Customer Reviews

Quantum of Solace [Blu-ray]

5 star:		(157)
4 star:		(111)
3 star:		(87)
2 star:		(70)
1 star:		(83)

 

 

Some reviewers and fans of the Bond films have complained that this film is a lesser effort in the series and pales in comparison to "Casino Royale". They have missed something important in their assessment of the film. When Dominic Green says to Bond that he and Camille Montez have something in common, that they are both "Damaged goods" he has clearly put before the audience the crux of the film that is "Quantum of Solace".
The film picks up only minutes after the end of "Casino Royale" and we are presented with a very damaged and changed James Bond. As revealed in the first film by Vesper Lynd's assessment of him upon their first meeting on the train, James Bond is a man who came up from humble beginnings and was given a privileged education but never allowed to forget his low origins. This has made him a very guarded loner with a chip on his shoulder, a perfect candidate for recruitment by MI6. In his words to her later on in the film, Vesper has "stripped me of my armor." But by the end of that film he is a man scarred by the death of his love, the armor is back on never to be penetrated again. He is now becoming the Bond of legend and a man bent on revenge.
So in "Quantum" there is no reason for the old fashioned quips or much humor in this man. Yet if you pay attention the character of James Bond as played by the incomparable Daniel Craig he lets us see that there are cracks in the armor. Something of a human heart still exists in him. This is played out in the scene after the plane crash where Camille asks him about his past. Craig shows it in his eyes in the most marvelous example of his layered and subtle acting style. Craig builds and molds a deeper, darker more complex Bond than we have ever seen before, a character more true to the books than in previous incarnations of Bond.
The action in the film is superlative and stylish. The opening car chase is indeed a nail biter only surpassed by the Sienna chase moments later. This too is then topped by the DC10 aerial battle towards the end of the film. The stunts are breathtaking and propel the film at top notch speed. But perhaps the most stunning and original sequence is the gun fight in the restaurant at the Opera house. This is played without sound effect as the score of "Tosca" commands the ear and heightens the emotion of the scene. This is inspired and brilliant film making taking in account all aspects of editing, cinematography, score, and acting. And since I mentioned music I cannot leave out the incredible delicious score by David Arnold who has infused his Bond scores with the much need taste of John Barry. He captures the glorious Barry sound and builds brilliantly upon it.
All the principle players give superlative performances. Judi Dench command attention as she always has as "M". Giancarlo Giannini redeems himself and is truly touching as Mathis. Mathieu Amalic is appropriately slithery and devious as the villain Green. As Agent Fields, Miss Gemma Arterton brings a light and fun light to the film. Finally in the role of Camille Olga Kurylenko holds her own opposite Daniel Craig. This is no mean feat and she is wonderful, athletic and touching in the film.
In the end Bond does find a quantum of solace and ends the film in a telling way. A small gesture that lets us know he is now moving on but not without a tinge of sadness. This beautiful sad ending is a refreshing and moving way to end a Bond film.
"Quantum of Solace" is a fast paced film that demands attention to the small details and respect for superlative performances by all involved from the director Marc Forster to the entire cast and crew.

With the successful reboot of the James Bond franchise with Casino Royale (Three-Disc Collector's Edition), fans speculated what the next adventure would be and who would be the director. With the new look and attitude expertly established by Martin Campbell, the producers made the decision to have Marc Forster helm the next one, Quantum of Solace. At first, he seems like a rather odd candidate to direct as he's known mainly for edgy independent films like Monster's Ball and the sentimental biopic Finding Neverland (Widescreen Edition). However, his choice makes more sense once you realize that his films are predominantly character-driven and Casino Royale had much more of an emphasis on character than most other Bond films.

Forster does a surprisingly excellent job creating a lean, no frills revenge story under the guise of a Bond film. He is more than capable of handling the action sequences, of which there are many, and invests us in Bond's personal quest for vengeance all the while fulfilling the usual expectations of a Bond film: beautiful women, death-defying stunts, exotic locales, and world-dominating villains.

The first disc features a music video for "Another Way to Die" with Alicia Keys and Jack White in a slick video done very much in the style of the opening credits sequence. As far as Bond songs go, it's actually quite good and a definite improvement over Chris Cornell's song for Casino Royale.

