Columbia Pictures | Release Date: November 14, 2008
6.3
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 599 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
296
Mixed:
219
Negative:
84
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)
8
MDJul 22, 2009
My family and I were extremely disappointed in "Casino Royale" and after watching it again, I still can't figure out how it got any good reviews. "Quantum of Solace" on the other hand was much more enjoyable and DC finally starts to act My family and I were extremely disappointed in "Casino Royale" and after watching it again, I still can't figure out how it got any good reviews. "Quantum of Solace" on the other hand was much more enjoyable and DC finally starts to act more like James Bond rather than the thug he was in the previous movie. This movie is not perfect, but it was entertaining and it gives me hope that this "reinvented" Bond is evolving into someone we can like again. Expand
0 of 1 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
8
TonyHMay 8, 2009
I enjoy the way Daniel Craig interprets his Bond character and really appreciate that there is less focus on the "gadgetry" than in all the Bond movies. I really get a sense that this Bond cares about what and why he does what he does for a living.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
7
JayHMar 22, 2009
It has all the right ingredients for a Bond flick - rapid pace, plenty of explosions, car chases, great special effects, great international settings and over the top action. Not the best of the Bond films, but it works. Very entertaining, It has all the right ingredients for a Bond flick - rapid pace, plenty of explosions, car chases, great special effects, great international settings and over the top action. Not the best of the Bond films, but it works. Very entertaining, outstanding production values. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
8
tankjDec 11, 2008
I'm not sure why everyone wants to see the same cheesy Bond movie. Craig is the best bond yet (sorry Sean). The action in this movie is spectacular. It is not quite as good as Casino Royale but still very good.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
7
GoldenEye16Aug 22, 2010
Tooooo short and not enough lighter/comedic moments. All bond does is go around shooting people and then doesn't even kill the one guy at the end. The action was good besides the shaky camera which I personally don't like. Not really aTooooo short and not enough lighter/comedic moments. All bond does is go around shooting people and then doesn't even kill the one guy at the end. The action was good besides the shaky camera which I personally don't like. Not really a good bond movie but a decent action movie. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
ERG1008Aug 24, 2010
Daniel Craig's second outing as 007.
BIG set pieces, lots of carnage (Bond seems to wreck every location he goes to), fast, furious & slightly silly.
Bit of a mess this one & doesn't really hold together as the brilliant Casino Royale did.
Daniel Craig's second outing as 007.
BIG set pieces, lots of carnage (Bond seems to wreck every location he goes to), fast, furious & slightly silly.
Bit of a mess this one & doesn't really hold together as the brilliant Casino Royale did.
Craig is fine & basically an emotionless maniac which, considering his profession, is what he'd be.
Nice perfomances also by Olga Kurylenko (Blimey Charlie!!) & the great but under-used Giancarlo Giannini.
The bad guys aren't as a prominent as other films but it's still a damn sight better than any of the awful Pierce Brosnan films.
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
kingshahidOct 8, 2011
This movie had a lot of action. Aside that I had no clue what the story was. I never liked this actor as James Bond either. It was not worth sitting through but the action was packed.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
8
Compi24May 10, 2013
It may not be edited perfectly or nearly three-quarters as well-crafted as its predecessor, but "Quantum Of Solace" still stands tall as a thrillingly engrossing Bond film.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
AlbertS.Nov 14, 2008
The beggining of the film, which had hardly any dialogue, felt like you were trying to get a story out of a kid with ADD. It was confusing, and it wasn't until about 1/3 of the film in that things start making sense and the movie gets The beggining of the film, which had hardly any dialogue, felt like you were trying to get a story out of a kid with ADD. It was confusing, and it wasn't until about 1/3 of the film in that things start making sense and the movie gets better. Overall the movie lacks class, that Bond factor that sets it apart from other action movies. The dialogue lacks wit, the plot lacks substance, and the movie felt like it needed about another half hour to properly explain what was going on. The villains helped the movie for me because they were evil, but not absurdly so. It would have a higher score if it wasn't for the overdone, drawn out action sequences that hilighted how underdeveloped the rest of the movie was. 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
9
[Anonymous]Oct 30, 2008
Hey, seems to me I've already read one underwhelming review, but I liked this it ot. I was not wowed by the first Daniel Craig as Bond effort but seems like the new director has tuned it just right: gritty and well shot w/just the right Hey, seems to me I've already read one underwhelming review, but I liked this it ot. I was not wowed by the first Daniel Craig as Bond effort but seems like the new director has tuned it just right: gritty and well shot w/just the right touch of emotion. Enjoy. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
PhilipC.Aug 5, 2008
Bond is back and better than Ever! The action is amazing, the whole story is very continual and relative to Casino royale. But this one was much better. It's just amazing. See it for yourself. I saw a SC.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JohnW.Nov 1, 2008
A further step away from the formulaic previous Bond entries and all the better for it. It doesn't have the charm and strong storyline that Casion Royale did but it's still a strong film. It is probably the most 'un-Bond' A further step away from the formulaic previous Bond entries and all the better for it. It doesn't have the charm and strong storyline that Casion Royale did but it's still a strong film. It is probably the most 'un-Bond' like film in the whole series save for OHMSS, as it avoids many of the signature features of the previous entries. Daniel Craig is on top form as are the surrounding cast. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
MannyNov 14, 2008
This is an exceptional movie. But beware, it is a shift away from the traditional, cheesy lined Bond movie towards a darker, richer story. Craig's acting is on par, if not better than Casino Royale. I can't comprehend how reviewers This is an exceptional movie. But beware, it is a shift away from the traditional, cheesy lined Bond movie towards a darker, richer story. Craig's acting is on par, if not better than Casino Royale. I can't comprehend how reviewers trash this movie for its austerity and lack of "campiness". It wouldn't make sense to follow the typical formula for Quantum. In addition to the psychological trauma from Vesper Lynd's death, Bond suffers numerous other cataclysms in the movie. To simply "grin" and move on, as some reviewers suggested, wouldn't be appropriate -it would actually be quite distracting. Again I have to emphasize, this movie is remarkable, if this is a sign for what's to come from this franchise, count me in. As for those reviewers who trashed the movie, I suggest they "grin" and move on. 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
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
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
8
AugustNov 15, 2008
Not as bad as some of you say, and it's NOT Bourne.
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
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
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
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
7
PeterONov 17, 2008
Good but not enough fun, bring back the gadgets.
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
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