Directors: Marc Forster
Actors: Daniel Craig, Jesper Christensen, Judi Dench, Mathieu Amalric, Olga Kurylenko and Gemma Arterton
Studio: MGM
Release Date: March 24, 2009
Since 2006, before speaking on the subject, Bond fans now have to state their position before speaking on the subject of the films. I will follow the new tradition and just state that I think Daniel Craig is the most watchable Bond. I word it in such a way as I’m not sure what ‘best’ Bond means, though I think longevity and general storied accolades have some value, so I’m not prepared to say the man is ‘better’ than Connery, or Moore. It’s merely a preference, like being partial to Suchet over Finney and Ustinov. Craig simply is what the Bond franchise needed so not to come off as a mawkish homagic disaster. The idea on a franchise like this – of any franchise – is to create a current launch point that invites more growth today, not to bust one load in tribute of what has come before. The latter would have to be comedic – you can’t out Austin Powers Mike Myers. There is no need to go further on how much I enjoyed Craig’s Casino Royale than just saying that it’s likely my favorite 007 film. In the same breath I can tell you that I also thought it was rather long, and felt like somewhere there was twenty minutes on the film that didn’t need to be there. Quantum of Solace, however, weighs in as the slimmest of Bond movies with a run time of just over an hour and a half. In some sense it’s one of those lessons in bewaring what you ask for. It begins literally right after Casino Royale, and we are introduced to an organization (Quantum) that’s reach includes being able to infiltrate MI6 at its highest levels.
(edit)
This is where I had to come back and add that the antagonist was one ‘Dominic Greene’ (played by Mathieu Amalric- who was terrific in Munich) a construct that seemed intentionally created to be well . . .. rather forgettable.

Like all Bond movies, there are Bond girls. Though they are certainly gorgeous, they don’t seem to be given much to do. It was a situation in which I left the film thinking that I should feel more strongly about Camille and Strawberry, but in finding myself not doing so, I didn’t think less of either Olga Kurylenko and Gemma Arterton – both of whom are going to be in forthcoming roles – Centurion (Kurylenko), Prince of Persia, Clash of the Titans, (Arterton) – that I‘m very much looking forward to. They seem to be written as if unwanted, almost as if they were holdover elements of the prior Bonds that aren’t welcome but are known to not to be discardable. There was a almost a forced irrelevance here that I felt plagued the Catrina Murino role in the last film, but this film has no Eva Green role to balance it. This may very well be intentional, as the gravitas of the effect of Green to this iteration of Bond is something that very much defines (and continues to define) the immediate motivations and actions of this 007. Better than any other word, ‘immediacy’, perhaps best describes and separates the Craig Bond. It’s still personal; the world certainly is enough, more visceral Bond, that isn’t quite so fantastically removed from the world as previous incarnations. The world isn’t quite his bitch yet, and while he’s certainly a player, he’s not the ultimate debonair playboy – at least not insufferable so, comfortable with orgasmic ‘Christmas’ puns. For this we are most thankful, and Craig does nothing in Quantum Solace that makes me think he shouldn’t be Bond for the foreseeable future.
All around, there isn’t much to complain about from the cast. Jeffrey Wright is always a favorite of mine and shines when given the chance, but for the second film in a row seems under utilized. Dench is an institution, and Jesper Christensen is back and effective as Mr. White. The pieces were present, there just didn’t seem much for them to do that was coherent, and one aspect of Bond that should never be let go is the quality of universal clarity. There is a haphazardness and randomness to the actual plot that doesn’t do the rest of production credit. It seems especially odd coming from Marc Forster, the force behind absolute favorites of mine in Monster’s Ball, Stranger than Fiction, and Finding Neverland. All films that find themselves.
That said, while I’m certainly no film student, what I said above (back to immediacy) doesn’t seem to play out to in terms of transitioning tension. When we watch something like the Bourne movies, the movement of the camera, especially in action-scenes, creates a personal tension – a personal danger – that we don’t feel in this movie, even as we get the feeling it’s the very effect attempting to be mimicked. To be honest, a lot of the action scenes are simple rather hard to follow. You want to follow, but you can’t, and in the end, worse than seeing something that doesn’t satisfy – you feel like you missed something that would or should. It’s rather frustrating. Furthermore, the cut scenes – that at times quickly change locale – present pictures, but Quantum of Solace seems to often either lose it’s framing narrative with such frequency that at times you forget that it has one.
In the end, Quantum of Solace is a mix bagged. While it lacks the pure adventure of witnessing the reinvention of Bond that transcended simple novelty and became something of a mini-revelation, it does avoids being a complete disappointment. The fact that it can’t circumvent being compared to it predecessor, and you walk away with it not hating the experience speaks volumes (on both Craig movies). This, however, doesn’t change the fact that Quantum of Solace at times feels a bit too much of an addendum of the first more than it does a true sequel, much less its own feature. It’s an at times exciting movie that impresses in-the-moment, but in reflection leaves no impression. Yet, it’s still recommendable.
It’s perhaps an optimal afterthought to Casino Royale that at the same time struggles to avoid being nothing but an afterthought on its own.
Extra Features: Not much to talk about. Fills up a list, but amounts to what you’d think you’d find on online at official website under press/media kits. Excluding Bond on Location, a 20+ minutes featuring working with the setting and stunt work. There really isn’t much to get excited about with trailers and music videos. There is a Crew Files feature that looks interesting, but ends up looking like previews of what will come on forthcoming, premium editions of the DVD.
Jan-ken-pon is the time traveling, force-walking, multiverse crossing column of Jay Tomio, owner of 1/3 of everything you see currently on screen, and the editor of Heliotrope. He’ll show you his magnum opus. Some call him the Bodhisattva.












I never was that big on the Bond franchise but I quite like Casino Royale. I liked that they tried to inject a little more psychological realism into the character. Haven’t seen this one yet as I was waiting for it to come out on DVD.
On an aside, Jesper Christensen is a very fine actor. He did some of his best work in Per Fly’s movies.
I’m not a crazy Bond freak either. I certainly enjoy the movies, but not so much and so indebted where I hate the Pierce Brosnan movies – I kind of take them all in stride (I tend to be that way in general though!). That said, I certainly appreciated what Craig brought to the table in this reimagining of the character.
RE Christensen: This film is filled with actors who seem to do better work elsewhere. It’s cast seems built to offer something they just were allowed to do, almost as if – with good taste – completely mismatched. As I noted above, I thought it seemed so odd considering the director, as all around this a very enviable list of contributors on this film. Just never became its own movie for me.
I just watched this last night and was very happy with it. I am a Bond fan; always have been, and I usually prefer the good old Sean Connery films. I think Craig really captures the multi-faceted creation that is Bond. I really liked everything about this movie – I was sorry to see it end.
For me it was solid. Even though I found the movie very evasive – and unnecessarily forced so – it was still okay to watch the one time, and at the end of the day it certainly is not anything remotely close to the worst Bond film.