Film

What's on at the cinema plus reviews of the latest movie and DVD releases

Updates:

Quantum of Solace (2008)

Director: Marc Forster

Time Out rating

Average user rating

202 reviews

Movie review

From Time Out London

Revenge is a dish best served cold. Which, along with mean and lean, is how Daniel Craig plays 007 in Marc Forster’s slightly disappointing, furiously-paced, hi-tech, slash-and-burn sequel to the more leisurely, luxurious first ‘reboot’, ‘Casino Royale’.

James Bond – you’ll have to remember his Christian name as the arrogant cad neglects to announce it – is grieving the loss of lover and betrayer Vesper Lynd (Eva Green). You’d best remember the plot – and Lynd’s necklace – of the earlier film, too, as director Forster throws us immediately, eye-smackingly into the frenetic activity and globe-traversing travel that is the angry, increasingly unorthodox, ‘soul-destroyed’ world-saving agent’s way of dealing with betrayal, grief and loss.

Eight minutes of highly impressive, parallel-edited, SFX-assisted, stunt-laden action are up before the ears, eyeballs and brain get their first momentary repose. Before then, our hero chases down Mr White in the Aston dodgem-car through Alpine tunnels. Cough or blink and you’ll miss how our bold spooks link the last film’s Le Chiffre to bug-eyed faux environmentalist Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), a destabiliser of US backyard governments with a laughable, pudding-basin haircut-ed sidekick. Almost immediately, he hops, skips and jumps across Siena’s roofs and the horse-loving, harlequin-ed Palio crowds – and we soon follow Bond ‘running wild’ from the palatial villas of Italy to the slums of Haiti, the neo-Reifenstahl opera houses of Vienna, and the menacingly beautiful, otherworldly moonscapes and deserts of Bolivia.

So much dash, flash and thrill – so many boat chases, tight rope-dangling fight scenes, bi-plane dogfights, architectural flourishes and flat-table computer displays – there’s scant time left for character, let alone, story, fun, seduction, humour or wit. You can sense the older, traditionalist viewers wanting to go home early to take their nostalgia pills. True, there are some cute one-liners – presumably the product of Paul Haggis’s polish of Neal Purvis and Robert Wade’s screenplay taken from producer Michael G Wilson’s first inspirational treatment and itself repeatedly pencil-marked by Forster and Craig.

Also, new Bond Woman Olga Kurylenko is impressive as 007’s Latin helpmeet Camille. But, strange for a supposedly ‘humanising’ franchise, Craig’s Bond comes dangerously close to being a cipher himself: only a ‘Bourne’-again, action superhero could perform his physical feats.

It’s a cynical movie, too: half the Brit agents are double and all the US spies seem untrustworthy – save Felix Leiter, of course, whom the excellent Jeffrey Wright reprises in arguably the film’s sole sympathetic, low-key performance. (Though, intriguingly, Judi Dench’s ‘M’ has gone all maternal – couldn’t she be renamed ‘SM’, for Surrogate Mum?) Okay, maybe real life is, pace Hobbes, brutal, nasty and short – like this movie. But can’t we sneak in the odd moment for some occasional quiet conversation, maybe even a leisurely martini or a game of baccarat, even if we can’t afford luxury rail travel or – God forbid – some protracted, guiltless sex? Go on, Bond, next time, indulge yourself a little more. We like to watch.

Author: Wally Hammond 2008-10-20 13:31:15

Time Out London Issue 1993, 30 October – 4 November, 2008

Bookmark

User reviews of this film

George said...

Posted on Oct 28 2008 05:59 Roxy and Rothery...have you actually seen the movie? If not then how can you rate it out of five? I was fortunate enough to go to a cast and crew screening so I feel qualified to comment. I love Bond and I love the new Bond era but believe me this isn't a good movie and it isn't a patch on casino Royale

Report as inappropriate
Roxy said...

Posted on Oct 28 2008 00:44 That was a bad review, actually probably one of the worst I've ever read. Not even worthy of the title "Movie review"

Report as inappropriate
George said...

Posted on Oct 26 2008 19:45 I very much agree with this reveiw having seen the movie today at a C & Crew screening. It lacks depth and is a real disappointment after Casino which I loved.
There is too much aaction and no depth or intrigue.

Report as inappropriate
Dianne said...

Posted on Oct 24 2008 20:48 I'll second that!! He ooozes sex appeal.

Report as inappropriate
Will Rothery said...

Posted on Oct 24 2008 10:25 How could you give it this kind of review? Your job as a critic is to review things fairly, to rate things down on the premise of it's action is a farce to the community you claim to enlighten. The new format of James Bond - which I consider the Daniel Craig era - is set upon a storyline; they make it action, because it needs it. It's showing the human, almost animal, side to Bond that longs to get revenge.
It's a story. If you're going to review a film, do so with your brain switched on.

Report as inappropriate
Will Rothery said...

Posted on Oct 24 2008 10:25 How could you give it this kind of review? Your job as a critic is to review things fairly, to rate things down on the premise of it's action is a farce to the community you claim to enlighten. The new format of James Bond - which I consider the Daniel Craig era - is set upon a storyline; they make it action, because it needs it. It's showing the human, almost animal, side to Bond that longs to get revenge.
It's a story. If you're going to review a film, do so with your brain switched on.

Report as inappropriate
diann said...

Posted on Oct 23 2008 11:45 Daniel Craig is the best bond and the sexist bend ever

Report as inappropriate