Also included are teaser and theatrical trailers.

While there are several featurettes on the second disc they are very substantial in length.

The second disc starts off with "Bond on Location," which takes a look at the challenge of finding original locations all over the world for the film that fit the specific visual look that Forster wanted to achieve. This included set design, how the extras looked and so on.

"Start of Shooting" examines the daunting task of following up the phenomenonal success of Casino Royale. Craig had to do much more extensive training for this film, including things like stunt-driving.

"On Location" sees Forster viewing the film's various locations as characters unto themselves. They shot in some pretty remote areas.

"Olga Kurylenko and the Boat Chase" takes a look at the new Bond girl and how they viewed her character as Bond's equal. The actress did a lot of physical training so that she could do many of her own stunts.

"Director Marc Forster" talks about what he brings to the film. The cast speaks admiringly of him.

"The music" examines composer David Arnold's work on the film and how he tried to reflect its themes in the music. Alicia Keys and Jack White talk briefly about working together and we see footage of them shooting the music video for their song.

"Quantum of Solace," the latest James Bond film and the second featuring Daniel Craig has its flaws, but is still a pretty spectacular film. The series is in full retooling mode, hardly recognizable when compared to the films of Sean Connery and Roger Moore. While closer to the darker sides of Timothy Dalton and Pierce Brosnan's Bonds, it does have more in common with the popular Jason Bourne series starring Matt Damon, which is not a bad thing.

This Bond pickes up right after the end of Casino Royale, as Bond takes a prisoner for interrogation to M, again played by Dame Judy Dench. The interrogation and subsequent events uncovers a global conspiracy named Quantum, with members of prominence and power, including an admired environmentalist who is obviously up to no good. The rest of the film plays out as Bond races to find out and foil the villain's scheme, partnered with a revenge-minded woman, played by Olga Kurylenko.

The negatives - This film is much shorter than most Bond films, which isn't good or bad by itself, but the film plays in parts like it had a bit too much cut out, most notably the scenes between Bond and Strawberry Fields, a female agent played by Gemma Arterton. Like many women, she tries to resist Bond's charms to no avail, but as events unfold, it is obvious that Fields and Bond had quite a bit of time together, which is not reflected in the final cut. The villain, played by Mathieu Almaric, does not convey much in the way of danger or menace. He doesn't need to be the kind of kitschy, cartoonish villain that the old Bond films are famous for, but he should at least raise the audiences hackles, but he does not. Finally, the tension between Bond and M is understandable, but every film shouldn't have Bond being stripped of his license and having him act any more of a free agent than he already does. It would be more realistic to show the continued development of their relationship with disagreements and dialogue rather than rely on a plot device that has been used numerous times in the Bond series.

The positives, which far outweigh the negatives - Daniel Craig continues to prove that his Bond is like no other. His Bond is nuanced, troubled, and truly, truly dangerous. This Bond seems like someone who has a license to kill and is more apt to use it than any other Bond save Dalton's Bond. His acting talent gives Bond the gravitas and good humor that provides a balanced character. The action scenes have been updated and are breathtaking, and the potential for future films seem limitedless.

Quantum of Solace bodes well for the future of the series since even though it is flawed, it is at the same time a very remarkable film.

To me, Quantum of Solace was a complete and utter letdown ! I saw and liked its direct predecessor Casino Royale, so my expectations were high. But I found some parts of QoS to be almost unwatchable. Did the editor go mad or was he doped up when he cut this movie? The action sequences comprise of extremely short, blurry images that pass with machinegun-speed. They produce an almost stroboscopic effect that literally hurts your eyes and numbs your mind and leaves you unsure of what's happened. At home, you can rewind the DVD player to watch it again. In the movie theater, you're hopefully lost. The result is a physically exhausting film experience after a mere five minutes of play. I almost switched the DVD-player off there and then. I know that the pace of (action) movies has picked up considerably since the nineties, and in general that is a good thing. But the pace of the action sequences of QoS is ridiculous and an insult to moviegoers. My young adult children (18 and 16) complained about this too, so thankfully I am not alone in this respect. Just lately, I began to fear that I have trouble coping with the increasing pace of today's movies because I have turned middle-age. Clearly this is not the case, then ! The action and violence in QoS is gritty and realistic, almost clinical. And I love Daniel Craig as the new JB. Five stars for him. But QoS the movie seems to have no discernible plot and what little plot there is is enigmatic (not in the positive sense), vague, illogical and lacks coherence. This quickly becomes annoying to the extreme. You never have an idea what's going to happen next and --most important--why. I am very happy with "the new JB" as portrayed by Daniel Craig, but QoS is definitely not the way forward with the JB-franchise.

