Quantum of Solace dont live up to its expatiation, having a poor pace and bad editing. An average action film.

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

first things first. this movie has some of the worst film editing i've ever seen. it cuts between cameras in literally less than 1 second intervals. and it blatantly ignores decades of bond lore, as well as the scientific laws of time. i heard great things about skyfall so i figured i would catch up with daniel craig's bond beforehand, but i would recommend just skipping this one altogether.

This is a very good action movie. The story is good, The cast is good, just everything is good. I give this movie an 8 because I expected more as casino royal.

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.

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

This was a bitter disappointment compared to Casino Royale, ditching a substantial story for a string of action scenes. The plot is ruined by its eco subtext, which gets tedious and annoying. The villain wasn't sinister at all, he was the sort of guy you'd take out for a beer. The lack of originality is incredibly obvious, the action scenes gave me serious deja vu of the M:I series, and Bond's subplot of his eagerness to avenge Vesper Lynd shamelessly borrows from The Bourne Supremacy. The ending is atrocious, since when would Bond leave the Bond girl stranded in a Bolivian desert town? The gaps in logic are bigger than Jupiter, he puts Vesper's father's corpse in a dumpster instead of having a proper burial, and some random guy comes and fights Bond in a hotel with no connection to the plot whatsoever. Worst of all is the shaky cam and rapid fire editing, which dominated the action making it difficult to watch. The only things giving me points to this movie are Daniel Craig's gritty portrayal of Bond, and the holographic table scene, that's all. Topping Casino Royale was always going to be difficult, but Quantum of Solace doesn't even come close.… Expand

I'm going to go against the grain here and say that I really, really like this movie. I am not a fan of old Bond - I loved Casino Royale, and think that this film really stands up as a sequel to it. I liked that it had one, clear plot, and tied in well with Casino. At the end of that film, Bond realizes he has been betrayed by the only woman that he ever let himself love - he responds by shutting his feelings off entirely, and beginning a mad quest for revenge. The action scenes are smart and quick, and Olga Kurylenko as Camila is extremely beautiful, but also very interesting with a subplot of her own. There are so many small character building moments in this film, and the villain leads us to believe that there is a sinister Bilderberg type group pulling the strings for all of these coups in major countries. Nice to see Felix back again, and the political intrigue parts of the film were sharp. M's maternal relationship with Bond is subtly expanded upon. The Opera scene is flipping brilliant. Overall, I think that this is one of my favorite action movies of all time, and honestly it's super underrated.… Expand

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.

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.

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.

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.

Like a solid second act. Ends up being only a follow up to the original instead of its own movie. A step down from Casino Royale, but I'm still looking forward to future installments.

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 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

Muy aceptable. Acción a raudales desde el primer minuto. Continuidad con la anterior entrega de Daniel Craig. Globalización a tope, enseñándonos como la economía y el poder pasan por encima de los mandatarios. Lealtad. En contra algunas escenas con demasiado movimiento que necesitan un esfuerzo de concentración, así como el deseo de venganza y demasiadas muertes. Es cierto que después de la venganza se nos muestra que esta deja igualmente un vacío.
Fabulosa la interpretación tanto de Daniel Craig como de Judi Dench.… Expand

Quantum of Solace turns back the clock on Casino Royale's unconventional structure to bring about a more traditional Bond adventure. Craig still makes for an excellent 007, investing the role with emotional gravitas. The action scenes are more fantastical than it's predecessor and as such have that tangible James Bond feel to them. Quantum of Solace is a good movie, even though it makes me cry to see a DB7 banged up so roughly.… Expand

Production wise, I couldn

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, 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

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 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.

I'll tell you straight! The film Quantum of Solace is not for everyone. Those who watched movies as a child because of the steep Bond shootouts, chases, fights will be very upset because of their absence. And those who watched them because the story will be completely satisfied. You can also recommend this film to those who did not sign with the Bond. They will appear in this film a masterpiece. I belong to the latter. So I put it the highest rating.… Expand

Stuck on this film, the story editing is great and fast moving for all the right reasons, but some action scenes (such as the opening) makes no logical sense, Yes it's thrilling (In large thanx to the sound effects) but It is dizzying instead of entertaining. The film is well made but the half a second editing still enhances the film at certain times (planes chase sequence, hotel room fight) and hurts at others. The film is well written for the genre and actually improves certain aspects of Casino Royale, but the overproduced editing hurts it from being better than Casino Royale.… Expand

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 (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

An underrated gem of a Bond film. No, its not your usual epic, lavish Bond adventure. It is instead a very taut action thriller in the vein of films like Taken and euro-thrillers. I have no doubt that in years to come it will become more highly regarded as other "different" Bond films like On Her Majestys Secret Service and Licence To Kill have.

