First ‘Quantum of Solace’ Reviews Inspire Less Faith than Title

blackbook.Image4602.pf_main_quan_image.jpg
Share Button

I’m one of those people who was actually excited when the title of the new Bond film was announced. Quantum of Solace. Another indication that the makers of this new Bond didn’t really care what the fans thought or wanted — that they were going to take this franchise in whatever direction suited, no matter how bewildering. And people were bewildered. Then the trailer was released, and die-hard Bond freaks breathed a sigh of relief. The movie seemed to retain the contemplative aspects of Casino Royale, while incorporating the over-the-top action sequences of the Brosnan era. This was a Bond for everybody, eggheads and meat heads alike. But now, the first reviews are online, and I would like to help them spread like web wildfire.

It isn’t looking good for Daniel Craig and company. Well, that’s not true. The movie will still break bank at the box office, but this new Bond aims for critical respect, and it’s kind of not getting any. The Times Online declares in the first sentence of its review, “It’s James Bond, licence to bore.” The Guardian pines, “I was disappointed there was so little dialogue, flirtation and characterization in this Bond: Forster and his writers Paul Haggis, Neal Purvis and Robert Wade clearly thought this sort of sissy nonsense has to be cut out in favor of explosions.” The BBC says, “It’s a film that feels like the second part of a trilogy, with this being the bleaker second act.” In the contrary camp, Screen Daily calls it “one of the most remarkable action films ever made,” while Empire reassures that “Craig looks good in a tux.” Isn’t that all we really need, after all?