QUANTUM OF SOLACE Thread
Posted: Sat Oct 18, 2008 5:36 pm
First reviews are out -- and they're quite mixed, but both agree it's lean, mean, bleak and humorless. Sounds like it's going further into BOURNE territory, doesn't it. The second review questions the selection of Marc Forster as director, which I basically have as well (he's even said he'd rather not helm an action movie again!).
I did trim plot-specific elements of the reviews out so as not to bore everyone with a plot synopsis. Movie opens in just a few weeks.
BBC Review:
Clocking in at one and three-quarter hours, it's a good half hour shorter than 007's previous outing. And its reduced running time results in a leaner, tauter experience...what this film does differently is to focus closely on an emotionally battered Bond, his mission and his motivation.
There are odd moments of uncertainty when the film tries to juggle Bond's personal story with the ambitious plans being pursued by Greene.
But for the most part the villainy rightly takes a back seat to Bond's emotional journey.
007's mission may be what drives the film's plot, but the real interest lies in how Bond deals with the individuals and situations he meets along the way.
That's not to say that the film jettisons all the things that have characterised the previous stories. There are broad nods to Goldfinger especially, but this film manages the difficult task of moving the franchise into interesting new areas.
The raw nature of the film may put off some who yearn for the days of gizmos, gadgets and Bond quips as he dispenses with faceless opponents."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7676637.stm
Also an Aint It Cool respondent (FWIW) had a reaction also...decidedly negative:
"The James Bond of Quantum Of Solace goes precisely nowhere. At times, you feel you can see the character – and by proxy the writers – actually thinking, "So what now?"
Bond's arc here ought to be revenge; the death of Vesper Lynd the
righteous cause. But Craig's emotionless visage is so blank, the
script so bereft of character, Quantum Of Solace feels like just
another day at the office for 007. Sure, he kills a few people he
shouldn't. He breaks the rules. He goes off the grid. But what kind of
Bond would he be if he didn't? It isn't until the final scene that
you'll actually remember Bond's motivations, so meaningless are his
exploits up until that point.
The issues are with the studio's choice of director in Marc
Forster. This is a man who knows how to put dramatic audiences through
the wringer (Monster's Ball, Finding Neverland, The Kite Runner) but
he's completely out of his depth handling a franchise this large.
High-tempo sequences, like the opening car chase and an extremely
Bournian rooftop pursuit, are disorientating in the extreme: too fast,
too sloppy and too ruthlessly edited. Often, things change in the
blink of an eye – one second Bond is lying on his back, the next he's
jumping out a window, the next he's swinging from a rope. It's often
impossible to keep up.
Fight scenes often seem practised and stagey (Bond smashes an opponent
through a wall with ridiculous ease), while one shot sees 007 riding a
motorbike... at about 25mph. These are all hallmarks of a director
unfamiliar with action; perhaps former Paul Greengrass protege Dan
Bradley should be held responsible.
Make no mistake, Quantum Of Solace is a crushing disappointment.
Try as you might, you'll be unable to invest in any of the characters
– now Bond's heart has been broken, it's like nothing ever changed and
the character exists simply to get to the next location and car chase
and gun fight. It's a perfectly average action film, certainly better
than the last few Brosnan outings. But when Casino Royale set the bar
so high, it's not acceptable for a follow-up to simply stroll under
it. Once again, Bond finds himself at a cross-roads, standing still,
without direction. So... what now?
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/38784
I did trim plot-specific elements of the reviews out so as not to bore everyone with a plot synopsis. Movie opens in just a few weeks.
BBC Review:
Clocking in at one and three-quarter hours, it's a good half hour shorter than 007's previous outing. And its reduced running time results in a leaner, tauter experience...what this film does differently is to focus closely on an emotionally battered Bond, his mission and his motivation.
There are odd moments of uncertainty when the film tries to juggle Bond's personal story with the ambitious plans being pursued by Greene.
But for the most part the villainy rightly takes a back seat to Bond's emotional journey.
007's mission may be what drives the film's plot, but the real interest lies in how Bond deals with the individuals and situations he meets along the way.
That's not to say that the film jettisons all the things that have characterised the previous stories. There are broad nods to Goldfinger especially, but this film manages the difficult task of moving the franchise into interesting new areas.
The raw nature of the film may put off some who yearn for the days of gizmos, gadgets and Bond quips as he dispenses with faceless opponents."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7676637.stm
Also an Aint It Cool respondent (FWIW) had a reaction also...decidedly negative:
"The James Bond of Quantum Of Solace goes precisely nowhere. At times, you feel you can see the character – and by proxy the writers – actually thinking, "So what now?"
Bond's arc here ought to be revenge; the death of Vesper Lynd the
righteous cause. But Craig's emotionless visage is so blank, the
script so bereft of character, Quantum Of Solace feels like just
another day at the office for 007. Sure, he kills a few people he
shouldn't. He breaks the rules. He goes off the grid. But what kind of
Bond would he be if he didn't? It isn't until the final scene that
you'll actually remember Bond's motivations, so meaningless are his
exploits up until that point.
The issues are with the studio's choice of director in Marc
Forster. This is a man who knows how to put dramatic audiences through
the wringer (Monster's Ball, Finding Neverland, The Kite Runner) but
he's completely out of his depth handling a franchise this large.
High-tempo sequences, like the opening car chase and an extremely
Bournian rooftop pursuit, are disorientating in the extreme: too fast,
too sloppy and too ruthlessly edited. Often, things change in the
blink of an eye – one second Bond is lying on his back, the next he's
jumping out a window, the next he's swinging from a rope. It's often
impossible to keep up.
Fight scenes often seem practised and stagey (Bond smashes an opponent
through a wall with ridiculous ease), while one shot sees 007 riding a
motorbike... at about 25mph. These are all hallmarks of a director
unfamiliar with action; perhaps former Paul Greengrass protege Dan
Bradley should be held responsible.
Make no mistake, Quantum Of Solace is a crushing disappointment.
Try as you might, you'll be unable to invest in any of the characters
– now Bond's heart has been broken, it's like nothing ever changed and
the character exists simply to get to the next location and car chase
and gun fight. It's a perfectly average action film, certainly better
than the last few Brosnan outings. But when Casino Royale set the bar
so high, it's not acceptable for a follow-up to simply stroll under
it. Once again, Bond finds himself at a cross-roads, standing still,
without direction. So... what now?
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/38784
