Is there solace in revenge? Bond and M sniff a shadowy international network of power and corruption reaping billions. As Bond pursues the agents of an assassination attempt on M, all roads lead to Dominic Greene, a world-renowned developer of green technology. Greene, a nasty piece of work, is intent on securing a barren area of Bolivia in exchange for assisting a strongman stage a coup there. The CIA looks the other way, and only Bond, with help from a retired spy and from a mysterious beauty, stands in Greenes way. M wonders if she can trust Bond, or if vengeance possesses him. Beyond that, can anyone drawn to Bond live to tell the tale?
|007 Quantum of Solace Movie(DivX)||Resolution: 640x272 px||Total Size: 1395 Mb|
|007 Quantum of Solace Movie(HD 720)||Resolution: 1280x528 px||Total Size: 1933 Mb|
|007 Quantum of Solace Movie(iPod)||Resolution: 480x208 px||Total Size: 300 Mb||
|007 Quantum of Solace Movie(HD 1080)||Resolution: 1920x800 px||Total Size: 8094 Mb|
We have taken some photos of "007 Quantum of Solace". They represent actual movie quality.
Having the rebooted James Bond series, 'Casino Royale,' become myfavorite of all Bond movies, it was going to be tough to follow it upwith the first direct sequel: 'Quantum of Solace.' At first, I didn'tlike it, hardly at all. The plot was all over the place Â OK, I admit,I really couldn't follow it, the first go-around, there were a lot ofdry scenes, and the rejuvenated Bond took leaps backwards with hissexual encounter with a "Strawberry Fields." My second and now thirdviewings, I enjoyed it a lot more. I suppose its one that grows on you.Sure, nowhere near as good as 'Royale,' heck, not in the top Bondfilms, but still enjoyable.It's 10x more gritty and dark than 'Royale,' yet I loved the feel andstyle of the film. Thankfully, they did fix one of 'Royale's biggestproblems by shortening this down 37 minutes. Also, the cinematography,landscapes, locales, fight scenes were all well done.The yellow-toothed villain left a lot to be desired, and even thoughthey needed to give the audience the typical Bond Bimbo, I still cringeat reducing this mature Bond to a 15-year-old.Taking place within the hour of the 'Royale' finale, Bond is bent onrevenge (despite his consistent attempts to state otherwise) and inturn taking down the big-evil corporation known as 'Quantum.' You don'tget the whole story on them, so I suspect this isn't the first sequelto be made in the Bond movies, though I wish it were. Move on. Get Bondback where he needs, fresh missions. (I think they did state that'swhere it's going in the final shot.) I liked the song, though,listening to it outside the movie, it seemed very edited in the titlesequence. I still think the story has a lot to be desired, but stillrecommended for action/suspense buffs.
The newer Bond films with Craig have lots of showy special effects but also are much darker, more depressing themes. What happened to the Bond most of us knew & loved which were exciting, stylish & still had a touch of humour? If I'd known the character of the previous Bonds had been totally changed I would not have bought the last release. I long to really be entertained by Hollywood...real life can be dark enough and I need films that make us forget reality and our entertaining.
It is best to watch this back to back. First Casino Royale and then this one. It picks up directly where the other left off. It will leave you exhausted afterward, wanting more. Big Thumbs Up! Sean Connery was my favorite and he instantly comes to mind when JB's name is mentioned. Daniel Craig is the next best thing as far as I am concerned. He is tough, quick, dresses up classy and maintains an air of masculinity that was missing since Sean Connery was replaced.
*****Classic ****Excellent ***Good **Fair *Tragic Review: Not only is Quantum of Solace better than it's predecessor but also isone of the best of the decade. Expect great amounts of action,adventure and thrills as Craig gives Bond the full measurement of powerand adrenaline thats needed for a successful follow up to the widelyacclaimed Casino Royale.The action is 100 times better than in the previous instalment andshows the gradual increase of fast and fierce brutality by masterBourne choreographer Dan Bradley. The sequences move fast, furiouslyand brilliantly. The action also positively shows that a director cankeep this faithful as well as a spot on story on the top.Daniel Craig enhances his Bond to great heights and gives him an evenmore gruelling and bloodier look than the previous film. Craig fullydemonstrates he is Bond and that he's the best one for the job.The cinematography layers the film up together and gives the film anideal look as to where the film takes place.The direction is perfect from Marc Forster (The Kite Runners) whovividly and imaginatively creates an action adventure for the mosthumble of Bourne fans. The shots are wide and various but equally matchup to a classic Bond film.Verdict:A visually stylish classic that can proudly hold nods up against allthe other Bond movies.
