Magnum Of Solace -
#1
Posted 20 October 2008 - 10:37 AM
An opinion on Quantum of Solace
The sophomore Bond film is always tricky terrain for the 007 incumbent: audience curiosity has been sated by the first film and this time they really need to want to come. And when your debut is film is the highest grossing and most critically lauded film in a series spanning 46 years, you really need to pull something out of the hat. Luckily, Daniel Craig is the tip of the talent iceberg in the 22nd Bond film from Albert R Broccoli’s Eon Productions. Quantum Of Solace is an extraordinarily good thriller and a progression in terms of style and story. It is this marque of quality that will give the cinema-goer a magnum of solace when they watch Bond back in action. And they’ll want to. Again. And again.
Sequel Royale
In Quantum Of Solace, James Bond 007 is out on his own and out for revenge. This sequel royale opens with a thrilling “Crashed-in” Martin chase along lakeside autostrada and an excavation cut beneath the surface of Northern Italy where Bond is quarry in a quarry. This sequence is breathtakingly economical and capped by Bond in cheer-inducing style. 007 then enters glorious Sienna, Italy and delivers a vital piece of intelligence straight from the end of his last outing. Though the chase is over, the ride is about to begin. We are now in the murky depths of the intelligence world: a man you think you can trust is just another way to die. In an artful cross-cut sequence set against the Palio horse festival, Bond doggedly pursues an opponent from the depth of the sewer system of the city, to street level and finally to the terracotta rooftops in layered chase of shocking intensity. We then go to London , here, a city of rainy tower blocks and big anonymous, grey buildings housing Minority Report-style intelligence tech. Le Chiffre’s laundered money turns a whisper of love to a whisper of hate in Haiti . Here, we are introduced to Camille and Dominic Green. The former is a mysterious Bolivian beauty with an agenda of her own drawn from her tragic past and the latter is ostensibly a man with plan to save the world before it withers and dies. Bond then gets battered and bruised on a brutal boat chase. This scene ends with a delicious moment of Terence Young-ery! Bond uncovers an international conspiracy and a nebulous organization called “Quantum” which leads to a unique, floating production of Tosca in Bregenz , Austria . This setpiece, where 007 smartly inserts a spike in the spokes of Quantum’s plans, is a stylish standout moment: Hitchcock + Coppola = Forster. We then return to Latin America , namely Bolivia, where Bond lets Agent Fields take him down to where he’s going and nothing seems real. He uncovers a conspiracy involving the toppling of the Bolivian government and the domino effect of Quantum’s influence in South America . Quantum, with the aid of sexed-up CIA dossiers and a poodle-like British Government, will inadvertently impose the exiled dictator General Medrano upon a people. However, there is a twist in the tale of which Jake Gittes and Vilos Cohaagen would be proud. We are then treated to an aerial battle pitching a lumbering old school transport against a sharp fighter plane in which Bond is outgunned but ultimately not outmanoeuvred. A mysteriously strange desert complex is the setting for the denouement: an elemental finale involving fire and water and the ruthlessly ironic resolution of the characters’ personal dramas. There is philosophical coda which maps the journey of Bond’s psyche and exemplifies the theory of the Quantum Of Solace (the title remains unsaid in the film).
Rolls Royce Heritage
Marc Forster’s films to date represent a very respectable body of art. Monster’s Ball led to Halle Berry winning a well-deserved 2001 Oscar ® for Best Actress, an award which helped power the 2002 Bond film Die Another Day to become the highest grossing Bond of its day. 2004 saw the release of Finding Neverland starring Johnny Depp as Peter Pan-creator, J M Barrie – a splendid film which showed Forster could handle the British idiom. In 2006, his careful, quirky philosophical comedy, Stranger Than Fiction, was released and a year later, he directed the epic, spiritually-moving masterpiece The Kite Runner. In the past, this would not have been a typical Bond director’s CV but in this golden age of Bond, producers Michael G Wilson and Barbara Broccoli have made a creatively brave choice. It has succeeded in spades. The melding of the Forster family with the Eon family has yielded a film which is respectful of the Rolls-Royce heritage of the series.
