Thinking back to my post on Casino Royale I remember being disappointed about the formula change but I thought that the film was pretty good. Maybe, with the success of the Matt Damon spy movies, the producers felt that Bond, James Bond needed to be Bourne, Jason Bourne?Could we have our old Bond back?
“Quantum of Solace” and its immediate predecessor, “Casino Royale,” jettisoned Q and his gimmicky toys. No travelogue-pretty footage of foreign locales. No mindless king-and-country patriotism. Miss Moneypenny is once again AWOL.
Heck, this de-mythologized Bond doesn’t even seem to enjoy sex.
In place of those cheesy but audience-friendly elements, the filmmakers have come up with … nothing. This glum effort, as directed by Marc Forster, plays like a “Bourne” movie with the reels in the wrong order. It’s frantic but never goes anywhere.
In short, “Quantum of Solace” isn’t much fun. In fact, it gets more irritating as it moves along.
Has anyone seen the movie yet? Do you agree with Butler? More importantly, should I spend the money and watch it now or catch it on video?
I just watched it yesterday and didn't like it much. I am not sure about any formula change, since I don't follow the James Bond series religiously but now that you mentioned it, I do see that it does give a somewhat different feel compared to the other ones.
ReplyDeleteI think the series went through the same thing when they had timothy dalton. the Pierce brought it back to fun. My favorite movies in the series are all the Roger Moore ones. Moonraker, Live n let die, Octopussy, For your eyes only, the spy who loved me, man with the golden Gun. I even liked a View to a Kill. And I loved it when Jaws was in it.
ReplyDelete