Looking down the checklist of what you get when you see the name "JamesBond" on the poster of a movie, it seems that the electric reboot in2006's Casino Royale missed out a substantial amount. Gone were thegadgets, the humour and the trophy girls Â the post-Bourne Bond was allabout the psyche of a thug. "Find Bond" barks M on more than oneoccasion in this outing and, in all honesty, I think most of theaudience are still looking.Following on just an hour after Casino Royale (marking the first directsequel in Bond history), the difference is easy to see. Accompanied bya rock soundtrack, we find ourselves jerked all over the place in aflashy albeit very hard to follow car chase that sets the speed for thefilm and thankfully, it rarely lets up. Why "thankfully"? Well, notbecause of the lack of good action in movies nowadays. The problem withthis film is that we need to have overblown set pieces and lots ofthings blowing up to keep our minds off the ridiculous and paper-thinplot.It's a good thing Bond has a passport, because from the opening inItaly, he moves around the world faster than malaria. Moving from A toB with one line of dialogue stringing him along, he quickly destroysanything in his path Â and manages to kill any lead MI6 have on theorganisation that Mr White is a part of. However, the story reallyisn't as simple as that; director Forster tries to get inside the mindof Bond after the death of Vesper Lynd in Royale. However, this iswhere the failure begins, as we rarely see a side of Bond other thanthe brute, and this makes it very hard for the audience to even likehim. There are only a few occasions where this matters, as theincredible set pieces quickly take our minds off the audacious yetfaltering storyline and keep them on the adrenaline rush coursingthrough our bodies. An aerial dogfight is one such piece; there is anunexplainable need to ride a plane a matter of miles to a secret lairin a desert when 007 has a perfectly usable Humvee to drive. But thisabsurdity is instantly forgotten when he's attacked on all sides and athrilling chase begins.But what about the humour? The girls? The gadgets? All humour is lost,save for some Â maybe three Â one liners ("'We have people everywhere'?That's a bit clichÃ©Â I mean, florists say that" says M afterinterrogating the mysterious Mr White). The girls take a back seat forBond (not in that way) because of the seeming importance of Lynd, andtherefore seem awkwardly shallow Â particularly Camille (played byUkranian model Olga Kurylenko), who enters the scene as a backstabberand continues to manipulate Bond throughout the film. The second girlBond comes across, Agent Fields, is a nod back to older, classier BondgirlsÂ but it is only a nod, as she barely lasts five minutes in thefilm before she is found in another throwback to older films (a hugeeaster egg for Goldfinger fans). The final female lead is the hugelyunderstated M, who has a much meatier role here, and Dench plays itwith such a perfect mix of benevolence and impatience that it's hard toimagine back to the days when M was a man.All the elegance and style of Royale is lost, all the thoughtfulness ofBond's mind is replenished with anger and a need for over-the-topviolence. The girls are hollow, the humour misplaced, and the gadgetsgone. So what on earth is there in this movie to watch? Let me put itthis way. If the title character wasn't James Bond, agent 007 for MI6,in the 21st sequel to an adapted story, then this would be a hugelyenjoyable action adventure film. As it is, the Bond we love is gone,and he's been replaced with a clone of Jason Bourne's younger sister.
I loved Quantum of Solace. But I'm totally bewildered. When didmainstream cinema stop using cartoon villains, stop casting women asboring helpless one-dimensional retards, stop using tedious cheesybigoted dialogue and start using locations in the developing worldwithout cringeworthy condescension? When did everything change soradically? This was an extremely tough, cool, exciting, sophisticated,international action film (with a feel bordering on futuristic) which Ienjoyed from start to finish. What a blast! A totally engaging andimpressive piece of work. Craig is complex, vulnerable, unbelievablytough, and for me, easily the best Bond of all time.