Daniel Craig is good in this film once again. The action sequences are good and film in general is good as well but not as great as the previous fim. I still enjoyed it though.

I am a huge Bond fan. I have read the Flemming novels and I have seen all movies. Quantum of Solace is my favourite Bond movie by a mile.
It has everything that you could want from a bond film. Awesome action, excellent acting, hot Bond girls, a realistic plot and a realistic villain with a genius plan. The car chase and fight scene are better shot and easier to follow than anything in the Bourne films. They're hard hitting and thrilling to watch.
It pays homage to most of the great early movies like Goldfinger and The Spy Who Loved Me.
Sean Connery played Bond just like the character in the Flemming novels but Daniel Craig is by far the best actor to ever portray Bond. He looks classy and he kicks ass when he needs to. Highly recommended.… Expand

The plot is just slightly too complex to follow, the Bond-girls aren't quite as stunning, and the writing is not quite as polished as its predecessor. "Quantum"'s primary problem is that it had to follow "Casino Royale". A moderately-fun action movie, an adequate addition to the Bond franchise, but a below-average sequel. Regardless, it's still worth a look. Maybe even two or three.

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.

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 actioner disguised as something more. Quantum of Solace is an average film, and that's arguably the worst thing one can be.

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 not enough clever story; enjoyable in itself but nowhere near the stellar mark of its predecessor.

I find the negative reviews of this film laughable: 1. I DOES NOT UNDRSTAND DER PLOT... why? because the film does not pause to explain everything like so many modern films do? Everyone I watched this film with understood the plot without many questions. 2. WATER? WATER?... being completely unaware of how valuable water is makes a poor excuse for disliking a film. Having no understanding of current events and problems is just sad. 3. SO MUCH AKTON IS NOT BOND... yes, it is. This film does action sequences better than the slow and clumsy Bond films of yesteryear and that is a good thing. 4. I LIKE BROSNAN BETTERER... yes, those were great movies. No one should question that.… Expand

Not up there with Casino Royale but a great follow up to it. The acting was still great but the movie rushed through its self a little bit. Daniel Craig still does a good job and makes me forget about that Pierce guy. Overall a very good movie.

i found this an enjoyable movie however what has let it down is too much action. The acting was good as you would expect from a james bond movie and so was the storyline. it was just too fast paced there was not much talk involved it needed to take sometime to slow down every so often

Over dramitised

I now understand why people kill themselves, with movies like this and Casino Royale, what the h3ll is wrong with the directors of today. I believe the world would be better if the just drowned themselves in a bucket of their own urine and aired that instead of this crap. At least then people would be left with a sense of satisfaction. Very very poor.

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.

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

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 a good bond movie but a decent action movie.

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

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

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

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.

A horrible film consisting of no plot, no story, no acting and no sense. James Bond is not a action hero, get that straight Hollywood, and next time actually try to make a new Bond film a good one and a memorable one. "Quantum of Solace" is one of the worst of 2008.

This movie could have had some of the best action sequences. But it lacked that and lacked the charm which you would expext from a bond. Daniel is making the franchise fall because everywoman he sleeps with dies. He should have had a bond with no sequels. But this film puts the hype and has more action which I like and I loved this movie because we saw something new instead of all the James Bond movies. He is not trying to save the world and he is just out for revenge.… Expand

Never before has there been such abuse of the name bond. All those years theve spent building a franchise only to have this aboination to come along. The story was week and confussing, the fighting was good but covereing a girl in oil??? Come up with an orginal idea rather than stealing from other bond films. Everyone envovled is a turd. End of.

What a dismal Bond movie. It had none of the character development or plot of the last one. Purely two-dimensional. On top of that, the actions scenes are shot in the increasingly popular super-close style that makes it so you can't tell what's actually going on. I frequently couldn't determine which black car or black suit was chasing the other. Overall, profoundly disappointing.