Forster Family
A number of people belong to the Forster family. Director of Photography, Roberto Schaefer, has created a subtle palette that binds the film with visual unity and some lovely subliminal storytelling (blood red fruit and broken, blood-like glass). The multi-level chase in Sienna reflects the complexity of what lies beneath the surface. The beige and blue of the desert setting reflect the isolation of Bond and his steely-eyed resolve. Long-time Foster editor, Matt Chessé (working here with Richard Pearson) has really given us a uniquely edited James Bond film. Short bursts of intense high octane action are interspersed with location detail. Like melody and counter-melody, this works. Though one of the shortest Bond films (106 minutes), the deep, textured storytelling, evinced through vignettes, make the film feel like a rich, cordon bleu meal. One appreciates the feast but one needs time to digest it. Art-house Forster has said that he was initially reluctant to take on such a huge franchise film but it was Schaefer and Chessé who convinced him to change his mind and become part of film history. Thanks chaps! Kevin Tod Haug, the visual effects supervisor has also worked with Forster, has tweaked reality with CGI to intensify the action. This is clearest in the aerial sequence where the lead actors seemingly skydive into a desert sinkhole (an unused script idea from GoldenEye). Rounding out the Forster family, is the work of MK12, the title design artists. Daniel Craig walks around a desert landscape shooting, while silhouetted nudes form patterns around him and a naked girl emerges from beneath the sands of time. MK12 also contribute to the creative title cards announcing the location of each chapter in the film in unique fonts.
Top Notch
The Eon family are on top notch form too. Writers Paul Haggis and Neal Purvis & Robert Wade (with additonal, uncredited work by Joshua Zetumer) have fashioned a satisfying sequel. The mystery story of corporate oligarchies misleading the American and British governments to control the world’s most precious resource without care of the negative economic and ecological consequences is a terrific comment of the concerns of the Zeitgeist. The domino effect sought by Quantum resonates in yet another continent torn apart in the past by CIA and MI6 machinations. The Euro-centric geopolitical spin is a daring Bond first. Judi Dench’s superb M (a real plot-driver in this film) is given two wonderful moments. One is where she tries to wake up an ethically-slumbering Foreign Secretary (nicely etched by Tim Pigott-Smith) and the other is where she asserts she doesn’t give a what the CIA thinks! The recent Bond films have kept the British end up with nuggets like these. Giancarlo Gianni as Rene Mathis paints out the shades of grey one has to peer through in this deadly, duplicitous world as well as the joy of life (his lady friend, Gemma – Lucrezia Lante Della Rovere – is gorgeously pithy). Taken from the words and spirit of Ian Fleming, this performance is simply marvellous. His character’s arc is this film’s soul and the most emotionally charged in the film. He almost steals the film. Jeffrey Wright’s subtly upstanding Felix Leiter strives to work within uncomfortable parameters of his duty. He is the American conscience of the film. Gregg Beam (in a lovely, oily performance by David Harbour ), CIA section chief and the CIA are the butt of some playful digs. One senses that the team (Paul Haggis was fresh from his powerful In The Valley Of Elah) was keen to explore the thematic possibilities writing a contemporary global spy thriller affords. Themes of what lies beneath the surface of people, land, regimes, motivations are visually conveyed by the settings. This is a film about layers and the complexity and consequences of one’s choices. By the end of this film, 007 eschews his licence to kill: he has learned something. When the film is humourous, it is intelligently funny. Craig bites through some wonderful one-liners. In, sadly, one of the few examples of Bondian flair and panache, Bond enters a hotel and utters the funniest line of the film in Spanish ( No hablo español ? – don’t worry, there are subtitles!).
High Scores
David Arnold’s score is a more subtle, less bombastic affair, informed greatly by the South American location. He is good at providing local colour, working with other musicians from the region. The James Bond theme is kept to a minimum (saved for the end titles again). The score is in keeping the meditative, introspective tone the film has at times. It is a shame he was not given a chance to write a song for any part of the film. A sliver of the instrumental version of Another Way To Die is heard in Haiti . The controversial theme song is performed with dirty, funky passion by Alicia Keys and Jack White. Replete with ominous piano/string major chords, playful lyrics punctuated by the Memphis Horns, this is superfly, funk, soul Bond. It is not pastiche and is another example of Quantum Of Solace pushing the Bond envelope.