This is one of those movies you're not sure what to think of until sometime passes from your first viewing. I believe the main reason thatthis series has been going for so long is that, when the producers havemade a mistake on one of their films, they will show an open mind, comeback the next time around and fix it. EX.: the sillier space sagas YOUONLY LIVE TWICE and MOONRAKER were followed respectively by ON HERMAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE and FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, films in which Bondwas brought back to earth; the outlandish DIE ANOTHER DIE was followedby the solid CASINO ROYALE and so forth. With this in mind, mysuggestions for fixing the goofs on QUANTUM OF SOLACE are as follows:1) Hire a real, renowned great singer, not one teens will dig (as faras I know, Shirley Bassey is still alive and these kids can't hold acandle to her). 2) Never again use the Bourne editing process, nobodylikes it, period. You can't appreciate a great stunt when it cuts toofast to a next one which you don't end up appreciating either. QOS'editing all but itself sank it. 3) The gun barrel scene goes at thebeginning, never again at the end. What the heck was the point in doingso ? 4) Go to any exotic countries you may like but use their mostbeautiful locales, not their ugliest. It's nice to find locations with"flavor", not so good when they don't "taste" so good. 5) If you wantthe audience to hate the villain, don't just imply he killed a belovedcharacters as in the case of Mathis and Agent Fields. Show it on screenso we can detest him properly and thus enjoy his doom. 6) When Bondkills the main villain show it. Don't just have him discuss it with hisboss. 7) As bad as things might be for Bond on the movie. Give him afew scenes in which he might actually be happy. One of his maincharacteristics is his enjoyment of the good things in life (drink,food, girls and so on). 8) A follow up to 7: Bond must never saygoodbye to the movie's main woman character in a car, in the dessertshaking hands or whatever. A body of water and heavy kissing havealways been the norm (and worked out great as far as I can remember).9) Take under consideration: hotels in the dessert are not flammableper se. 10) Bring back Moneypenny and Q. Their scenes always brought asmile to my face. Samantha Bond is more than adequate as the first butgood luck finding someone to replace the beloved Desmond Llewlyn (butyou have to do it anyway !). 11) Make sure the villain's evil plot ismore evil and dangerous to world peace than simply leaving about adozen people with funny looking hats, waterless, 12) Also remember,there are great film-makers, auteurs and directors who know how to makegreat Bond movies. Which have been the best of the recent ones ? :GOLDENYE and CASINO ROYALE. What do both of them have in common ?. NeedI go on ? I'm sure you can afford the guy. By the way, QOS is OK. Had asane editor cut it it would be above average for Bond, as it was itturned out below the median line. I guess you can say it is not as goodas the sum of its parts and as such a wasted opportunity.
The movie starts off well enough with a nice car chase sequence that employs quick-cut scenes to convey adrenaline-pumping action, but it can be difficult to follow and I have to agree with critics' description of this approach as hypercut editing. In fact, a few people left the theater after the movie starts off with its two signature action sequences utilizing this approach. This unfortunately just underlines the problem with the film's pacing. Marc Forster is well-regarded for his previous work on "Finding Neverland" and "Monster's Ball", but it is obvious that this is his first venture into action-film-making. While I think it is a great idea for the production team to employ "Bourne" veterans to stage the action sequences, the movie was overly reliant on their approach and the aforementioned hypercut editing should have been a complement to the movie's style rather than its primary tool. I defended Bond's state of mind and soulless demeanor as a vehicle in his early character development that would take him to the familiar suave, debonair spy he eventually becomes, but the portrayal of his motivated actions were inconsistent and rang hollow. As referenced in the title of this review, this was a greatly missed opportunity to memorably add to and definitively establish his early beginnings in James Bond canon. It is all the more disappointing when you consider the serial core cast--Daniel Craig, Judi Dench, and Jeffrey Wright--was at the top of its game and that there were some intriguing story elements that could have been delved into more or at least handled better to have the audience empathize more with James Bond's inner demons. This might be attributed to a rushed script that was turned in before the writers strike in order to meet production deadlines. Being a sequel to the storyline from the indelible "Casino Royale", there was a perfect set up to finish Bond's emotional journey but instead it seems like the movie was more interested in hastily ending that part of his life so that it can move onto his next. "Quantum of