• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The Bond "Quantum of Solace" Criticisms Didn't Make Any Sense

S

slappy

Commodore
Commodore
I thought QoS was a bit dull and uninteresting, but that's it's biggest fault. The criticisms heaped upon it truly made no sense to me and still don't to this day. It was like people were so bowled over by the tidal wave that was Casino Royale's positive reception that they decided to just go with it and save the dumping for the next film, since all the whining was about the same stuff they claimed to love.

OMG he isn't Bond, he's Jason Bourne!

Did you watch CR? Cuz that's probably the most brutal, unflinching, dispassionate Bond in history and people claimed to love it there and hate it in QoS.

It was too serious.

Not as serious as CR.

Where was the romance?

Since when is Bond romantic? In CR he seduced a woman for info, and left her to die. Then he accidentally fell for a traitor whom he denounced as a bitch before going back to work.

It was non-stop action.

No it wasn't. CR started with an extra-long rooftop chase, then the high speed melee at the airport, a fight to the death in the stairwell, a car chase, and ended in a building collapse/watery free-for-all.

Again, it makes no sense. Bond got reinvented into a cold, calculating assassin with dreamy eyes to rave reviews only to have people get upset about the same thing later.
 
You made some good points there ;)

I felt that QoS felt like a classic Bond movie and that was the problem, CR was something more so in the end the sequel while good fell short of CR. The plot was the biggest problem and I had to watch it a 2nd time to get everything especially Vesper's husband role in QoS. However I felt QoS had the best Bond girl to date and it was so refreshing not too se Bond shag her.
 
The action sequences were fine but I had no idea what was going on with the plot of the movie 90% of the time. I watched it with a couple of other people and I wasn't the only one who felt that way.
 
Casino Royale was more evenly paced. I mean, the first hour does have most of the film's more memorable action sequences, but at least there's a rather lengthy poker game right smack in the middle of the film. Quantum of Solace, due partially to its shortened running time (1 hour and 40 some odd minutes compared to the 2 and a half hour length of Royale), feels more action packed because there's a car chase, foot chase, boat chase, and an airline chase all without the breathing room of Casino Royale.

Also, Solace takes itself much more seriously than Royale, which had a few fun quips. In Solace, Bond is much more oriented on revenge and that makes him
a considerably more one dimensional character. Bond had a bit more character (ie he was much livelier) in Royale than in Solace. However, Bond still has some nice one-liners and quips in Solace, like when he flipped the assassin on the bike ("Well, I missed") or when he was at the opera ("You really need to find a better place to meet"). It was just a bit more cold-hearted and sardonic, since Bond was a much more ruthless character in Solace than in Royale.

Personally, I love Quantum of Solace. I thought Marc Forster's directorial flourishes were fantastic and I had a perfect time understanding the action sequences. It's far from being a perfect movie but Daniel Craig is once more terrific as Bond, mixing cold-heartedness and a sense of vulnerability almost seamlessly. I think Casino Royale holds up as a better movie but Quantum of Solace still works splendidly as a gritty, breakneck revenge thriller.
 
I like Quantum of Solace, but the main problem is that it's over-edited. I think they brought in a second editor after the first one and cut it down a bit, and too me it really feels that almost every shot after the intro is a bit too quick. Over all the film would benefit from holding the shots a bit longer. The intro is brilliantly edited though.
 
JacksonArcher said:
Also, Solace takes itself much more seriously than Royale, which had a few fun quips. In Solace, Bond is much more oriented on revenge and that makes him
a considerably more one dimensional character. Bond had a bit more character (ie he was much livelier) in Royale than in Solace. However, Bond still has some nice one-liners and quips in Solace, like when he flipped the assassin on the bike ("Well, I missed") or when he was at the opera ("You really need to find a better place to meet"). It was just a bit more cold-hearted and sardonic, since Bond was a much more ruthless character in Solace than in Royale.
Click to expand...

I dunno, I don't really see it that way at all. In QoS, it at least seemed as though he had a real emotional purpose for his actions that kept him from being one dimensional. In Casino, Bond was all work and no play. He murders three men in cold blood within the first 15 minutes. His first act was to shoot an unarmed man dead where he sat.

QoS wasn't all that serious to me, I mean the bad guy tried to horde water. :lol: Casino saw Vesper forced to aid Bond in brutally strangling the life out of a man, rendering her traumatized and distraught.
 
My only complaint was that I didn't know what the hell was going on. That sucked all the enjoyment out of it though. I guess I should have brought along my Wikipedia plot summary.
 
The problem with QoS is that the story of the film is very lackluster. It was promoted with the idea that Bond was going after revenge, but that had very little to do with the actual story of the movie. Bond, more or less, stumbles upon Green's plot to steal Bolivia's water and focuses on that.

The whole Vesper storyline is mostly forgotten, save for one scene, until the tail end when Bond tracked down Vespers' boyfriend (presumably he got this info from Green, but it was never stated outright.

The build up of mystery around Green's plot, I felt, was a bit of a mistake as well. We are given this mystery that he is up to something very sinister and when it is revealed (steal Bolivia's water and then sell it back to them at a higher cost), you are left going "That's it?! That's what the big mystery was?!"

