“Quantum of Solace” has been playing to critics in the U.K. and most of them are reviewing the film in an incredibly positive manner. Much like the very-solid, “Casino Royale,” it looks like this new wave of Bond is continuing in its quality mode of smart, action and entertainment. Even snobs like us thoroughly enjoyed, ‘Royale,’ so this is good to hear. Directed by more-emotional director Marc Forster, it looks like ‘Solace’s revenge story hasn’t the lost flair or touch of the previous Bond-reboot.
The London Times gave the film four out of five stars and said the film is a “bruising thriller that leaves you feeling both drained and exhilarated. The daredevil leaps and tumbles through glass roofs are just as sensational as the splintering high-speed pyrotechnics, but it’s the amount of heartache and punishment that Craig’s new Bond absorbs that makes him look so right for our times.”
The Daily Telegraph has some issues. “The expository dialogue scenes can be dull, and cram in so many machinations and double-crossings that it’s easy to lose track of who’s duping whom. And yet, several times – just when you’re tempted to consult your watch – the movie suddenly surprises.”
The Guardian is thoroughly impressed. “The movie ladles out the adrenalin in a string of deafening episodes: car chases, plane wrecks, motor boat collisions. If it’s got an engine, and runs on fuel, and can crash into another similarly powered vehicle, with Bond at the wheel, and preferably with a delicious female companion in the passenger seat – well, it goes in the movie.”
The BBC is down with the film’s economy: “Clocking in at one and three-quarter hours, it’s a good half hour shorter than 007’s previous outing. And its reduced running time results in a leaner, tauter experience.”
American critics are enjoying it as well. Or at least, Variety’s Anne Thompson has seen it and writes, “Sure, it’s glitzy and glam and jammed with heart-stopping violent action. But it’s also arty and elegant and beautiful.”
That pretty much wins us over. Sign us up for our screening, please. Remember when the title was announced and everyone went ‘meh’? Sounds like we won’t be hearing any of that any longer.
NICE!
Wow, i expected you guys to report on this film’s test screenings, but in the other way. I read a negative review courtesy of aintitcoolnews that i normally wouldn’t put alot of faith in, but for some reason i can forsee what the reviewer says to be a serious make or break the film problem.
“No, the issues are with the studio’s choice of director in Marc
Forster. This is a man who knows how to put dramatic audiences through
the wringer (Monster’s Ball, Finding Neverland, The Kite Runner) but
he’s completely out of his depth handling a franchise this large.
High-tempo sequences, like the opening car chase and an extremely
Bournian rooftop pursuit, are disorientating in the extreme: too fast,
too sloppy and too ruthlessly edited. Often, things change in the
blink of an eye – one second Bond is lying on his back, the next he’s
jumping out a window, the next he’s swinging from a rope. It’s often
impossible to keep up.
Fight scenes often seem practised and stagey (Bond smashes an opponent
through a wall with ridiculous ease), while one shot sees 007 riding a
motorbike… at about 25mph. These are all hallmarks of a director
unfamiliar with action; perhaps former Paul Greengrass protege Dan
Bradley should be held responsible (it would certainly explain the
feeling of deja vu – as Bond jumps through yet another window, you may
feel like yelling, Alan Partridge style, “STOP GETTING BOURNE
WRONG!”).
What’s more, the realistic tone struck by Martin Campbell in Casino
Royale has taken something of a leave of absence here. MI6 use flashy,
over-the-top Minority Report-style holo-computers, when anyone who
reads the papers knows that British intelligence can’t even hop in a
taxi without leaving their laptop in the back. Bond, leaping on a bad
guy’s bonnet, finds time to fire of a clunky quip before his bullet.
Amalric’s bad guy lurches uncomfortably from believably slimy to
ridiculously evil, lunging at Bond with an axe in a final showdown.
Though I hesitate to compare it to Indy’s infamous ‘fridge’ escape,
the scene where 007 jumps out of a plane without a parachute /and
survives/ seems a little too far-fetched even for a Bond movie. All we
ask is for some consistency – this isn’t Crank, this is Bond.”
Being an action stickler, this isn’t good news, and reminds me of all the talk about Chris Nolan not being able to direct action. And although i loved the Dark Knight, there were action scenes in it that really didn’t flow.