Old Eonians And New
Other notable old Eonians returning include stunt co-ordinator Gary Powell. The action is very new and exciting. The best fight in the film is a vertiginous combat in a Sienna chapel: an excerise in knuckle-whitening suspense that would make the performers of Cirque du Soleil wince! Chris Corbould’s special effects work (often in camera) add excitement by being unobtrusive aiding the believability of the action. The sound design of the award-winning team led by Chris Munro is aurally creative, helping establish the reality of the location and including some audacious, Robert Altman-esque over-lapping dialogue (the original use of subtitles is a Bond first). Casting director, Debbie McWilliams’ fine eye really goes a long way to adding verisimilitude (Chile and Panama substitute for Haiti and Bolivia). At this point we must mention a certain Michael G Wilson who lounges seedily in a Haitian hotel and the reappearance of a Universal Exports cover name that a previous web-fingered Bond villain would recognize! Oh, and by the way, the gun-barrel is back!
Notable newcomers to the Eon and Forster fold are costume designer Louise Frogley who gives Bond a cleaner, more casual look. Her constumes help convey the Bolivian locations well. Glamour is restricted to a few scenes in this film but (working with Tom Ford), Bond is dapper but deadly as ever. Dan Bradley, as 2 nd unit director, has made some innovative changes and decisions. Bourne-esque in places, yes, but Bondian too, he has helped create some set pieces that work by being intense but not overlong. Above all, the action feels original and unseen hitherto by cinema audiences. Oscar-winner Dennis Gassner’s production design is Ken Adam-esque for the geometrically pleasing shapes that fill the frame but kept to a human scale. His best set is the Bolivian hotel whose black and white hotel interior perfectly augments the chess board manoeuvres and visual arresting moments set within it.
Character Driven
The cast is intriguing. Mathieu Almaric is a sinister executive of Quantum and Enron-esque in his morality. The notable actor enjoys his rather under-developed part with aplomb. Joaquín Cosio as a similarly underwritten General Medrano is a meaner, dirtier man with a backstory linking him to the leading lady, Camille played with gutsy gusto by Olga Kurylenko. A novel characterization for a Bond film, she has a parallel story to Bond’s and they both seek the titular emotional comfort. Her damaged beauty potentially could help restore 007’s faith in women but ultimately their characters share a brief, frustratingly unconsummated, journey for this film. Gemma Arterton brings both light and dark into Bond’s world in an engaging turn. Incidentally, her character’s first name is one of the most subtle and clever jokes in any Bond film. Jesper Christensen as Mr White lurks effectively again in the shadows and is the catalyst to this story. Anatole Taubman as the tonsurely strange Elvis does not really register and Rory Kinnear as Tanner is merely functional in the absence of Michael Kitchen.
Indelible Impression
Most reviews have started off with Daniel Craig as James Bond. Of course, after all the film-makers and co-stars are given their due, he really is the most visible strength to this movie. Front, centre and core of this film, 007 is a wounded yet healing dark knight. His physically energetic performance captures a man living on the edge of his life but his soulful turmoil is even more effective. While Craig presents a determined, tough and brutal Bond, he is also is terrific at hinting to the personal demons his chosen profession forces him to deal with. This is a less naturalistic performance than his debut but no less artistically pleasing. Craig's Bond cauterises the yearning melancholy, post-Vesper, with ruthless dedication to duty. He is extremely witty with the little humour he is given. Daniel Craig further stamps his mark on James Bond and gives to 007 the inner life that is a rich seam of Ian Fleming’s writing.
Motion pictures are the most collaborative and expensive yet powerful art form in the world today. It is hard to delineate credit because the whole is the blurred summation of the parts. No review would be complete without noting the hugely talented contributions of producers Michael G Wilson and Barbara Broccoli who have dared to take Bond beyond boundaries thought possible. Marc Forster has made an indelible impression on the series and this boutique Bond delivers on so many levels. Casino Royale was like the fourth film, after Dr No, From Russia With Love and Goldfinger, before the lava of creativity had cooled to the crust of formula. Quantum Of Solace is the fifth, equal but different entry to that series. Don’t think you’ll know about Bond XXII from what you have gleaned so far. Experiencing is exhilarating: the audience might lean right while the film turns left. The film is a stunningly original entry in suspense cinema and more revelatory for the surprises and twists contained in it. Quantum Of Solace, the esoteric, epigramatic title of one of Ian Fleming’s most richly human James Bond short stories is now, appropriately, the title of the most richly human James Bond film.