Solace" even tries to emulate its predecessor with an ending to signify the birth of the Bond the world knows and loves. However, it is executed unconvincingly not only in that particular scene, but also in the buildup throughout the whole movie. It would have been better off for "Royale" to serve as a standalone end story rather than have "Solace" expand on it in such a paint-by-numbers fashion. As much as "Casino Royale" took a quantum (pun intended) leap in re-invigorating the Bond franchise with a classic telling of Bond lore, "Quantum of Solace" stumbled with a couple of mis-steps back with an unfulfilling product that won't necessarily hurt the franchise but does indicate a possible return to the uninspired, formulaic approach to making James Bond movies. It's funny how a previous reviewer mentions paying attention to detail in order fully appreciate this movie because I feel this movie would be better enjoyed if the audience would gloss over the details. In fact, if you compare the end scene of "Casino Royale" with opening scenes of "Quantum of Solace", you'll notice the suit Daniel Craig was wearing is different as Bond donned a Brioni suit in CR but a Tom Ford suit was shown in QoS. I'm still glad I saw the movie but it comes off as superfluous and if I had to give it a grade, it'd get a C+ with the plus only added due to being somewhat related to the previous Bond outing, which I obviously have a high affinity for.
Leading up to the release of Qauntum of Solace my expectations were nothigh because of the early reviews and I thought it would be difficultto match the outcome of the brilliant Casino Royale. I know regardCasino Royale as a modern day classic and one of the best Bond movies.QoS is high on action and low on story, in-depth characterisation,humour and interesting characters. The plot is frustratingly difficultto follow and I came out of the cinema struggling to remember what theplot was about. CR was also difficult to follow but it still kept youhooked.The action is let down because of the shaky camera that is very similarto the Bourne movies. The main weakness about the film is that it doesnot feel like a Bond movie. David Arnold's theme is non existent andfor some reason he chooses not to use the Bond Theme until the endcredits. Also I do not understand why the traditional gun barrelsequence is moved to the end and not at the start. The film lacked anyhumour and the witty one liners are not present. Little changes likethis is how it makes the film feel like an ordinary film and not a Bondfilm.Finally I was surprised by Daniel Craig's performance, in CR he wascool, dangerous, witty but also human. However in QoS he is a moodykilling machine that just frowned all the way through. Don't get mewrong he was great in the action scenes but he just was not interestingas a character. Overall the film is a let down, I just hope that in thenext film they bring back some of the traditional elements such asMonnypenny, Q, humour etc.
It was the scene between the Foreign Secretary and 'M' that basicallysummarizes the secondary theme of the film: Villains are not any longerpersons with black character treats. They are persons whosepersonalities have many shades of gray. Dominic Greene is off coursethe villain, but he's also an eco-philanthropist. James Bond on theother hand should be the positive action-hero, but instead kills morepeople than Dominic Greene does! The theme is furthermore highlightedby scenes of very poor Bolivian people who are literally dying to getsome water. David Arnold's unoriginal Babel-like music stresses thisfact as well.Then there is the post-Bush CIA who cannot wait to see the currentBolivian government thrown overboard by Greene and Co. And MI6meanwhile has become an incompetent secret service with so many leaksin its organization that it's almost a not-so-secret service.Lot of this is off course quite realistic in the real world. BothBarbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson know how the world has changedsince 9/11. The outgoing US government, the CIA, MI6: Ethics seem notso important anymore for them. Many films produced after 9/11 have hadsimilar themes about the founding's of terrorism. One can think of'Syriana', 'Lions For Lambs', 'United 93' and more recently 'The KiteRunner'. Also the Bourne films show us this criticism when the CIAwants to adopt operation 'Threadstone', no matter how bleak this willturn out for certain US citizens.It is exactly the leading character from the Bourne franchise whoperfectly succeeded at showing us the bleaker and grayer world offoreign politics and intelligence agencies.But should Ian Fleming's character James Bond be used in the same wayas Robert Ludlum's Jason Bourne? It is true that since the start of thefranchise in 1962 James Bond was more or less the same character. Attimes he was a bit darker and a bit grittier, but still a suave Britishspy. This was the case in 'The Living Daylights','On Her Majesty'sSecret Service', 'From Russia With Love' and indeed 'Casino Royale'.But at times Bond also proved to be a funny Brit as well. 