. Kurylenko’s physical charms.

This is not out of any professional scruple. The plot of “Quantum of Solace” is largely propelled by Bond’s angry flouting of the discipline imposed by his job, and anyway when did James Bond ever let work get in the way of sex? No, what gets in the way is emotion. 007’s grief and rage, the source of his connection to Camille, are forces more powerful than either duty or libido.

Mr. Brosnan was the first actor to allow a glimmer of complicated emotion to peek through Bond’s cool, rakish facade, and since Mr. Craig took over the franchise two years ago the character has shown a temperament at once rougher and more soulful than in previous incarnations. The violence in his first outing, “Casino Royale,” was notably intense, and while “Quantum of Solace” is not quite as brutal, the mood is if anything even more grim and downcast.

The death in “Casino” of Bond’s lover Vesper Lynd (Eva Green), along with the possibility that she had betrayed him before dying, provides an obvious psychological explanation for his somber demeanor in “Quantum.” But while the exploration of Bond’s psychology makes him, arguably at least, a deeper, subtler character — and there is certainly impressive depth and subtlety in Mr. Craig’s wounded, whispery menace — it also makes him harder to distinguish from every other grieving, seething avenger at the multiplex.

“Quantum of Solace,” a phrase never uttered in the course of this film (though it has something to do with Greene’s diabolical scheme, itself never fully explained), means something like a measure of comfort. Perhaps that describes what Bond is looking for, or maybe it is what this kind of entertainment tries to provide a fretful audience. If so, I prefer mine with a dash of mischief.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
TheFilmBuffApr 2, 2016
Marc Forster Has a License to Confuse and Bore in Quantum of Solace.

Those of us who adored Casino Royale, the 2006 reboot of the haggard, self-parodic James Bond franchise, had some trouble trying to decide where to place it among the
Marc Forster Has a License to Confuse and Bore in Quantum of Solace.

Those of us who adored Casino Royale, the 2006 reboot of the haggard, self-parodic James Bond franchise, had some trouble trying to decide where to place it among the series' finest. Was it better than Goldfinger? Probably not, but close. The Spy Who Loved Me? Maybe so. From Russia With Love? Nope—missed it by this much, to quote another secret agent. Granted, it's all shades of bullet-gray when it comes to Bond, historically riddled with silly, soporific misfires that looked the same regardless of who wore the tux and gulped the gin and gave the girl one last gasp before she drew her last breath.

But Casino Royale was a welcome break with a wearying tradition: It was the first James Bond movie since On Her Majesty's Secret Service to portray 007 as something more than a suave, Kennedy-era caricature—a handsome head perched upon a tailored suit and a martini glass. Daniel Craig, an art-house bombshell if there is such a thing, brought to Bond warmth, humanity, and, above all, gives-a-damn decency heretofore lacking since George Lazenby's sole stint as Connery's stand-in. More than just a good time spent riding shotgun in a tricked-out ride with a bad boy, Casino Royale was a love story masquerading as a spy thriller, with Bond falling for his collaborator and eventual betrayer, Vesper Lynd (Eva Green), who was working for . . . ?

That, alas, is the question allegedly answered by Quantum of Solace, which takes its title from an inconsequential Ian Fleming short story and is the first Bond movie to serve as a direct sequel. Allegedly, because Craig's second outing as Bond is as frustrating, sloppy, and brusque as its predecessor was engaging, sleek, and unhurried. At 106 minutes, it's the shortest of the Bond films, but it feels like one of the longest as it bounces hither and yon only to wind up stranded in a Bolivian desert, where baddie Dominic Greene (The Diving Bell and the Butterfly's Mathieu Amalric) is sucking the sand dry of its underwater river. Yawn. Used to be, Bond villains were larger-than-life Evil Geniuses who at least had Grand Aspirations to take over the world, bwah-haw-haw. Now, the bad guy's just a phony environmentalist with a thing for deposed dictators and dry wells.

At least, that's what Quantum of Solace seems to be about, though most of the time it's simply too hard to tell—or too pointless to care about—courtesy of the haphazard direction of Marc Forster, who demonstrates by negative example why Bond movies are best served by journeymen with something to prove rather than would-be A-listers slumming it. From its very first moments—we enter the film mid–car chase—Quantum is a spastic, indecipherable, unholy, and altogether unwatchable mess. Between swerves and smashes, we simply have no idea who's doing what to whom, where they're doing it, or why. What's meant to be kinetic and cathartic serves only to disorient, to keep the audience at a head-scratching distance.

It's as though Forster (Monster's Ball, Finding Neverland) and his two editors (longtime collaborator Matt Cheese and, get this, Get Smart and Bourne Supremacy vet Richard Pearson) filmed Quantum on a roller coaster and cut the movie with a food processor set on "indecipherable." Consider the scene, only moments after the car chase, where Bond and M (Judi Dench, even more disagreeable than she was in Casino Royale) question the mysterious Mr. White (Jesper Christensen, reprising his role from the previous film) about his role in Vesper's double-cross and death. The interrogation, but of course, turns into a shoot-out, with Bond chasing the assassin across rooftops and through broken glass ceilings—a reprise of Casino Royale's thrilling parkour sequence, perhaps the franchise's singular Great Moment. But Forster, whose biggest action sequence to date involved Halle Berry and Billy Bob Thornton getting it on, interrupts the action with needless, irritating cutaways to inconsequential doings (dunno what, can't say, wouldn't matter anyway) elsewhere that render the entire scene a confounding, alienating muddle. Which is to say nothing of the klutzy opera-house shoot-out stolen from The Godfather: Part III only moments later.

Written by Neil Purvis and Robert Wade (whose association with Bond dates back to 1999's The World Is Not Enough—yes, the one with Denise Richards) and Casino Royale pinch hitter Paul Haggis, Quantum of Solace may ultimately prove Bond's worst enemy to date. It's both frantic and boring, a surprising and wholly unnecessary attempt to gin up the revived franchise by turning Bond into Bourne.

If nothing else, there's no need to worry about where Quantum of Solace fits in the Bond pantheon—it's easily one of the worst.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
MasterRileyJul 20, 2016
While it still boosts fun action and set pieces, Quantum of Solace doesn't reach the critical acclaim of Casino Royale. It is still enjoyable to watch which is why I would still recommend it to Bond fans.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews