Moviephile

Yacking on movies and related viewing material.

&
 

Nov 19 2008

Quantum of Solace: A Review

Published by universehall at 1:30 pm under Drama, Reviews, Viewing Material Edit This

I don’t mind saying that I was very excited going into Quantum of Solace. As I’d already mentioned, Mr. Hall and I enjoyed Casino Royale quite a bit - it only made sense that we would enjoy this one just as much.

Unfortunately, it just didn’t work out that way.

From the very start, the movie didn’t grab me the way the first one did. The movie begins with a chase sequence in cars which is nowhere as interesting as the on-foot chase sequence that begins the first movie - and for another thing, the chase was shot and edited together so poorly that I spent the first ten minutes of the movie annoyed because I could not, for the life of me, figure out what was going on or who was chasing what. The title sequence was rather drab and uninteresting, and the theme song was not appealing to the ear.

There were three chase sequences in the first twenty minutes or so of the movie, and not one of them was interesting to watch. This film contained far too many “topical” references which may have been good five months ago but are already lacking in punch: remarks about the value of the dollar or the expensiveness of oil are already inconsistent with reality. The story was rather inconsistent about Bond’s character - is he hard and cynical or secretly caring? I’m not blaming Daniel Craig (even though a little bit of facial expression on his part may have assisted matters) - I blame the director and the writer. Why did he have no facial expression? Because they gave him nowhere to go! And what exactly gave him solace in the end? I have yet to quite figure that one out.

The bad guy didn’t work. Is he a cheap, smarmy little goblin who would run away from a fight - or is he a smart, intelligent con-man, willing to go hand-to-hand with master killer Bond? He was inconsistently characterized (which I also blame the writer and director for, not the actor).

The movie was muddled, inconsistent and kind of boring - not to mention visually drab and uninteresting. At absolute best, forgiving a whole lot and mostly for the sake of its predecessor, I give it a B-. But my gut reaction is to give it a C.

Probably the best thing that can be said about it was that it wasn’t very long, so at least you don’t have to spend too long in confusion and boredom.

My recommendation: don’t waste your money on this one. If you really want to see it, wait until it comes out on DVD and then put it in your Netflix list. That would probably be the best way to see it.

Possibly-related Articles:                                        (auto-generated)

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

Some Today.com contributors may have received a fee or a promotional product or service from a manufacturer for promotional consideration, while others receive no consideration at all. Each contributor is responsible for disclosing any such promotional consideration.