User Score
6.4

Generally favorable reviews- based on 488 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 75 out of 488
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. ChrisG
    Nov 15, 2008
    9
    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.
  2. Kelvin
    Nov 15, 2008
    5
    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 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
  3. MarkB.
    Nov 15, 2008
    9
    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.
  4. wolfiefish
    Nov 15, 2008
    1
    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 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
  5. JoeReviewer
    Nov 15, 2008
    6
    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 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
  6. RichardT.
    Nov 15, 2008
    5
    Action but no sex for England.
  7. AndyM.
    Nov 16, 2008
    5
    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 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
  8. WilliamB.
    Nov 16, 2008
    7
    Daniel Craig is fine, but this film is too uptight! Sometimes the action set-pieces are confusing and incoherent.
  9. DougN.
    Nov 16, 2008
    7
    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.
  10. JohnB.
    Nov 16, 2008
    9
    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.
  11. HansH.
    Nov 16, 2008
    9
    Not as phenomenal as Casino Royale, but still extremely entertaining and solid.
  12. WilliamC.
    Nov 16, 2008
    3
    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 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
  13. MattB.
    Nov 16, 2008
    9
    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!
  14. MichalI
    Nov 16, 2008
    4
    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.
  15. NS.
    Nov 16, 2008
    10
    AWESOME AWESOME AND MORE AWESOME! Definitely check this movie out! That action scenes are wicked!
  16. JasonR.
    Nov 16, 2008
    4
    Hugely disappointing. No character development. Terrible editing. Wow, they really blew it.
  17. SteveB.
    Nov 17, 2008
    6
    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 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
  18. DanaM.
    Nov 17, 2008
    4
    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
  19. MateoZ.
    Nov 17, 2008
    8
    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. 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
  20. kvan
    Nov 17, 2008
    4
    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.
  21. JacobC
    Nov 17, 2008
    2
    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.
  22. MichaelT
    Nov 17, 2008
    9
    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.
  23. BrianT.
    Nov 18, 2008
    3
    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.
  24. JackF.
    Nov 18, 2008
    8
    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 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
  25. ChristianT.
    Nov 18, 2008
    6
    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 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
  26. HarryP.
    Nov 2, 2008
    5
    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.
  27. KevinF
    Nov 22, 2008
    4
    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 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
  28. EliC.
    Nov 22, 2008
    1
    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 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
  29. JakeE
    Nov 24, 2008
    9
    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.
  30. TomG.
    Nov 5, 2008
    7
    Just got in from quantum and I have mixed feelings, on one hand it is an excellent film with plenty of action and a gripping plot but on the other hand this is no bond film, this could easily be the fourth 'Bourne' film, Quantum leaves Bond lovers with lots to desire especially with bond's humor and gadgets.
Metascore
58

Mixed or average reviews - based on 38 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 38
  2. Negative: 2 out of 38
  1. Reviewed by: Kim Newman
    80
    As with "The Dark Knight," the only real caveat is that while it's exciting and imaginative, it's not exactly anyone's idea of fun. To keep in the game, perhaps the next movie could let the hero enjoy himself a bit more.
  2. Reviewed by: Jay Slater
    60
    Quantum of Solace may be explosive with images of fiery infernos, but it's convoluted and confusing, the plot playing second fiddle to its set pieces.
  3. The new picture allows hardly any flourishes of style and character in the 007 tradition, but moviegoers seeking an adrenaline rush will be well pleased.