Quantum of Solace

Forget about all of the mediocre reviews that say the latest Bond film is too dark, too grim. Quantum of Solace (2008) is a very satisfying follow up to Casino Royale. I found the film to be exciting and very entertaining.

Anthony Lane at The New Yorker says:

Quantum of Solace is too savage for family entertainment, but, as a study in headlong desperation, it’s easier to believe in than many more ponderous films.

The violence is relentless but I didn’t find it pointless. It takes the Bond character in a different direction which isn’t a bad thing. Would you rather have invisible cars or Bond skiing down another mountain in the French Alps? At the risk of being boring, this film tries to be a little more believable with the plot and I think it works well, even if things get a little confusing at times.

My biggest complaint is that director Marc Forster cheated with many of the action scenes. Showing the viewer a set up rapid cuts creates a frenetic pace and builds tension but it also creates a jumbled mess that leaves you wishing you had a rewind button to press.

I can’t believe that critics like Roger Ebert are complaining that the female lead has a plain name (Camille) instead of Pussy Galore. Instead of Goldfinger or Scaramanga the villain is simply one Dominic Greene. Again, I don’t understand why people want crazy villains with unrealistic goals. This film tries hard to be believable and it’s just as entertaining as a Goldfinger if not better in my opinion.

Is the film as good as Casino Royale (2006)? No, but come on. Casino Royale is one of the best Bond films to date. You can’t hit a home run every time.

If you’re a fan of the Bond franchise then I think you’ll enjoy the film. If not, then maybe Bolt (2008) in 3D will get you excited.

Films are rated from 1 to 4 stars.

Posted in Movie Reviews at 1:04 AM