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.

This movie is unwatchable. I'm sorry I paid money for it. Daniel Craig is a nightmare Bond. No class, no charm, no humanity. He happens to be Jason in a Bond role. What has happened to this once great series? Craig is just the worst Bond I have ever seen. Do they actually pay this guy? It seems more like Craig paid the producers for the role. His face looks like it spent months in a meat grinder. There is absolutely no angle where his face can't damage the lens. Must go through a dozen broken cameras a day. And the plot is god awful. Psychopathic agent on murderous rampage to avenge the death of girlfriend. Thats it. Nothing more to say. Nothing to see. Will there ever be a time again when Bond does any spying? Do you have to go back to Connery to see any espionage? The Bond series has steadily gone down hill since Connery and got a little better with Goldeneye but then continued back on its downhill course shortly after. It really fell off a cliff with this movie. Why don't the Brocoli family sell the franchise to some people with talent? Whoever is running the show has no business making a hot dog let alone a movie. This garbage has Cubbie rolling in his grave. I will never watch another Bond movie until the producer and the actor is changed.

If I were to nail down what's wrong with "Quantum Of Solace" in a single word - it would be "cold". Bond used to be fun, Bond used to be entertaining, Bond used to grab you by the short and curlies and pleasure the engorged gonads off you for the allotted two hours it was given. And it never failed. Even the worst Roger Moore dreck of the late 1970's had something that encouraged repeat viewing. But on Bond 22 - you're bored half way through it and by the predicable end not much has changed.

I suppose after 22 films about the same thing, you're bound to have a case of diminishing returns, but there are times on "Quantum" where you have a shocking sense of pointlessness. Marc Forster directs chase sequences that feel contrived and have been done so much better before either in previous Bond films or others (principally Bourne). You feel like your watching Alien 3 - made by some inexperienced buck that made videos for a living. And don't get me started on the crap song and the woeful opening credits that were clearly a hurried last minute thing.

The opening car chase is the first offender. At the cinema, I along with others couldn't believe they'd do this - when you think of how Bourne simply nailed that - this Italian sequence is workmanlike at best. It should have opened with a reconfigured flashback sequence that included the car chase, but ended in the fabulous hand-to-hand fight sequence in the scaffolding (one of the films best moments) - and very Bond.

You have to feel sorry for Craig too - who seems to be putting in twice the effort for half the return. There is also a worrying ongoing lack of chemistry between him and Judy Dench who quite clearly pines for Brosnan to return - an actor who could convey both charm and edge in equal abundance and was comfortable as Bond and evolved as him.

It would of course be easy to blame Daniel Craig as the lead - I don't. It isn't that his Bond is charmless by choice, it's that he's being forced to be that way. Check out Craig's acting chops in "Flashbacks Of A Fool" or "The Mother" or "Defiance" - he's absolutely riveting and brilliant in all three - displaying all manner of emotion - shockingly good when given the material. But the under-worked script of "Solace" has straight-jacketed his version of 007 into a particularly nasty corner. It's far 'too' hard-edged and has left him with little or no room for acting manoeuvre. He isn't warm towards anyone - especially women - and his character needs to be.

The dispatching of Gemma Arterton's character Fields in black oil (aping the famous Goldfinger scene) is perhaps the crassest moment ever in a Bond film and a huge mistake. Her character could have died in a far more interesting and brave way - letting Craig and Kurylenko get away - but no - this is a man's movie made by men who have no interest in women.