#2
Posted 20 October 2008 - 10:59 AM
I'm taking this as a positive review. I think.
#3
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:03 AM
Sorry to put you to the bother - well, if we can't be anal about the new Bond, who can?
I'm just eager to find out what everyone else thinks of the film.
#4
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:04 AM
#5
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:06 AM
Sounds great...
#6
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:17 AM
I'm afraid to ask...but is it true - and I can't really believe they've done this - that the closing credits have been put at the end of the film...? (!!!).
Worse than that... I heard (SPOILER WARNING) that the film maker idiots have not even made the book version of YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE as the fans insisted...?!
And I'm not even going to ask if it's true that Craig wears a shirt in one scene that he didn't wear in the one before....
#7
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:21 AM
By this I mean, like in CR after Fisher's and Obaano's killing Bond has these quiet reflective moments, even the shower scene with Vesper is moving. Are there any moments like this in QOS.
The impression at the moment is that this is a generic action flick, but surely Marc adds something new, is it at least visual?
#8
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:24 AM
Er, Pierce-Daniel, I don't blame you for not reading my long, boring, waffly, verbose review. If you had, you would have realised that, IMO, this is NOT a generic action flick and it IS visual!The impression at the moment is that this is a generic action flick, but surely Marc adds something new, is it at least visual?
#9
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:25 AM
I was wondering when someone would write a review longer than the film.
Great review though, ACE.
#10
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:28 AM
But you seem to have missed the point of my post, I'm asking about Marc Forster. Are you familar with him outside of QOS? I'd love to have an answer. Cheers.
#11
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:32 AM
I LOVE Marc Forster's previous films! This is a Marc Forster-James Bond film.
#12
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:36 AM
#13
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:38 AM
Could you provide an additional commentary to my question though. Those quiet moments that are key to Forster films in the past, are they there. Not being too spoilerific, where are they. In CR Bond was an emotional wreck, he presented the image of being a cold hearted killer but it was his 'armour' a facade. Vesper stripped him of his armour and let his expose his soul, he had a probelm with killing people, it was very clear in the movie. But after Vesper's betrayal, he's harder and colder then before and wants answers. How does Bond mature in this film, what is his arc? How does he grow, and how does Forster approuch that.
Patience draws the prize....
That's surely something you'd want to experience for yourself and not have spoilt beforehand...no?
#14
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:39 AM
But maybe you should've called this thread: "ACE's QOS review: "THE BEST BOND MOVIE EVER?""
#15
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:39 AM
#16
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:45 AM
He promised a paranoia thriller where we never know who to trust, and a film that explores Bond more. To quote he said: "Bond wants rrevenge for the death og someone he loved, but still has to kill people, and it haunts him." Is that element apparent. Becasue the critics say he fell way short of the mark.
#17
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:45 AM
The best, most thorough and clear review of QOS yet, written by a true Bond connaisseur and therefore truthful. A wonderful enticement for the cinema visit.
#18
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:48 AM
I'm only asking becasue the critics have apinted it as a rather stale piece, where there is little movement with Bond's character as there is anything else. I'm more worried that Forster hasn't given in his usual highly rated pieces of cinema.
He promised a paranoia thriller where we never know who to trust, and a film that explores Bond more. To quote he said: "Bond wants rrevenge for the death og someone he loved, but still has to kill people, and it haunts him." Is that element apparent. Becasue the critics say he fell way short of the mark.
Not all the critics have suggested that.... not by a long stretch. I remember this period circa CASINO ROYALE - i.e. people panic-buying into the bad press as a substitute for not being able to see it as early as them. It's very odd behaviour and extremely disloyal to a film and series that sees the fans not even care what the negative notices have said once they have seen the film twice themselves and pre-ordered the DVD.
#19
Posted 20 October 2008 - 11:55 AM
An interesting and toughtful view on Quantum of Solace.
thanks for this
#20
Posted 20 October 2008 - 12:12 PM
#21
Posted 20 October 2008 - 12:15 PM
#22
Posted 20 October 2008 - 12:39 PM
Looks like Forrrrster has hit it Outta The Park.
