Last night I finally saw "Quantum of Solace". I had read all the mixed/bad reviews, especially from some board members here. I was aware of the main points of criticism. And I tried to stay positive. Yet, a growing fear was installed by these reviews. The fear of being indeed disappointed. The fear of having been blinded with uncontrollable fan-love. The fear of having to admit Stamper is right.
These seem to me the main points of criticism that were raised in the last weeks:
- The action is edited badly, too fast to see what´s going on.
- The plot is incomprehensible.
- It is only action, there are hardly any scenes for character development.
- The Bond girls are weak.
- The score by David Arnold does not feature the James Bond theme and is only a cacaphony of sounds with no theme and too much drum computers.
- The title song is the worst song of them all.
- The film has no style.
- The film has no or at least not enough humor.
- The villain is underused.
- The whole film wants to be a Bourne film and comes off as a faceless action-hero-film.
- Daniel Craig gives a one-note "Rambo-esque" performance.
- The film is too short.
- The title has no meaning.
Okay. I probably have a reputation around here as a shameless apologetic for all things Bond. But not in this review.
I will not defend "Quantum of Solace" as a fan who wants to disregard anything that could shatter his positive opinion on the object of his obsession.
Because I don´t have to.
"Quantum of Solace" is a masterpiece. A better film than "Casino Royale". Also a better Bond film than the excellent "Casino Royale". It is one of the few action thrillers with a soul. It is definitely the most modern Bond film since "Dr.No" changed the way action thrillers were shot, edited and directed. "Quantum of Solace" is the best second Craig-Bond one could hope for.
Oh, c´mon, you fan-wanker: At least explain all the hyperbole!
I will.
Let´s look at the criticism again.
The action is edited very fast. And I do understand that people expected a slower tempo. But to say that you can´t see what´s going on is simply not true. At no time there are jarring cuts that just try to disorient you (as Michael Bay did in films like "Armageddon"). All the action is presented in a way that you know exactly where the characters are, what they are doing, what they are reacting to. Yes, it´s all happening very fast. But that´s a logical and very emotional approach to this. The film does not present action as something you can enjoy leaning back. In this film action is something that happens without a warning. It is violent. It has devestating consequences. And it is over before you know it so you have to move extremely quick in order to stay alive in it.- The action is edited badly, too fast to see what´s going on.
Will future Bond films scale back and allow the more "here comes another enjoyable setpiece"-feel of the earlier Bonds instead of QOS´ "in your face-draw you into the moment"-feel? Maybe. Don´t I enjoy the earlier Bond´s action sequences? I do. But for this film, Forster´s approach was logical and absolutely right.
- The plot is incomprehensible.
Excuse me? What is not to understand here? As any Bond film QOS has a very simple and clear plot. I´m totally baffeled by all those people here who complain about not understanding the plot. Really, if you don´t understand this plot then... I fear for the future of storytelling.
The only imaginable reason why someone could complain about the beginning of the plot would be this: He/she did not see "Casino Royale". If you don´t know who the guy in Bond´s trunk is and what has happened between Bond and Vesper and Mathis, then...
... no. Even then you will understand that the guy in the trunk is called Mr.White and that he works for a secret organization. You will understand that Bond loved Vesper and feels betrayed by her. And that he thought Mathis tried to kill him but actually was innocent.
- It is only action, there are hardly any scenes for character development.
Not true. Yes, there is a lot action. But there are dozens of scenes with quiet character moments (I won´t list all of them because fellow board members like Zorin, ACE and Mharkin have already done that so brilliantly). In fact, these quiet moments had an even greater impact on me because of the contrast of the hard action coming before and after. Interestingly, QOS goes the opposite way of most action thrillers. Instead of upping the action sequences and getting more frenetic to the end, QOS slows the tempo bit by bit, without losing its steam. It goes deeper into character until at the end it has presented a fully rounded portrayal of Bond.
- The Bond girls are weak.
There is one main Bond girl here: Olga´s CAMILLE. Her motivation is kind of familiar (FYEO) but works very well. She has not the commanding presence of Eva Green´s VESPER. But that could and should never have been the case. Vesper´s shadow has to lie on this film. If Camille had been more striking than it would have diminished the whole emotional impact.
Having said that, Camille is a strong character with her own mind. It is wonderful how the relationship between Bond and Camille does not turn sexual but is grounded on their loss of trust. They both are indeed "damaged goods". And the scene in the burning Eco Hotel, when everything seems lost - is one of the most frightening and tender scenes in any Bond film yet. The decision Camille wants from Bond and the way he is readying himself to do it is heart-breaking. ONE OF THE BEST SCENES EVER (so much that I had to write this in these BIG LETTERS.)
Agent Fields is more of a throwback to former Bond girls in that she very easily gets seduced by Bond. If there had been time within the narrative then it would have been nice to see to see more of her. But the scenes she is in work very well.
Considering the beauty of these both actresses - it is always in the eye of the beholder. I found both of them very attractive.
- The score by David Arnold does not feature the James Bond theme and is only a cacaphony of sounds with no theme and too much drum computers.