After Mads Mikkelsen's fabulous and believable turn as the card-playing Le Chiffre in "Casino Royale", Mathieu Amalric is just hopeless as Dominic Greene - one of the most insipid bad guys ever - about as frightening as a teddy bear with a wonky eye. His expressions of anger and hate in the opera scene when Bond outs The Quantum group are just laughable. Bond's feisty companion Camille played by the truly gorgeous Olga Kurylenko is a smart choice as a leading lady, but she gets little to work with. Both the tremendously likeable Giancarlo Giannini and Jeffrey Wright as René Mathis (police chief ally in Casino Royale) and Felix Leiter (his CIA buddy) distinguish themselves, but again Rene is disposed off in a cold and crass way. And on it goes to the inevitable mega-explosive ending...

Then there's the Blu Ray itself - the picture quality is gorgeous as you would imagine, but the menu is irritating to navigate - the interviews use the same Daniel Craig footage almost three times where he looks tired and bored rigid and again utterly charmless. And you finish watching them very quickly indeed. Again you just know there's more - and sure enough - sometime in 2009 - the inevitable 2-Disc Ultimate Edition to fleece fans will appear.

It isn't that "Quantum" is really, really bad - it just that it isn't that good either. I can't see myself looking at it again and that's almost unforgivable after the out-and-out triumph of its predecessor. The makers need to go back to the drawing board and lighten up big time, because this is a very disappointing and dreary chapter in one of the most cherishable film franchises in history.

Bond tells M in one of their spiked conversations, "You don't have to worry about me...", but on the strength of this and hundreds of other 3-star (and less) reviews - we clearly do.

In the words of Gerry Rafferty boys, "Get It Right The Next Time"...

The problem with QoS is that the villain is about as threatening as a Care Bear, and rather than getting his hands on nuclear missiles, he's attempting to corner 60% of the Bolivian water market. This would be weak enough if it affected somewhere in the US, but Bolivia? In an issue that would barely raise an eyebrow at the UN, Britain obviously decides to send its number one spy to fix the problem.

In between a chain of over-the-top action sequences there's an InstantMix plot of no consequence. The plot points are TV-grade: in one 'pivotal' scene, Bond overhears the villain's master plans while hiding behind a fence. This is as much for the audience's benefit as for Bond's, in case we missed the over-signaled evil plan while being confused about the movie's title. Out-Bonded by True Lies and mercilessly parodied in Austin Powers, I think Bond's time may be over. It's really a shame since Casino Royale wasn't a good reboot of the franchise.

I just want to start off to say that this is a review of the film, not a technical review of the DVD itself.

We have entered the age of prequels and reboots. It seems like every franchise or recognizable name has been rebooted. James Bond, Batman, Hulk, heck, even Jason Voorhees has been rebooted. Some reboots are necessary while others just seem like they wanted to cash in on a recognizable name.

When I heard they were going to reboot James Bond, I was cautiously optimistic. Cautious because they could reboot it and make it worse, optimistic because the franchise really was in need of it. James Bond has always been kind of campy and goofy, but when they started to have invisible cars and media tycoons as the main villain, you know the line has to be drawn somewhere. In my opinion, prior to Casino Royale, GoldenEye was the last good James Bond movie.

Fortunately for us, Casino Royale turned out to be fantastic. Martin Campbell directed an action movie that was full of plot but was not boring, and full of action but was not ridiculous. When James Bond fought someone in the movie, it wasn't a karate chop to the chest and down goes the bad guy, you have him clobbering someone with a closed fist, throwing him through walls, slamming is face into the wall, getting his face slammed into a wall, and this goes on with such brutality that you swear the scene was not planned but was a real fight between Daniel Craig and whatever poor soul pissed him off. Then you have extremely smart dialog that you would expect from some Oscar bait movie, including the obligatory scene where M verbally neuters Bond (my favorite). You have characters that you either find intriguing or you find yourself attached to. Lastly, James Bond solves the mystery and defeats the villain through his own wits and perseverance, not through gadgets that were conveniently given to Bond right before a situation arises where he would need it. All of this together made for probably the best Bond movie I have seen.

So after Casino Royale, I couldn't wait for the next James Bond under this new universe. Yes, more crazy chases, more Bond brutally beating people into a pulp, more intense character interactions... Unfortunately, what we get instead, is Quantum of Solace...

