Theatrical Review of Quantum of Solace

I saw Quantum of Solace last nite. I go to the movies to be entertained. I don't go to pick it apart and super-analyse it. I either like a movie or don't. I thouroughly enjoyed the new Bond flick. I had no problem picking up the plot from the last one.I give it 10 out of 10 for value. Our group was still talking about it hours later. Looking forward to the next bond film.

---

[Post edited by countryboy340 on Nov 16, 2008]

Yeah, this is more of a continuation of Casino Royale than a separate movie. I think if you look at it that way, it does make sense. I mean, if Bond really did love Vesper so much, I can see him going on a rampage to get revenge. I don't see anything "Bourne" about that.

The important thing to remember is that this is supposed to be very early Bond. That is made clear from Casino Royale. So really, this isn't the Bond we all expect, and it shouldn't be. Furthermore, wouldn't it be kind of silly if he was all suave and playing with gadgets and bedding women while he's trying get vengeance for Vesper? Seriously, if you want more of that, there's 20+ other Bond movies with the same old tune.

---

[Post edited by hoodaguy on Nov 16, 2008]

One thing as reliable as gravity is that the instant a critic dares say something negative about a blockbuster, someone will leap in with the brilliant, incisive "But I just go to the movies to be entertained" comment as a powerful rhetorical response.

I agree, and from the reviews I read, most of the bitching is that it's just not the usual Bond we've seen far too many times. First the crtics gripe that Bond needs a face lift, a change and something new and fresh. MGM delivers that in "Casion Royale" and the critics loved it. Now we get more of the same and the critics are bitching about that he's just not like the old Bond. For the love of Pete, make up your minds! Persnoally, I like the NEW Bond. I would much rather see a character a little closer to reality rather than the campy, tounge-in-check deliveries we've had over the past 20+years.

The whole "Bourne" thing comes about due to the style of the film, especially the action. However, and as I've said before, the new Bond movies are not the only films guilty of copying the "Bourne" style. It's quite simply a visual action theme of the times (gritty contrast, shakey hand-held camera, etc.) that is seen in many action films over the past few years. IMO, bitching about it holds no water. If we were to demand that every action film made today has to have an original style we'd probaly never see another action get made.

Quote:
One thing as reliable as gravity is that the instant a critic dares say something negative about a blockbuster, someone will leap in with the brilliant, incisive "But I just go to the movies to be entertained" comment as a powerful rhetorical response.

But the ugly truth of that is most people DO go to movie to be entertained.

Quote:
But the ugly truth of that is most people DO go to movie to be entertained.

Which raises at least two questions.

Why bother to read reviews and respond to them if you don't like to think about or analyze movies?

Why are most people so easily entertained?

Let me put it to you like this: QoS should not have been a direct continuation, like Bourne Supremecy was to Bourne Identity, especially without a recap for a majority of the audience who last saw Bond on screen two years ago. Vesper was a traitor, Bond said it was over at the end of CR...move on to the next story. She wasn't that interesting of a character in the first place.

Ah well, not going to make all the people happy all the time.

Jason

Quote:
"Quantum of Solace" isn´t a James Bond movie it´s a hybrid, something along the lines of James Bourned.

This sounds like the best movie ever when you read this quote. Why are critics having a hard time accepting the new Bond? If they wanted more the same they can watch 20 something other Bonds. Honestly how many different ways can you do Bond? They could have pushed out another one like the traditional Bonds and it would bomb, instead they get a 70+ million opener.

Quote:
The whole "Bourne" thing comes about due to the style of the film, especially the action. However, and as I've said before, the new Bond movies are not the only films guilty of copying the "Bourne" style. It's quite simply a visual action theme of the times (gritty contrast, shakey hand-held camera, etc.) that is seen in many action films over the past few years. IMO, bitching about it holds no water. If we were to demand that every action film made today has to have an original style we'd probaly never see another action get made.

Right, and that's the problem. One critic made the "Bourne" comparison, and now every critic is tooting the same horn. By doing so, they themselves are guilty of what they are complaining about!

I'm not so sure the Bourne movies were the first of their kind to use that sort of style, either. For example, "The Shield" uses the same gritty, shaky technique, and it came out the same year as the "Bourne Identity." Same with "NYPD Blue," and that was out years before either of those.

Now, if in "Quantum of Solace" Bond had amnesia, THEN there'd be reason for the Bourne complaints. But personally, making the comparisons just because of the filming style is ludicrous. As Tim said, we would be bitching that every movie is similar to every previous movie in one shape or form.

I think that's the first time I've ever been accused of jumping on a bandwagon.

Having just watched all three Bourne films in three days for a review of the new box set...yeah. QoS is Bond doing Bourne. The only thing QoS lacked was the shaky camera from beginning to end.

Jason