As I already wrote in my post on the score after listening to it only on CD I have to repeat my statement here now: The score works beautifully and is layered with many new and fresh themes. The drum computers are just one element which is used with great precision.
AND (again to underline this the big letters) THE JAMES BOND THEME APPEARS AGAIN AND AGAIN. It does not in the big brassy, look-at-me style of the former films but it is incorporated again and again in a very intelligent way, sometimes fusing with the YOU KNOW MY NAME melody. I enjoy this score immensely, within the film and apart from the film.
- The title song is the worst song of them all.
I would not rate the song as one of the best Bond songs. But it has a strange quality of disorienting and sticking with you. Also, I do believe that its chaos is chosen and did not happen by accident. It fits within the context of Bond´s state of mind. A beautiful harmony would have felt out of place. In that way, AWTD is perfect for this Bond film and the character at that moment.
- The film has no style.
Obviously, this is ridiculous. Everything has a certain style. You can´t argue whether this is a good or a bad style because that depends on taste. But "Quantum of Solace" definitely has a distinct style. And by that I don´t mean merely the breathtaking cinematography or the urgency of the editing or the gorgeous but never unrealistic set-design. For me, the style of this film could mainly be described by "going deep into the mind James Bond". In that way, it is similar to "You only live twice" which always seemed designed IMO as Bond´s fever dream in which everything corresponded to his state of mind. In contrast to "You only live twice", however, "Quantum of Solace" is no fantasy but deeply and painfully rooted in reality.
- The film has no or at least not enough humor.
Again, not true. Check out the already existing thread to this. The film has all the humor it can have (for its subject matter) and its humor is wonderfully subtle instead of having a tacked-on "I want to be a crowd-pleaser"-feel.
- The villain is underused.
WHAT? Greene is used perfectly and showcased again and again. And Almaric never overplays him but cuts a very menacing figure. Not because he would be physically imposing (he is actually pretty short) but because he really enjoys putting fear into people.
His henchman thankfully is no imposing Stamper but actually a rather stupid follower. In that respect, again a return to realism instead of going for the traditional cliché unrealistic "Jaws"-like brute.
- The whole film wants to be a Bourne film.
I do think that EON was shocked by the success of the "Bourne" franchise. And using "Bourne"´s stunt expert definitely was a way to update the stunt work, to bring it on the excellent level of "Bourne".
And yes, the stunt scenes do feel like "Bourne". But as I already pointed out in another thread, this is just Bond coming full circle. Bond has influenced Bourne. And now Bourne influences Bond. But Bond incorporates this action-style into his own frame of reference. At no time "Quantum of Solace" tries to be a "Bourne" film. It remains totally Bondian. And if you don´t believe it, watch a "Bourne" film again and then really compare it to "Quantum" instead of falling for the easy catchphrase bashing.
By the way, people always loved the "Bourne" action style. Why is that suddenly something to complain about when it is used in a Bond film? Orson Welles pioneered "depth of focus" in "Citizen Kane". Do all other films who employed "depth of focus" only ape a certain style instead of coming up with an own style?
This is absurd. The "Bourne" action style is only a tool. Just as the "Matrix" camera move is only a tool. It´s just a way of cinema evolving.
And concerning the editing: Once again, Greengrass was not the first one to have fast cuts. Michael Bay wasn´t the first one either. As far as I know Oliver Stone was the first one to bring the fast cutting into the mainstream. And again, this is only a tool.
- Daniel Craig gives a one-note "Rambo-esque" performance.
WHAT?????????????????????????????????
He is even more dimensional than in CR! He is tough and vulnerable, funny and menacing, full of hate and full of tenderness. There is nothing one-note about his performance at all. He is playing all the notes that there are in this film. With this second film he truly becomes the best Bond ever.
- The film is too short.
I never had that feeling. It tells its story with perfect timing. It does not feel too long as CR did.
- The title has no meaning.
How frustrating it is to see people make fun of the title. It contains two words that obviously are not that familiar anymore: Quantum. Solace. Both words have meanings. What is so difficult about these words?
Would people have preferred it if the title at been "a little bit of consolation"?
Bond needs to find solace after the events with Vesper. And he does find it.
That´s the meaning of the title. So easy. Why in the world are people there who cannot fathom that?
I love this title. Having seen the film, any other title would not have worked as well.
By the way, I do believe that EON wanted to name the film "Quantum of Solace" from the beginning. The organization was not called QUANTUM for nothing, was it?
So...
How could this happen? How could a situation arise in which people (even real Bond fans) could not see what this film achieves so brilliantly: an in-depth portrayal of the character of James Bond.
There is only two reasons that come to my mind:
- they cling to the earlier eras in which the films were mainly designed to be harmless entertainment
and
- they fall victim to journalists who need to reduce complexity to a few catchphrases, thereby becoming blind to the plenty of merits of this film.
I just hope that audiences worldwide will embrace this film. It is definitely one of the best films of the year. If not the decade.
"Oooh, so he ends with hyperbole again..."
No.
The film just is that good.
P.S. The gunbarrel has to come at the end. At the beginning it would have made no sense. But now Bond has come full circle. He never left the service but from now on he will be on her majesty´s secret service completely.