Sure we get chases, but that's about all we get. It starts off with probably the best scene in the entire movie, and it's a chase scene with him and his Aston Martin. But the movie is literally one chase that leads to another chase, that leads to another chase, that eventually leads into a chase that leads to the final villain... You think I'm joking? The "plot" is composed of random scenes of people giving flat performances and very dull dialog that ultimately links one chase scene to the other. What about the fight scenes? Don't get me started on the "fight" scenes. The fight scenes are filmed in that quick-cutting ultra zoomed in fashion and the fights themselves are those fast watch the main character move some limbs and magically the enemy is down and out on the floor style fights made so popular by the Bourne movies. So what you get is some really quick cutting shaky cam of some limbs moving (you can't even tell whose limbs they are to be honest) and what started with two people coming at each other ends with Bond standing and the other guy on the ground. But really, you have no clue what just happened... In short, the "fights" sucked.

I think part of the reason for this is the director. They picked Marc Forster, and if you look at his resume, he doesn't have any action movies under his belt. Prior to the film coming out, I expressed this as a concern, and people flamed me to no end because of that. They said I was shallow, that if I wanted to see nothing but action I should watch Commando, etc. etc. etc. But they don't understand the point of my concern. My concern was that a GOOD action movie director knows how to balance action with a deep plot. While a lot of non-action movie directors do one of two things. They either deliver great character development and plot but sub-par action, or they overcompensate for their lack of action experience with lots and lots of action to the point where it is ridiculous and the plot and characters get left behind. Of course there are many exceptions, such as Jon Favreau and Iron Man, but in this case with Marc Forster, we got stuck with the latter scenario: Way too much ridiculous action and not enough plot.

Unfortunately for the next one, they can't have Martin Campbell back on board because he'll be busy with The Green Lantern. I just hope that they get someone who's experienced in making movies with deep plots and healthy doses of action.

I'm sure a lot of people thought this movie was great and enjoyed all of the action, but for me it just doesn't compare to Casino Royale. Not by a long shot.

The moment the music started, my expectations lowered. Then the Signature Bond theme song didn't play, which sets the tone for the much anticipated Bond Experience.

It didn't feel like a Bond movie b/c they tried to change everything so it wouldn't resemble the Bond movies we know and love and gladly pay for. Why make it a James Bond movie at all? Call it "Gritty, Grumpy, Boring Rogue Spy with No Chemistry and No Fun Toys Movie". Seriously, did you even have to make the Martini annoying? I was snoring by the time they finished explaining what went in it just so we would know that you had changed that too.

And to Paul Haggis, if you want to be self serving, please do it with something you create, not go and ruin this previously fun Bond Franchise. You weren't out to please The Bond audience,that's for sure, you wanted to capture our money and give us something that doesn't resemble Bond at all. We, the loyal followers, want the wry wit, clever actions and the sophisticated, smooth nature of the character. We want the fun technologies, cars with outlandish capabilities and stellar music.

And Marc Forster as the director didn't do anything to liven it up at all, but decidedly did the exact opposite. We expect and want to be swept away in escapism, that is what Bond used to give us. Even the little details like missing the Bond music that used to come flooding in when he gets busy with the Bondgirls. There wasn't even any kissing in this movie. They showed Fields after she supposedly slept with him saying she was mad at herself. Well honey, I was pissed off the whole movie!

Matt Chesse and Richard Pearson chopped up the movie so badly in editing you can't even tell what was happening in some of the action scenes.

To add insult to injury, they play the Bond theme at the end of the movie. What's the point, to stab us in the heart? So we could miss what we lost even more? It made me momentarily hopeful that what I just saw wasn't the real movie and the real one was now going to come on.

Until someone that understands the culture of Bond comes in and brings back a REAL Bond movie, I won't be fooled again into shelling out money for the ruination of Bond.

Michael Wilson and Barbara Broccoli, you should be ashamed of yourselves for what you have done to Bond. 50 lashes and no dessert for the rest of your lives. And trust me, that won't be nearly as torturesome and disappointing to you as this movie was to me and the rest of us Bondies.