I can’t tell if there’s a lot to say about this film or not too much at all. It’s basically the fifth and sixth act of an already bloated James Bond film. I’ve only seen this film perhaps once or twice before this rewatch and I was surprised by how much I forgot about it. There’s a lot to like, but there’s a lot to be annoyed and patronized by. There’s also some to hate.
After Casino Royale, one of the better Bond films (maybe #5 or #6 on my top 10) there was a race to top it. But there was a writer’s strike and a half-hearted effort for a movie and we were given Quantum of Solace.
I’ll tell you what I want in my James Bond movies: A new incredible adventure, witty repartee with Q and Ms. Moneypenny, and great action sequences. This film only gave us one of the three in some fantastic action sequences.
It centers around a plot by the evil Quantum syndicate to install a Bolivian dictator as leader of his country in return for control of a vast percentage of Bolivia’s water supply. Again, this is Octopussy syndrome. There’s not much to the plot, but whatever.
What we are given to latch on to, though, are homages to prior Bond films, like Gemma Arterton bathed in oil much like Jill Masterson’s paint bath in Goldfinger. I do like the relationship between M and Bond in these films, but it’s not enough to make up for the absence of Moneypenny and Q. I will say, though, the fight in the scaffolding was breathtaking. That was truly an incredible action set piece, but action set pieces do not a Bond film make.
And did they let a font nerd go nuts in the most patronizing ways? In prior Bond films we’ve been given once or twice very clean, readable titles if a transition to a new country is too abrupt. It doesn’t happen often, but when it does, it’s elegant. Not in Quantum of Solace, though. Every 40 seconds we’re given a new city and country in a stereotypical font to represent the country. As if we couldn’t discern from the visuals that we were in Italy, especially when M says “We’re in Italy” 30 seconds later. Those titles really upset me. They were overly patronizing and obnoxious.
And ending on the gun barrel sequence instead of starting on it? Yawn. I get what they were trying to do, really. They were trying to say that this was the beginning of a new era in Bond, but it was pretty ham fisted and patronizing.
And maybe I am too hard on this film, but next to Casino Royale, it just kind of lays there. The song is terrible, the plot is forgettable, and none of the things that make a James Bond film for me were present. It was almost like watching a deleted scenes reel of Casino Royale.
There were some elegant moments of storytelling, yes. And the set pieces and location photography were gorgeous, but I just felt the filmmakers were trying to talk down to me the whole time.
I’m going to watch this film again and see if there’s more to it, but as it stands it’s pretty forgettable. 2 Martinis. Let’s hope the next one is better.
