To call this film disappointing is to praise it with faint damnation. Is it horrible? No. But is it good? Well, no, not really, especially when compared to its immediate predecessor, Casino Royale.
Casino was a first step in re-launching the Bond franchise and it was a great film. Daniel Craig seemed born to play Bond in a way not seen since Sean Connery’s heyday. It’s biggest fault was its attempts to top the Bourne films, transforming Bond from suave and sophisticated to blunt and crude. Even there, though, the film showed Bond’s first steps towards sophistication and thus seemed to make a promise: Just wait until the next one!
Liars.
Quantum picks up minutes after the end of Casino, making this the first Bond sequel rather than just another episode in the series. The biggest mystery left over from Casino is who was behind Le Chiffre. Who were those bastards blackmailing Vesper? Just what the heck is going on?
And so Quantum starts off with Bond interrogating Mr. White, the guy he shot and captured at the end of Casino. Naturally, all goes wrong and we’re off and running.
More like plodding. Quantum has some nice set pieces, but for an action film it feels remarkably dull. Part of the problem is that the action sequences are the latest in the f-f-f-f-fast c-c-c-c-cutting style that makes you wonder if the editor suffered from a really, really bad stutter. Here is where the Bourne influence is the strongest, and on the Bourne scale it’s better than Ultimatum (which is the high-water mark of awfulness) but worse than either Supremacy (almost comprehensible) or Identity (pretty clear in retrospect). An opening car chase is relatively clear, but a subsequent foot chase is so bad you might as well go mix yourself a drink until it’s done. Matters are made all the worse by first-time Bond director Marc Forster intercutting the blurring Bond chase with blurring horse racing. Oh Forster, return to Stranger Than Fiction (a film I really enjoyed) and forget artsy action sequences. (I hope he gets World War Z right because zombies deserve clarity.)
Craig is still all sorts of awesome as Bond. But then, I think he’s all sorts of awesome in pretty much every film he’s in, so I’m biased. Craig is one of the best physical actors working today; at his best he reminds me of Burt Lancaster in this regard. Here, he continues to grow into Bond, acquiring a little more sophistication, by the end showing a willingness to occasionally let someone live. This is an important part of his learning curve.
The villain, played by Mathieu Amalric, is pathetic. No, really. He spends a lot of time speaking in a near-whine, making him about as sinister as a vacuum cleaner. He’s the reason why villains have brawny henchmen. Goldfinger had Odd Job; Drax had Jaws; Carver had Stamper. Here…? When he finally squares off against Bond you want to laugh out loud, the mismatch is that bad.
Olga Kurylenko is acceptable as a Bond girl; she can’t match Gemma Arterton as agent “Fields, just Fields,” though, and neither holds a smoldering twig to Eva Green.
And I was just plain pissed off at one, mercifully brief, scene, where Bond and Felix Leiter (with Jeffrey Wright returning to the role) lamenting the imperialistic ways of their respective nations. Oh, Paul Haggis (co-writer), can’t you just shut the hell up? One of the key differences between Bond and Bourne is that Bond stands and fights for something; Bourne has violent hissy fits. So this scene with Leiter makes absolutely no sense, especially since if that is how Bond truly feels then you are left to wonder why he remains in Her Majesty’s Secret Service.
So is there anything to like? Well, yes. Consider that the villain’s cover is as an environmentalist. And when he’s not trying to be physically intimidating, Amalric is all right. There is a moment, during a performance of the opera Tosca, where he and Bond face off and in and of itself it’s a little jewel of a Bond moment.
David Arnold is mostly successful with the film score, especially at the moments where he successfully channels John Barry. There are some stunning locales and when the camera is allowed to settle down, the cinematography is great. The plot resolves most of the issues remaining from Casino while leaving a number of loose strings for the next film. Oh, and there’s also Craig, Daniel Craig.
Which is fortunate because production of the next film has already been announced, and Craig has signed on for his third outing as Bond. Bond 23 is tentatively scheduled for release in 2010. If it picks up where this one leaves off, then we’ll see if the main problem with Quantum of Solace is that it’s the middle film of a trilogy, never an enviable position. If that’s the case, it’s merely a bridge, the B that takes us from A to C. And for that job, it does all right.
Comments