'TomorrowNever Dies', 'Moonraker' and 'Live And Let Die' are good examples ofsuch a Bond.With 'Quantum Of Solace' however, the Bond producers did go too far intheir ambition to set a new Bond-standard. Whereas 'Casino Royale' was,is and will be an instant classic in the future, the producers decidedto go one step further in making Bond a villainous, bad- assassin usinghis fists instead of his high IQ. It was totally unnecessary.Bond has always been a suave British agent, who only kills for Queenand Country if he needs to. But even in Fleming's first Bond novel henever threw a dead friend -RenÃ© Mathis- in a dustbin. His Cambridgepast would prevent him from adopting such disrespectful JasonBourne-like acts. In Fleming's first Bond novel he's already quite acool spy and never puts the British Secret Service in danger. But in'Quantum Of Solace' MI6 has become an incompetent unbelievabledetective agency. I would advice PM Brown to cut down money onBroccoli's and Wilson's version of MI6.All other aspects in Bond's latest installment are there, but alsoquite blunted if I may say. Bond girl Camille is again a vengeful,kung-fu-like man girl who has been written as Bond's equal. It has beendone before (Wai Lin, Jinx Jordan). But where are the real Bond girlswho are not afraid of showing their feminine side? I do miss theTracy's, Pussy's, Honey's and Vesper's of the Bond-franchise.While 'Quantum Of Solace' lacks plot and a good developing storyline--It's one of the biggest weaknesses of the film. 'Quantum Of Solace'is depending way too much on 'Casino Royale's' storyline and adds adisproportional number of Bourne-like edited action sequences to it.--the new crime syndicate QUANTUM could be a good starting point for thenext Bond flick. Mr White is, luckily, still alive and he could easilybe this century's Ernst Blofeld.Unfortunately, 'Quantum Of Solace' will not be an instant classic inthe near future. Film fans will always see this film as a trendfollower, not a trend setter. And that's its biggest weakness. Bondfilms should be trend setters again, THE example for all otheraction-thriller franchises. James Bond will, hopefully, return in areal Fleming-thriller, not a Ludlum-thriller.Rating as a James Bond film: 5.0/10.0 Rating as a general actionthriller: 6.0/10
This is the best Bond film yet. I can't believe all the haters outthere. If anyone has read the original Ian Flemming books then youwould know that this Bond is the original character. They haven'tchanged Bond, they have brought him home. In the books he was amisogynistic alcoholic with a violent and unpredictable nature. He wasgood looking but sort of scary and intimidating. He used brute forceover gadgets to beat his enemies. It wasn't until John Gardner startedwriting the Bond books that Bond became more slick and charming. Bondis a bad man and an effective killer.The action was unreal and there were a couple times I had to take adeep breath as Quantum of Solace was so intense. Both my wife and Iloved it. Daniel Craig was much better in this one than in CasinoRoyale because he was more true to the character and didn't use so manyZoolander "Blue Steel" stares at the camera. I can't wait for more Bondfilms!
This review is from: Quantum of Solace [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray) This Bond movie contained the special effects and car chases we have become used to. I cannot say that the BluRay version was any more spectacular than the normal DVD. Daniel Craig plays the part well with a bit of ambiguity as to wether he is more man than machine. All in all, it was fun to watch.
this Bond film is much darker than Casino Royale,(which i thought wasbrilliant)the previous one.Bond is it's also the only one that is acontinuation of a previous Bond film,as far as i know.this one has afair amount of action,which are all well done,but ti also has its slowspots.the storyline is not as fleshed as i thought it could havebeen.there are some characters that had very little to do.however,istill enjoyed the film.i just don't feel it was on the same level ofCasino Royale.i would still recommend it as worth watching.but letshope the next Bond film is an improvement.for me,Quantum of Solace is a6/10
We went to the cinema last wk to see it as I've always liked Bondfilms. I think Daniel Craig makes a really good James Bond better thanthe likes of Roger Moore & Timothy Dalton they were just too niceynicey...obviously not Sean Connery but the closest they will get Ithink.Needless to say that we both enjoyed Casino Royale but as for thisfilm.......it is just SO SO SO unbelievably boring!!! There was atleast 30 mins in the middle of the film when it was nothing more thandialog and we completely switched off It's as if the credit crunch hashit Bond as well...he is seen on a clapped out old boat then a clappedout old plane, the Aston Martin was shown for only about 5 minutes atthe start of the film and it was supposed to be damaged but any foolcould see they had just carefully removed the door and made the carlook filthy Where was the glamour? The amazing stunts and effects? Thegadgets / toys? Moneypenny? M? Utter garbage and a cryin' shame IMO.I'm rating this 1 out of 10 to get the utterly crazy 7.2 rating down!No way is this any more than a 4 out of 10 film.
