Quantum of Solace Review
By Joe Lozito
Bond and Determined
The James Bond franchise (one of the most successful in film history) has always been about formula. So calling a Bond movie formulaic is like called Blofeld a cat-lover. It goes without saying. Occasionally, every decade or so (less in the case of the unfairly derided George Lazenby), the franchise will stir things up a bit with the introduction of a new Bond actor. It's a different face but, generally, it's the same old game. Gadgets, girls, martinis, and globe-trotting action. Bond, James Bond.
2006's "
Casino Royale" did more than introduce a new Bond. It did what Hollywood likes to call a "reinvention". And it did it very well. Gone was the suave, quipping tippler of past, post-Sean Connery films, and in its place was Daniel Craig, a strong, silent, decidedly brutish Bond, more comfortable delivering a black eye than a bon mot. The result was the highest-grossing film in the franchise thus far, so the producers can be forgiven for doing little more than returning to the "Royale" trough again with "Quantum of Solace", a fast-paced actioner and the first straight sequel in Bond franchise history.
"Quantum" picks up moments after Bond captures the nefarious Mr. White (Jesper Christensen) at the end of "Casino". Still hurting from the death of lady love Vesper Lynd (and repressing it like a steely-eyed champ), Bond becomes a one-man army (isn't he always?), killing his way to the top of the mysterious organization that gives the film's title its unwieldy first word. Bond's personal vendetta doesn't sit well with M (Dame Judi Dench, ruling MI6 with an iron expression) and she's forced to relieve him of duty. That, of course, is easier said than done.
Of course, "going rogue" (to coin a popular recent term) is nothing new for Bond. Lest we forget, it was the raison d'etre for 1989's second (and last) Timothy Dalton entry "Licence to Kill". But in this case, the zippy, loose script (one of the shorter in the franchise) by Paul Haggis, Neal Purvis & Robert Wade (who also penned "Casino") plays up the amusingly maternal cat-and-mouse relationship between M and Bond. And truly, any time Ms. Dench and Mr. Craig are on screen together, you get a glimpse of the Bond movie that could have been.
The rest of the movie - as a Bond film is wont to do - hops from location to location (Italy, Haiti, Austria, Bolivia) in a series of loosely strung together (and even more loosely filmed) action setpieces. Marc Forster ("
The Kite Runner", "
Monster's Ball") is an odd directorial choice for a Bond movie. He has clearly studied "Royale" and the work of Paul Greengrass (the film's opening car chase is pure "
Bourne Supremacy"), but as an action director Mr. Forster proves to be more comfortable on land than at sea (a boat chase is nearly incomprehensible), in the air (ditto an aerial dogfight), or even at the opera (a weirdly juxtaposed shoot-out is too clever by half).
The script's predilection for topical hot buttons, like the environment and oil, bares the distinct smell of Haggis, and by the time Bond faces off against Dominic Greene (the villainous land baron played by Mathieu Amalric with crazy-eyed glee), in the desert version of the ice hotel from "
Die Another Day", you're likely to forget how you got there. But you'll know that everyone has gotten what's coming to them and, aside from everything else, the movie's over.
Though you'll be forgiven for forgetting it's a Bond movie. There are no gadgets (with the exception of the Microsoft-Surface-run-amok MI6 HQ), no martinis (save an odd exchange on a private jet), even the women are just along for the (ahem) ride. With the exception of the theme song (the less said about the abrasive Jack White-Alicia Keys duet the better) and a direct, gutsy homage to "Goldfinger", there's not much Bond to "Quantum". You won't even hear him introduce himself in his inimitable way.
I have nothing against a franchise reboot, but do we really need to forget our roots? Now that the Bond formula has been both shaken and stirred, these films have more in common with Jason Bourne than James Bond. Yes, they're crowd-pleasers - they deliver the action goods, but is that all we have left? Forgive me if I'd prefer these films had more than a quantum of Bond.
