Just saw it tonight, and don’t have much to say other than what others have noted. I felt the action sequences were among the most poorly edited I’ve ever seen in any film, and that the plot was about as senseless as most of the Roger Moore Bond flicks; combined, those two factors made if very difficult to really enjoy the thing. Liked the production design and sets overall. Thought both the main Bond girls were pretty good; the one that played S. Fields was adorable. Craig did well.
I’m an unabashed aircraft fan, and so enjoyed the DC-3 sequence, even if the filming was about as mucked up as it was for the other chases in the film.
Q of S won’t go in my collection, that’s for sure.
It just didn’t feel like Bond. He acted just like any old thug in countless other action movies. And what is it with not telling his superiors anything? That’s a good way to get court-martialed in real life.
Casino Royale was a much, much better movie, mainly because it actually had a good director.
Geologists contracted for mineral or petroleum surveys are not reporting on underground lakes or dry riverbed caverns. They are being paid to locate valuable deposits, and only Quantum was working with the foresight to realize that potable water is intrinsically more valuable than copper ores.
Saw it last Sunday, but only just noticed this thread.
I agree with many of the criticisms, and thought it was far, FAR inferior to Casino Royale. Annoying editing in the action scenes, virtually non-existent plot, dull Bond girl (Camille Montes; i thought Fields was hot), and little of the usual Bond humor.
I loved Casino Royale because it was an excellent action flick in its own right, and because it dropped some of the campy silliness of the earlier Bonds without giving up the humor altogether. This one took itself entirely too seriously, and while i think Daniel Craig and Judy Dench are excellent, i hope the next one isn’t so grim and plot-deprived. And get a new director!
Another thing, I didn’t like how they made the girl have burns, and the baddies ordinary. It should be the baddies with the scars or extra bits. T’aint right.
M has Bond removed after the death of Fields, they take his gun and gadgets, then gets he into the elevator with two (three? don’t remember) others. He then takes out the others, and gets their guns from them. Door opens, he steps out and kicks the leg of one of them back in the elevator so the door would shut. I think it would have been more in the spirit of Bond if we see the doors shut, and then cut IMMEDIATELY to the scene where he walks out of the elevator and kicks the guy’s leg back in.
Just saw it yesterday. I really liked it and thought it was as good as the last movie, which was then the only Bond movie I could stand, the early ones being too slow and the later ones being too silly.
I agree that the shaky cam and micro-cuts are a little much. They’re becoming trite now and multi-second cuts and a steady camera would actually seem bold and daring.
I didn’t hate the opening song, but I didn’t love it either. I did like the opening credits. You’re kind of screwed with Bond songs, because there’s a certain style–brassy, loud, and torchy–that they have to be in. Chris Cornell’s song in Casino Royale wasn’t my cup of tea musically, but I thought it was appropriate for the movie.
I was really hoping for a mention of SPECTRE. Also when someone first mentions Spectre Bond should ask “What does that stand for?” And the bad guy should say “It doesn’t stand for anything. We just thought it sounded threatening.”
But outside of these minor complaints I thought it was great. Craig was a real badass and the girl was pretty cool. While the villains scheme was pretty implausible–one wonders if Evo Morales has seen the film–it worked for a Bond movie, which is, for all the new grittiness, still a fantasy.
I really think that Craig and Dench sold the movie. The violence was just right and done well, camera work aside. The scene in the Opera was really really cool.
We just saw it. I cannot remember a worse movie. The fault was entirely in the editing/direction, I found the action sequences totally incomprehensible. Even the opening sequence, with the camera moving across the water like we were in a fast-moving speedboat, and then being involved in a car chase.
There was NOT A SINGLE SHOT that lasted more than seven seconds. I know, I was so bored that I started timing the cuts.
The action sequences had some glimmer of promise (like the ropes and scaffolding) but the cutting was so fast that it was impossible to know who was where.
This movie SUCKED, big time. Do NOT waste your money on it. It’s a crime against cinema, it’s the worst Bond film ever, it’s probably the worst action movie ever. Brrrrrrrrrr.
I have to agree, the movie was sub-par. The high-speed car chase and the chase on foot in Italy were impossible to follow…too much cutting between Bond and his adversary, and too much darkness.
The rest of the movie wasn’t too bad. I especially liked how Bond flushed out a bunch of Quantum folks at the opera…but Mister White played cool and stayed in his seat. (Of course, the MI-6 knows who he is anyway.)
I was a little confused about the Fields woman; I thought she was really working for Quantum because she tripped Bond down the stairs and betrayed Mathis? But Bond then makes it sound to M like she was a good British agent? I must have missed something there.
C K, if you haven’t already, go back and watch Casino Royale again. The movie actually made a bit of sense after that. (Still horrible editing though.)
I saw it opening night, but I just noticed this thread. I’m glad I’m not the only one who hates fight scenes consisting of 120 2-second snippets of film.
The end was so anti-climactic as to be baffling. I get that it’s supposed to show a restrained Bond who forgoes getting vengence on Vesper’s boyfriend so MI-6 can get intelligence on Quantum (and seriously, they have their own lapel pins? Is there a branding committee?) but after the ridiculous Hotel Built Out of Dynamite sequence, I was hoping for something a bit more dramatic than an intervention.
This movie was infinitely better than a Pierce Brosnan Bond flick, but it was still not a good movie.
I love James Bond films and novels and thought Casino Royale was a brilliant film and Daniel Craig an excellent and inspired choice of Bond.
Quantum of Solace was not a good film, IMHO. The opening song was shite, the villians were boring, the Bond Girls were, respectively, unattractive (the Bolivian girl) and completely superfluous to the plot and pointless as characters (Fields),the editing atrocious, and the whole thing basically suffered from “MTV Director with too large a budget and not enough oversight”, IMHO. And the Bond Gunbarrel sequences goes at the start of the movie.
It had some good moments- particularly the Opera scenes and the advanced computer stuff, and the interaction between Bond and M- but otherwise I’m hoping that the next Bond Film has a different (and better) director and more engaging villains. I’ve always considered the Goldfinger/Blofeld-esque “Absurd Villainous Plan” to be a vital part of the Bond Universe and I’m still convinced that Quantum has the potential to be a new SPECTRE; with Mr. White as Blofeld, provided they can come up with some suitable Villains and Villainous Plots for Bond to foil.
Yeah it was like they thought up the action sequences and then suddenly realized they had no plot and threw one together on a post it note. And since all the good villains had done all the cool stuff, the current one was left with building secret dams. Sure, secret dams.