you are right, it's a good action movie but a terrible bond movie, getno style.The actor is not good looking said my wife.Bonds before Craig were always good looking and great charming withgirls.In all the movie he was Deshevelled, the movie fights were more violentand without the oo7 touch.The music and all movie style for a Vin diesel movie excellent.maybe the director copy the style from him but missing tattoos.Only at the end i can listen the classic bond music
This review is from: Quantum of Solace [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray) I can see why there were folks out there that couldn't handle this movie. This is not your father's Bond. I think it's good to change things up once in a while. I liked the fast paced action of this Bond outing. Blu-ray PQ was great. I remember seeing the first Bond movie as a kid and thought the franchise went down the tubes after Connery left. I'm one of those who think Craig is the best Bond since Connery and look forward to the next Bond movie as long as Craig repeats the role.
I've just come from the Irish press screening and I must say to thevarious naysayers who seem to think their comments on the net hold anyvalidity they are completely wrong, in my opinion. I'm a workingjournalist who has been writing about movies and the industry for over20 years and it seems to me that there are plenty of folks who live infront of their computers and have little or no experience of what it isto enjoy a movie with a like minded crowd. (By way of qualification Ihave also worked in cinemas and film festivals). Put simply "Quantum ofSolace" is a cracking thriller, a fine Bond film and an overall damngood night at the movies. The action is top class (especially theopening car chase), the acting is more than solid and the direction isespecially great. The storyline makes perfect sense if you assume thatthis movie is the second in a trilogy where Bond will eventuallyuncover the mystery of Vesper Lynd's death. The screening tonight waswith an audience of several hundred, from radio, press and TV and thevibe among the audience upon leaving was of a 'a very good picture'. Toput it very simply, no more no less; it's no masterpiece, simply a goodflick and a good night out. So there, for what it's worth a report fromthe ground. In this reviewer's opinion, a very enjoyable experiencewhich will be enjoyed my millions worldwide. Finally to the variousbloggers out there, all I will say is simply this, a night at themovies with a Bond flick is nothing more than that, a night at themovies. It does exactly what it says on the tinÂ .Nuff said.
He does not introduce himself as "Bond. James Bond." He does not havegadgets because 'Q' does not even exist. 'M' does not say "grow up 007"because he does not even flirt with Moneypenny with his charmingmannerisms and he does not go to bed with the first woman he meets atan event. Instead, he slams the side of an Aston Martin against thetunnel wall right at the start of the chase sequence, beats the livingdaylights out of the spy who infiltrates his hotel room merely withphysical combat that involved his fist, some broken glass and a knife,runs over Siena's rooftops, rides a wooden boat with such aggressionthat he doesn't need ammunitionÂ . he just slams the boat throughwhatever comes in his way, pilots a Dakota plane over a desert in athrilling dog-fight sequence, only to escape without a parachute afterthe plane loses an engine, then blows up a hydrogen fuel cell tank toescape from an conflagrated room and finally, he lets the villain runlose in the desert to have him experience his end rather thaninflicting it upon him. Bond dirties his hands a lot, bruises himself,kills people whom 'M' wants alive, loses his sleep over the death ofhis love Vesper and relentlessly pursues his vendetta. Bond is ananimal out of control as he unleashes his unstoppable fury that is ledby an inconsolable rage. He is hurt and therefore, he is mean. So longto the suaveness, charm, wit and tackiness of Moore, Connery andBrosnan. Daniel Craig's Bond disappoints you if you expect him to bethe secret agent 007 that you have been used to seeing in 20 films ofthe franchise. Quantum of Solace will disappoint you if you expect Bondto be the charismatic hero. Evolution, as they say, is inevitable inchanging times.Director Mark Forster (Kite Runner) carries out one aspect of JamesBond that begun with Martin Campbell's revival of the series in CasinoRoyale. Bond is still raw. He is still learning. 