I'm insanely jealous of those who were able to stay away, and/or not expose themselves to such things. I must work harder on achieving this kind of 'zen' next time...but one of the by-products of my prolonged, hyper-attenuated overexposure to the production of the film is a familiarity with the director's stated intent---which (for good or ill) served as a primer for viewing the film---whilst absorbing a tidal wave of bad reviews from fandom had an undeniable tampering effect on expectations. I found myself looking the terrible editing, the zero time for character development, etc...
From the opening, ominous low flyover of the lake, intercut with a close-up shots of an Aston Martin DBS at speed, it's clear we're in new territory for James Bond. And then...there we are, riding along with James Bond through a twisting mountainside tunnel, amid automatic gunfire, screaming tires and pinwheeling point of view. It's a maelstrom of visual confusion; we're given just enough perspective to discern who's chasing whom (the italian truck driver alongside Bond is doubtlessly just trying to not be killed).
Then come the controversial titles, which I frankly enjoyed: the desert theme of physical and emotional desolation is previewed, the faceless women, Bond in search of someone, Bond falling (which I see as a visualization of despair), the bullet on a flat trajectory---a metaphor for Bond, perhaps, but certainly for the film itself...
Then comes the chase through the cistern and over the rooftops of Siena, intercut with the Palio; a juxtaposition of slow-motion equine fluidity with still more frantic handheld, and close-on quick-cutting of Bond's pursuit of an MI6 traitor---but wait! There are some nuggets of plot and character business to be had first, and it's easy to miss. First, Vesper's French-Algerian boyfriend's death has obviously been faked. Second, Bond claims not to care about finding him, saying that neither him nor Vesper are "worth it"...but he deftly steals the photograph of them from the file when M's back is turned, and thus we can sense that Bond might be in some denial on the issue.
Then comes a visit to Haiti, and as good a hand-to-hand/knife fight as I've seen anywhere. Bond coldly dispatches the baddie and lingers for the bleed-out. Then he binds a wound and steals the man's jacket, watched all the while by the dead man's vacant eyes. The interception of a suitcase intended for the dead man puts him into contact with Camille...and Dominic Greene. The ensuing boat fight (not a chase, in my opinion---someone has said that it seems as if they're going in circles, and I think they are---like a true aerial dogfight, it's all about achieving a tactically advantageous position and inflicting damage, and this takes the shape of a twisting, turning corkscrew, which is what we see here, IMO) is brutal, and once again visually chaotic, before Bond and Camille are ultimately able to escape without pursuit...
At this point, I checked my watch. I was fifteen minutes into Quantum Of Solace.
Don't worry, I'm not going to summarize the rest of the film!
) It does make a point, though: the kinetic forward momentum of the piece is overwhelming, and the cliche of not having a chance to 'catch one's breath' is a perfectly appropriate one to use. While I'm quite sure this was intentional on Marc Forster's part---he openly spoke about QoS being like "a bullet fired from a gun"---this pacing takes a toll on plot and character accessibility for some viewers, who might be looking for a more conventional narrative. Scenes such as those between Bond and M, Bond and Mathis, Bond and Leiter, Bond and Fields, Bond and Camille, etc., give us what we need---and indeed contain many fine moments, with humour and fine dramatic performances---but are over before we can savour them...and we do yearn to savour such things, like Bond himself enjoys fine food and drink. Hopefully next time...I disagree with those who say there isn't a sense of emotion in this film...but like anything in QoS that doesn't explode or move at high speed over land, sea and air, it can be lost in the jetstream of the film's kinetic speed. Craig's performance is pretty much perfect, in my opinion; internalization is the most difficult acting assignment, and it's 'mission accomplished' here as far as I'm concerned. His denial of caring about Vesper...his no response to Mathis' saying "She died for you"...his reaction when Mathis, with his last breath, tells Bond to forgive her---and himself...his face when presented with Fields' oil-coated corpse, his playing of the scene where Camille tells him that his prison is 'in there' (Bond's mind)...I find it all quite rich, if undeniably fleeting.
About Mathis' death, and the disposal of his body: I thought was poignant, and spot-on. Bond's remark that his friend "wouldn't care," the jarringly field-expedient utility of removing the cash from the wallet, the way the camera lingers on the dumpster from above---it all elicits revulsion, which it is intended to do, and belies the grief so brilliantly underplayed by Daniel Craig, but it also speaks to the compartmentalization required by someone in Bond's line of work in order to avoid going insane.