Bond is back again...and Craig is on his second film playing everyone's favorite spy. Quantum picks up alsmot immediately after the events of the Casino Royale...so there is little time to get ready for this film, because it starts out "balls to the wall" and rarely lets up till the big explosive finale. In comparison to the first (Casino Royale), Quantum of Solace lacks a bit...whether it be the story the directorial style...nothing about this film seems as elegant or as well put together as its predecessor...it definately amps up the action a few notches however. The action scenes better choreographed and far more explosive...so it certainly excedes Casino in that regard. It's really the story and lack of substance that make this film a bit ho-hum at times...its just not interesting to follow, something about a greedy enviromentalist on the hunt for oil and he isn't afraid to lie and kill to get what he wants and then this even less important story about a girl trying to get revenge on a general for brutally killing her family (yawn)...but you really won't care about any of that, it almost seems like filler until you get to the real meat of what this movie is about...ACTION and lots of it, as its easy to see where most of the care went. Casino Royale is a far more polished Bond film...Quantum is certainly watchable and its actually quite entertaining as a hollow action film, it dosent seem to really expand on the Bond character other than we know he is even MORE upset and far more lethal in his methods now than before. it comes HIGHLY RECOMMENDED...if you are looking for action, this is it, if you are looking for story....i strongy recommend you watch Casino Royale to catch up.… Expand

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

I really did not enjoy this movie at all. I gave it a 3 because, for an action movie it had some cool action sequences. I didn't care for any of the actors in the movie either. I didn't care for the story.

Okay, after the horrid "Casino Royale," I thought that this was going to be a lot cleaner. It wasn't. The clasic "Gun barrel" opening was tossed away to the end of the film and done with horrorfying results. Bond is no longer an Agent he is a midless killing machine. Oh and if this is still part of 007's first mission EVER WHY THE *@!$ IS IT IN MODERN TIMES?! After "Die Another Day" we no longer get to see what Bond's next adventure is the re did the whole thing with crappy decisions! No story, tons of action that is poorly developed and RIPS off of Classic bond films! "Goldfinger" is in here but rip offed of it as well as "GoldenEye," "Thunderball," and "Live and Let Die" It has the Bond movie title and logo but it is NOT a Bond film, complete garbage.… Expand

Spectacular scenes and good rhythm.

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.

Pitiful Bond movie. The last two are a real let down. No super spy gadgets, cars, etc. Just blow 'em away brutality. A raw film that rubbed me raw. In attempting to make super spying into some gritty, hardcore killer flick, the writers have fallen prey to a neverland that would have the 00 spies bouncing off their asylum walls. Way over the top without the fantasy gadgets...too much unreal realism. What can I say to some it up? It was a real downer. Redeeming lines within the thing about forgiveness...that was good.… Expand

Where was the debonair 007? New 007 has no class, no catchy lines that got laughs, and completely lacks any sophistication as other Bond actors. Furthermore, the movie lacked the most entertaining elements: Where were Q and Moneypennie? Where were the cool gadgets we've come to expect to see in all Bond movies? Again I ask where were the "Phrases that Pay"? Furthermore this movie was poorly edited. All action scenes were limited to an ungodly half second. They must have not done any retaked for the flubbed scenes and pieced together all the stuff they liked in the end to make it so choppy and hard to watch/follow with your eyes. Gave me a real headache. A true waste of film and the money DH and I spent to see this poorly filmed, acted and letdown of a 007 film. Truly a big letdown compared to Brosnan, Connery, Moore and Lazenby.… Expand

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.

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.

So yes it's confusing. And yes upon leaving I had many unanswered questions. Not a huge fan of simply taking off from where the last left off. As I wasn't prepared for this I spent most of the opening car chase trying to remember the last bond film I watched two years ago. All that aside, the action is great. Craig is by far the most legitimate Bond character ever. Yes Connery was great, but Craig's character is a nice change from the boyish, unrealistic bonds of old.… Expand

The dialogue between Bond and M was just not convincing. Was the plot lame? Probably. What was the whole point dragging the poor guy from his home in he Mediterranean to get locked up in the trunk of a car in Bolivia - and eventually get killed? Yes teh plot was lame.... You don't speak to a President that way - sign the deal or you will get replaced. And if Bond could bumpo him off, why not the Bolivian President (or whoever that character was).... Still it was great entertainment. Awesome. So I give it a 7.… Expand

Really enjoyed this movie - so much better than expected after reading mised reviews. The Bond team have truly reinvigorated this frachise just when it was on its last legs. A gripping, suspenseful plot that keeps the audience guessing, worthy characters and break neck action sequences. I hope they can maintain this quality standard for the next one.