'M' is still annoyedby his impulsive actions and doubts her judgement of his character.That, mind you, does not alter the fact that Daniel Craig befits thenew Bond to perfection. Although, the action provides for a morerealistic and slick depiction, it loses out on the charm of Bond'sbeautiful indulgences that include the desirable Aston Martin DBS. In abid to trace the link between Le Chiffre and his personal agenda ofseeking those responsible for Vesper's death, Bond encounters Camille(Olga Kurylenko), a stunning beauty who is rough as a horse trainer butdrives the smallest of cars around and whose personal agenda introducesBond to the Kingpin of the nexus, Dominic Green (Mathieu Amalric). Heis the sly villain who plays a game of deceit and intellect behind thebacks of governments and agencies. Bond uncovers Green's plans ofresource exploitation in Bolivia but in the process, gets rid of vitalleads that only infuriate 'M' and the American agencies. But throughhis determined effort and unyielding quest to seek those responsible,Bond regains M's trust and through a series of blasts in a fuel cellpowered hotel in the desert, achieves his end. The primary action sequences center around the four elements of Earth(car chase), Water (boat chase), Air (Dakota dog-fight) and Fire(climax) and provide definitive moments of sophistication and nuancethat one would expect from an action film with a guy named James Bondin it. Even though, Forster chooses to kill the Bond that we know andsend the new one in his quest to seek solace in the Bolivian desert, heretains some old characteristics to embody them into the new 007. Theseinclude Bond's cold reaction to M's derision, his wit in play withwomen such as Camille and Ms. Fields, his instinctive reactions when hesuspects that someone is in his hotel room, the teasing manner in whichhe checks in with Ms. Fields into a luxury hotel claiming that theywere teachers on a sabbatical who have won a lottery, his sarcasm withCamille and his surprisingly humorous intervention when mastermindsdiscuss their plan for Bolivia while attending an Opera (which is aremarkably intelligent sequence). But he has lost his sleep, he talksdeeply about revenge, he enters the scene with sudden, smashing form ashe jumps on the hood of the SUV (climax) or jumps his motorbike overboats, being reckless and calculative at the same time, forceful andalmost like a piece of rock that you would fling over the surface ofthe lake. The exotic and rough looking Olga Kurylenko is a stunner and for achange, she does not bed with Bond as the typical Bond-girl would butmaintains a distance through the end of the film. Judi Dench has agedbut has more to do in this film than simply watch a screen to monitorBond's movements. Mathieu Amalric plays the villain very well. Hedoesn't need a bloody eye to portray malice but his plot plays forvillainy in the film. Despite its flaws of over-edited sequences, lack of 'Bondism' and theintro credits with 'another way to die' playing in the background thatmakes for the dullest Bond opening of all time, Quantum Of Solace movesJames Bond to another level that we are not totally familiar with andthat perhaps is the film's downfall in the 'critical' domain but itpromises the entry of 'Q', the secret agent's finesse, womanizing,martinis Âshaken not stirred and a whole lot of wit and humour. Bondhas moved on from a vengeance seeking storm to a mature secret agentwho has won the trust of the MI6 and we should eagerly await the nextinstallment with all the fireworks that we have been deprived of whilehe found Solace.- 7.446 on a scale of 1-10.