Loved the opera scene---and the intercutting of the opera with the silently-rendered gunfight in the restaurant. That moment, when Greene and his men see the tuxedoed Bond from across the lobby---that delicious pregnant pause before action---made my heart sing. Another fabulous moment is when Bond, after clearing the elevator of conscious MI6 agents ( :007) ), confronts M, and then climbs out onto the ledge of the atrium, and makes good his exit.
I sat there in the cinema, and reflexively said out loud: "Look at him go..." These, folks, are JAMES BOND moments---some of the best in the entire series, to my mind, and I firmly believe that history will ultimately record them as such.
I enjoyed the airplane chase (not a dogfight, for the reasons I detail above
), for what it was: Bond struggling to survive an unwinnable encounter. There's no doubt of the eventual outcome; that the smaller plane will take down the very cool old DC3---this is an aerial 'Alamo'---but that moment, when Bond climbs it into a stall, and they bail out, is just very cool. I thought it looked pretty good, actually, and here the editing might be the best of the film---or, at least, the most effective. Wildly improbable, and over the top? Yes. James Bond? Absolutely.The hotel in the desert, to me, just screams Ken Adam. The interiors, particularly the space where Bond and Greene have their fight as the flames erupt around them, looks quite a lot like something Mr. Adam would have conceived---even the texture on the walls looks very 'classic Bond' to me.
Performances: Giancarlo Giannini was pitch-perfect in every scene, as was the great Jeffrey Wright---his scene with Bond in the bodega, where they spar briefly over the notion of failed British empire and American corruption, is well done. I look forward to more of Wright's Felix Leiter in films to come. Olga Kurylenko and Gemma Arterton are both very effective (especially Camille).
Mathieu Amalric's Dominic Greene isn't the best Bond villain, but that's not his fault. He's very good in every scene, possessing the most punchable face and demeanor of any baddie since Kronsteen, and is clearly another relatively minor stepping stone up from Le Chiffre, as we ascend the organizational chart of the nefarious Quantum in future outings. His fight with Bond is fantastic, and his ultimate fate is something that would have made Ian Fleming smile.
The scene between Bond and Vesper's 'ex' is positively electric. Though the ultimate resolution might seem disappointing at first blush, it banks significant character capital for the future, and the love knot left in the snow signals a necessary closure for James Bond, who is now free to do what he does best...and nobody does it better.
The locations are lush and beautifully photographed. The various location captions are fresh and interesting to me.
The narrative pacing, coupled with the close-in handheld-style camera work and an all-over-the-place editing approach during the action sequences, are obviously the most controversial aspects of this film, as well as a script that was clearly impacted (like LTK!) by a looming writer's strike. My position: while the visual style and editing of the action was certainly deliberate, one can only wonder how the finished product might have differed if Forster had been given a bit more time (which he clearly felt he needed).
There is a school of thought that says that such 'subjective perspective' camera/editing work effectively immerses the viewer in the chaos of the moment---where detachment and ease of perspective is impossible---and thus achieves an element of 'artistic truth.' I believe this is the case, but in QoS this clearly comes at the expense of some viewer inconvenience, which has obviously led to a sense of disenfranchisement for some, and has contributed to the polarization of the film's 'loyal Bond fan' audience. The same can be said for Forster's decision not to let certain dramatic beats play out as many might have preferred. Because of his 'bullet fired from a gun' ethos, Forster essentially demands that we keep up, which can be an alienating prospect. Many go to a Bond film to simply be entertained---not challenged---and this is certainly a valid viewpoint, so nobody should be faulted for not being happy with the finished product.
And when you consider the fact that they did not have a finished script when they were scouting locations, and that Craig and Forster probably had as much input as Purvis, Wade and Haggis on the final shooting script, the fact that it works as well as it does is nothing short of remarkable.
It is, essentially, the violent and lightning-quick third act of Casino Royale---that film's angry and misunderstood little brother. Like a bullet fired from a gun, it howls along on a short and flat trajectory, and takes its target down.
So much said here...but so much more to say. Just as well; I suppose I need to keep a few arrows in my quiver...
This film has issues and flaws...but I like it. Definite top ten for me...possible top five.
Edited by Loeffelholz, 17 November 2008 - 04:12 AM.