Also, the re-use of Mathis was a waste as he added nothing to the story other than to let viewers know he was a good guy and to die. The same could be said for Agent Fields. Although, she seemed to be place there for Bond to have a conquest (which, again, didn't make sense to me...if Bond is still so torn up over Vesper, would he realistically jump into the sack with someone else so quickly?).

However, there was also a lot of good in the movie as well. The score and the action scenes were pretty good (although, it took a viewing or two to focus on what the hell was actually happening - which I admit could be considered a problem). Daniel Craig was also very good as Bond. I can tell he is slipping into the role more comfortably. Also, his interaction between him and M was played very well. I think the two of them have a good chemistry.
 
The worst thing about it was the dreadful song by two of the most untalented popular artists of the last 10 years.

No, not Kid Rock and Beyonce Knowles.
 
I thought it was good. I was just a little surprised at the faster pace and less runtime compared to CR.

That and Greene wasn't as intimidating as LeChiffre was.
 
I think if you compare Quantum to any other "off" Bond flick and it'll hold it's ground well. My only REAL complaint was the utter lack of Q and gadgetry... I'm sorry but that's a HUGE reason I see Bond flicks... I could care less about how he fights (although the quick cuts in fights are getting a little much...) or who he screws... just PUSH A BUTTON ON YOUR PHONE AND BLOW SOMETHING UP for Christ sakes!!







Oh, and nail a hottie... gotta nail a hottie.
 
The Hollywood Saloon podcast on Quantum of Solace discusses many reasons why the film does not work as a standalone Bond film or Part II of Casino Royale. A couple include the lack of a Daniel Kleinman title sequence and pointless cross-cutting during action sequences.

One comment they made encapsulated much of what I thought was wrong with the movie. In a highlight reel of James Bond action, villains, gadgets, stunts, or anything else, what could get included from Quantum of Solace? The most memorable scene was at the opera house, and it still was far from perfect.

Quantum of Solace remains the one Bond film that I will never own. Even my two least favorite films in the series, Diamonds are Forever and The Man with the Golden Gun, have some standout scenes, characters, and moments. Quantum has nothing.
 
bigdaddy said:
Let's be honest the movie doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...

What Bond movie ever does...

Jaws in Space
Big Lasers from space
3 nippled assassin
midget killer
Another laser in space
Q landing a hot air balloon only to be molested by pretty women

;) gotta love it
 
Jax said:
bigdaddy said:
Let's be honest the movie doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...

What Bond movie ever does...

Jaws in Space
Big Lasers from space
3 nippled assassin
midget killer
Another laser in space
Q landing a hot air balloon only to be molested by pretty women

;) gotta love it
Click to expand...

But at least with those movies you understand what Bond's doing and why he's doing it. I had no idea why Bond was doing what he was doing for 90% of QoS.
 
I think the major problem is that in Casiono Royale the viewing public had the plot explained to them in minute detail, whereas in QoS they were credited with the intelligence to work it out for themselves (and lets be honest it is fairly straight forward it isn't a David Lynch film for goodness sake!)

Expect Bond 23 to feature a nefarious badguy who explains the plot to Bond in minute detail before attempting to kill him using a "laser" or something...

QoS is not without its flaws, but it is more of a classic Bond film than Cr was. It's also much shorter and snappier. CR is good, but its very unbalanced (most of the action comes in the first hour) the card game isnt brilliantly handled (watch as Mathis explains for the idiots in he audience) the Bond girl is terrible (is she French, is she English, do we care? This is Fleming's fault to be honest. It never makes sense in the novel what Bond sees in her, or vice versa and this is mirrored in the film, give me Diana Rigg or Maryam D'abo any day thank you very much)

Greene isn't great but he's at least as good a villain as Le Chiffre, who shows zero personality or threat before the torture scene. Plus Greene's plan is at least interesting and a damn sight more nefarious than "make money playing cards because I failed to blow up a plane!?"

Add in the fact that CR has more endings than Return of the King and QoS is a huge improvement.

Like I say it could have been better, and one imagines the writers strike meant it wasn't able to be as polished as it might have been, though I think this adds to it, gives it a nice raw edge. Not the best Bond film ever made, but far from the worst.
 
Starkers said:
I think the major problem is that in Casiono Royale the viewing public had the plot explained to them in minute detail, whereas in QoS they were credited with the intelligence to work it out for themselves (and lets be honest it is fairly straight forward it isn't a David Lynch film for goodness sake!)
Click to expand...

I've been puzzled by comments to the effect that it's incomprehensible. I thought it was very direct and simple.

Add in the fact that CR has more endings than Return of the King and QoS is a huge improvement.
Click to expand...

I didn't care for that element of Casino Royale at all. It was generally poorly structured and paced, and failed to involve much. (Worse, it wasn't very interesting.) I particularly disliked the torture sequence in Casino Royale; I did appreciate the record-setting car flip.

In general, I enjoy the broad and ridiculous elements of Bond films (killer hats, bases inside of volcanoes, laser killing machines, etc.), so I haven't been happy with the recent direction of the series. Quantum of Solace was a tremendous improvement over Casino Royale, though, being both coherent and somewhat interesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top