This story, while not written by Ian Flemming, is the natural extension of Casino Royale. Quantum of Solace explores the personal and professional issue that James Bond deals with in 'becomming Bond'. I found the film to be intelligent, well paced and in keeping with the Ian Flemming tradition. Quantum of solace should be viewed 3 to 4 times to truly appreciate the 'Art9; of film making that was put into this project. Enjoy.… Expand

I enjoyed this film! This is the only time since the mediocre "License to Kill" where Bond has been in official REVENGE mode, and Dalton didn't do it half as well as Craig. Sure it wasn't all quips and one liners, a'la Moore. Never the less I'm really liking this so called "gritty" Bond. My only trivial gripe was with the Bond baddy's lack of a gimmick (No deformity or pet peeve?!?). In the end: Great Bond film. Great revenge film.… Expand

well I

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.

Village Voice has it right - this was edited in a blender set on indecipherable. Utter garbage. Give me Brosnan or any other Bond for that matter. The director should never be allowed to work again.

The worst Bond film of all time. I thought nothing could be worse than Die Another Day. This manages it with some aplomb. The direction is horrible - all split second jump cuts designed to create excitement and stimulate action. It does nothing of the sort, only creating a sense of nausea. The story is boring and flat. Give me back the megalomaniac who wants world control and save me from these weary eco-stories. This has NOTHING in common with any Bond film. No sexiness, no gadgets, no exciting villain, no villain's lair, no henchman, no decent theme, no John Barry music, no intro, no nothing. The worst Bond film or all time, maybe one of the worst films of the year.… Expand

Ignore the critics, this is one of the best bond films ever.

The first Bond film I liked was Casino Royale the second is Quantum of Solace. I just can't stand the cheese associated with most Bond films so the last two instalments are a welcome relief. Still I guess I can understand why Bond fans are bitter, there are plenty of intelligent films out there so perhaps the Bond franchise should stick to what the Bond fans like.

I've literally just returned from watching this Bond movie, and while walking out of the theater, my dad commented on what he considered to be the lame plot. Listen- no one should go to a Bond movie expecting a coherent plotline; in fact, they've never had coherent plotlines. Honestly, Daniel Craig is the best Bond since Connery and I don't think anyone can seriously dispute that. The girls in QOS are perfectly acceptable and the locales are exotic, as should be expected. The major flaw with this film is the quick-cut method and hand-held camera work used by the director during action sequences. Stuntmen were injured while making this Bond film, Craig lost part of his finger during an action sequence, but damned if you can tell what's going on at any point while the action takes place. As Bond films are all about the action sequences, the quick-editing and shaky hand-held camerawork destroys a good portion of the film as a whole.… Expand

I'm not joking around, what the hell was the point to that movie? It has to be the worst 007 movie ever. The only movie that isn't written by Ian Flemming (he only mad the charecters not the story) turns out to be the worst. I know they could have made something so much better then that. What was the point to all that action? What is the bad thing thats going on right now? Why is there cars chasing eachother? Is that charecter good or bad? What is Greene trying to do with the world? So many questions are unclear once the movie is over. Everyone who saw it that I know said that they were lost the whole movie. It totally needed more talking and explaining for people to understand what is going on that whole movie. It can't pick off the first movie right when it starts. It is confusing and you have no clue what was going on most of the time until the end. And even still you are still lost in questions what was going on that movie. It was confusing, the action was pointless, it was nothing like the tranditional Bond movies. Ian Flemming is the writer of 007... there is no one else like him.… Expand

Terrible movie. While Craig has an aura of intensity about him which makes him a wonderful bond, the plot was absolutely terrible. At the beginning I thought that there would be more of a focus on the secretive 'company', but they barely went into that. While I do not like films that are pointlessly dragged out to the extent of wasted time, this was at the opposite extreme; being too short to fulfill the plot or send any message to the audience. It was like trying to fit a 400 pound guy into small size clothing - it does not work.… Expand

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

As time goes on, and more bond films come out, the more they strey from who james bond is supposed to be, james bond is becoming more like rambo and Quantum is exactly that, just not james bond anymore, although watchable if you like action movies.

After readiing the reviews I was expecting to be disappointed, but this Bond movie is one of the most exotic, intelligent and action-packed of all. Some really great sequences - all properly done - (no CGI) - and the close-up / quick cut MTV-style editing places the viewer right in the mayhem. Yes, it's brutal and there are absolutely no Moore-esque one-liners or gadgets, this is a Bond for adults. Recommended.… Expand

After watching this movie, I've come to realize that many people (and especially critics) just didn't get it. It's part two of Casino Royale. It is a two-movie storyline that explains why he is who he is and why the love of a woman will never again pull him away from his "job". It wasn't that the plot was weak as many as said. It was simply just an extension of the first movie's plot to wrap up James Bond's introduction to us in this format. There were obvious signs that the next movie will be a new plot in a more traditional Bond way. The first two movies set up who this Bond is...now we go forward. By the way, the entertainment value of this movie is still very high. It is such a good way to introduce the best bond of a new generation.… Expand