A coupla questions, though, if I may:
- Which is the better film, this or CR, and which do you prefer? Or is it too early to say, impossible to compare the CR apple to the QUANTUM orange, etc.?
- Do you think that QoS is A Controversial Bond Film a la LTK? Zorin recently predicted that it would not only divide fans but lose 'em in spades. Do you agree?
- What are your favourite things about QoS? What surprised you most? Anything you disliked or felt could have been done better?
Sorry to bombard, old boy, but you lucky and so-and-sos who've managed to see QUANTUM early gotta expect a bit of fanboy prodding!
#23
Posted 20 October 2008 - 12:56 PM
Too early to say.- Which is the better film, this or CR, and which do you prefer? Or is it too early to say, impossible to compare the CR apple to the QUANTUM orange, etc.?
Yes- Do you think that QoS is A Controversial Bond Film a la LTK?
Read the review.- What are your favourite things about QoS? What surprised you most? Anything you disliked or felt could have been done better?
...fanboy prodding!
Ooo-er, Missus!
#24
Posted 20 October 2008 - 01:21 PM
And yet again, Zorin sticks it to "the fans".Not all the critics have suggested that.... not by a long stretch. I remember this period circa CASINO ROYALE - i.e. people panic-buying into the bad press as a substitute for not being able to see it as early as them. It's very odd behaviour and extremely disloyal to a film and series that sees the fans not even care what the negative notices have said once they have seen the film twice themselves and pre-ordered the DVD.
I actually can't remember, but was there a period like this before Casino Royale? I seem to recall a lot more raves. Though I suppose CR never reached Dark Knight levels of acclaim...
#25
Posted 20 October 2008 - 01:23 PM
I was wondering when someone would write a review longer than the film. Some of the words are longer than the film.
I'm taking this as a positive review. I think.
Yes, well, ACE had been absent from the site for the better part of a year now. So he had ample time to begin work on this.
#26
Posted 20 October 2008 - 01:27 PM
And yet again, Zorin sticks it to "the fans".Not all the critics have suggested that.... not by a long stretch. I remember this period circa CASINO ROYALE - i.e. people panic-buying into the bad press as a substitute for not being able to see it as early as them. It's very odd behaviour and extremely disloyal to a film and series that sees the fans not even care what the negative notices have said once they have seen the film twice themselves and pre-ordered the DVD.
I didn't mention the word "fans". Oh - actually - yes I did. Sorry. Its a generic term as much as it is one of insult (!). The fans can be you, me or the man on the street - who, right now, is wondering about booking a babysitter so he and the wife can catch the new James Bond film at the cinema. Whether ANAL IT NEWS or IGN AGAIN don't like it is irrelevant to them. And that's all that matters to the series fortitude and the cinematic future of James Bond.
#27
Posted 20 October 2008 - 01:29 PM
I just need to know- Does the shorter run time have a detrimental effect on the film? I loved CR as it was a total epic, but cuttind 40 minutes AND doubling the action can't do to well for the story. Is it a case of action all the way with little regard for plot, a la TND?
Sorry to ask without reading the whole review, I just don't want any spoilers...
#28
Posted 20 October 2008 - 01:34 PM
I just need to know- Does the shorter run time have a detrimental effect on the film? Is it a case of action all the way with little regard for plot, a la TND?
No
#29
Posted 20 October 2008 - 01:34 PM
You may remember Spynovelfan, Loomis and some others had this discussion, about a year/year and a half ago, concerning the character development of Bond in CR's plot and its impact on future entries in the series. Now, from you impression of 'Quantum Of Solace', which pretty much is 'Casino Royale - Part II', do you think it possible there will be future entries that don't even tap a little bit into this deeper characterization? Can there ever be a 'back-to-popcorn' Bond-romp like, say TSWLM or TLD for example? Or has the art to tell Bond stories on the big sceen evolved foo far away from that direction (my secret, or rather, not so secret, opinion)?
#30
Posted 20 October 2008 - 01:41 PM
I wouldn't say it was spoiler free. I read the opening bit and found out way more about the story than I really wanted to know.
Oh, c'mon. Even reading CBn's Main Site and the active threads headlines give us at least some info on 'Quantum Of Solace'. I tried myself to stay as spoiler free as possible, but by now you get info out of every direction. I think ACE didn't do too bad with that regard.