Having been so impressed with Casino Royale, which I felt was a filmthat stood on its own without the Bond brand protection, I was hopingfor, and expecting a film of a similar quality.I felt that the first half of the film wandered through one actionscene to the next, and for the first time in a long time, found myselfshuffling in my seat and frankly a little bored.I accept that this was always going to be a different "type" of filmfrom Casino Royale in that the action scenes were supposed to addressthe anger built up in Bond, yet I feel that it genuinely focused toomuch on technology and action sequences, bearing little thought to thedeeper inner demons that I enjoyed so much in the previous film.Having said all this, there were flashes of utter brilliance; forexample the end of the Opera scene, which was more like something of aScorcese epic - it made it feel like a proper grown up film thatdeserved recognition in its on right - and then it stuttered back tothe overall slow and dialogue sparse plot.The nails in the coffin for me were the basic, avoidable continuityerrors right at the start of the film (Craig's position in Aston andCraig's collar in talks with M). All the money thrown at this film andit lacked simple editing and thought.Overall, an unfortunately shallow film (with echoes of Licence to Kill)which will hopefully provide a clear link and purpose to Craig's thirdBond film. This film is worth a watch (probably only once), but makesure you book a very comfy seat, and don't expect too much of it.
In this direct follow up to Casino Royale, British secret agent JamesBond embarks on a mission to take down the mysterious organization thatLe Chiffre was working for, and also blackmailed Vesper Lynd intobetraying Bond. Bond's new target is Dominic Greene, a proclaimedenvironmentalist with a crooked plan to buy up Bolivia's water supplybefore staging a coup d'etat. Bond maintains that he is simplyfulfilling his duty, but M knows that he is acting purely out ofvengeance for Vesper's death. Quantum of Solace is an action packedfilm, and definitely an enjoyable watch. It succeeds in taking JamesBond in an entirely new direction, however there are certain thingsmissing that could have made it that much better.Despite what some movie critics and classic Bond purists will tell you,this is a very good James Bond film. Casino Royale was a reboot, and inrebooting the franchise, the makers of these films are trying to takethe series in a new and more refreshing direction. Daniel Craig's JamesBond is the coldest, most ruthless killing machine on the Britishsecret service, just as he is described in Ian Fleming's novels.However, despite seeming almost robotic when he's doing what he needsto do, Daniel Craig is able to play Bond's more human side as well.Action scenes aren't so easy for Bond to get through anymore. He canmiss his mark when he's making a jump, he can slip and fall, he can gethurt. What makes it better is that when he gets up and keeps going, youcan see that he's in pain but he's fighting past it. He's also morehuman on an emotional level. There is a scene where he's sitting at abar, drunk out of his mind, and staring at a picture of Vesper with alook of absolute heartbreak on his face. I think this is the mostdistraught I've seen Bond over a woman's death since On Her Majesty'sSecret Service. I enjoyed how Bond made his way through this entirefilm without having to use any sort of special gadget. While Bond'sgadgets are a trademark, I think this new take on the series is tryingmore for a sense of realism. I also think it makes James Bond seem muchmore capable when he's using his own strength and intelligence to getout of situations. I also enjoyed Dominic Greene, the main villain ofthis film. He was unlike any main villain I've seen in a James Bondfilm before. He was a small, meek looking man that only had his powerto wield as a weapon, unlike most of the villains who appear menacingdue to some trait like being mountainous in size, having a vicious scaror a bleeding eye. When he finally has to fight Bond, he is actuallyterrified out of his wits, blindly swinging an axe praying that he willhit Bond before Bond hits him, because he knows if that happens he'llbe done for.Now, as I said, this is in no way a bad James Bond film. It's takingthe series in a great new direction. However, as a fan of the seriesoverall, there are some things that I missed that I think should make areturn. First of all, missing characters. While I don't feel it'scompletely necessary to bring Q back just yet, I think the famous M'ssecretary Miss Moneypenny should make a return soon. The scenes betweenMoneypenny and Bond are always a small highlight to the films, just tosee how many smooth and flattering ways Bond can reject this poorwoman. Secondly, while I do think that James Bond should be a moreserious character than he has been in the past, I don't think it'snecessary for his humour to disappear completely. I think the odd punor one liner should be allowed to pop up here and there, and Quantumwas completely devoid. The third problem I had with the film was thatit seemed far too rushed, and the story wasn't all that fleshed out. Ifelt like this film was serving as filler material until the next filmin the series when Bond will undoubtedly take the evil organizationdown. Also, I want the series to return to the format where each movieis disconnected from the last. And finally just a few nitpicks. The gunbarrel sequence needs to be at the beginning of the movie. I felt likeit was put at the end only to be different. Also, though the openingcredits sequence was classic James Bond, the song could have been muchbetter.7/10