On balance, no better or worse than "Casino Royale." Had its strengths, plus real weaknesses. Craig is a special Bond, as was Connery. The development of his relationship with 'M' has been excellent, probably the best element of two movies. Plot was thin, but not nearly as confusing as I'd been led to believe. Really disliked the denouement scenes in the weird desert hotel. Lacked cleverness and the action was forced on the viewer rather mindlessly.… Expand

Extremely poor plot and very far fetched, even for a bond flick. The director expects us to believe bond miraculously survives multiple certain death situations with giving even a hint as to how. I had hopes that the bond franchise had wisened up given a more human nature of casino royale, but they have gone terribly of the rails this time around.

Most people reviewing this film really don't seem to understand it at all. This film is a character study at its core. It serves as the bridge between what Bond was and what he will be for the foreseeable future (I hope). It is excellent in every respect, even moreso than Casino Royalle, which I thought was fantastic. For those of you who miss hollowed out volcano bases and giant lasers in space, go watch Moonraker to your hearts' content.… Expand

Worst Bond movie ever? I think not! In fact, I think that was Die Another Day. Ring any bells? Thank you Daniel Craig for reinstating my faith in the franchise. Sure, this film is not perfect, but its a definate step in the right direction. My only two complaints about this one are that the villian could have been more menacing and the action scenes not so poorly edited. Otherwise it was a very enjoyable night at the movies for me. I like the fact that they are moulding the character closer to Ian Flemmings original ideas of Bond and not the horrible cheese-and-wine character that Brosnan portrayed with his stupid remarks and lame jokes. Can't wait to see what they will do with the next installment!… Expand

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.

this movie is by far better than the all the horror mivies being made today. at least bond uses more realistic toys in the new movies and not all the old gimimicks, car that dissapear, watches that can left 2 people without taking your arm off? Hope the new writers keep it real in the future as well.

What's wrong with a little action? Not as good as Casino Royale of course, but still good nonetheless. I had low expectations due to hearing poor reviews from people who had high expectations, so when I went into the film I left feeling very relieved and anything but dissappointed. True, I have not scene any bond film other than a Brosnan's or Craig's, but I have to admit, for what this film was, it was a good one.… Expand

As a woman, I was looking forward to seeing Bond in another speedo, admiring his gorgeous physique and relishing in the delight of some outrageous plot to rule the world. Sadly, I was disappointed. The plot was weak, the bad guy looked creepy and there was no seduction. It was all action and not much else. I still think Daniel Craig is the second best Bond, after Sean Connery and hope that the next installment will be a true Bond movie, not an action movie about someone getting revenge for a lost love.… Expand

Very very poor bond movie. Bad story, and honestly quite a boring movie to watch. Makes the awesome Casino Royale look like a classic.

One terrible scene after another. Action set pieces are incoherent. The drama is dialed down. Craig's muscles are the most impressive thing on display. For the Bond movie with the biggest budget, this was a waste of a lot of money.

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.

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

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

Ugh. The story was nonsense. It made so little sense that at one point I wondered if the projectionist had skipped a reel.

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

Just another Action Movie, not Bond anymore.

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

Very disappointing. I like the new portrayal of Bond, it's way more true to the Fleming novels than the campy crap of the overrated Connery ones and the foppish prettyboyness of Brosnan. And I'm happy to see the end of the random devices Bond just happens to come into the exact situation for him to need it. Craig is how Bond should be portrayed. But the action sequences were terrible. They were so contrived they came off like the Peter vs The Chicken sequences from Family Guy. The villains were completely uncompelling, the writing was just lame. It was just a cookie cutter action flick whose main character just happened to be named Bond.… Expand

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.

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

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

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

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.

Great addition to the Bond series. I'm not sure why it gets mixed reviews. If you are a fan of the franchise, you'll love this film.

I like the new direction these Bond movies are taking. More cerebral and violent than older movies. Doesn't spell everything out and leaves lots of avenues open for other sequels (in a good way). If you are looking for stupid gadgets and unbelievable villains with silly world domination aspirations you have 30 years of other Bond movies to watch.

Worst Bond film ever based on many facts: no character development, no depth to the plot, very plain action sequences (with many borrowed from previous films) and way too many loose ends. It seems like all the good scenes were edited out to leave this skeleton with no meat for a story. Wait for video.