Video Review: Quantum of Solace

A big reason my blog output has been so meager the last few weeks is that I'm preparing conferences for a Salesian confreres' retreat that I've been asked to give in August.  It's actually two retreats now, since the original speaker for the first one in August had to bow out do to an assignment change. It's still only one set of talks I have to prepare, but I have a little less time to get them together now.  

In the midst of all the reading and outlining (I plan to get down to the actual writing by the end of the week) I took a break to catch a movie that surprisingly got past me, 2008's Quantum of Solace, the latest entry in the almost 50 year old James Bond franchise.  Surprising because I hardly ever miss a James Bond movie.   I liked the direction the series took when they cast Daniel Craig in the lead in 2006's Casino Royale, a "reboot" of the franchise which went back to Bond's origins to show how 007 became 007.  Quantum received lukewarm reviews when it came out, and the word of mouth I got on it from friends wasn't great either, so I dragged my feet and finally decided to wait for the video.  Little did I know it would take me almost three years to finally get around to seeing it.

I have very mixed feelings about Quantum.  Though Casino Royale is a superior movie, it's about twenty minuted too long, whereas this film is tighter and runs at a quicker pace.  The action is what one would expect from a Bond movie, with real suspense.  Even though you know 007 is going to make it through the various tight spots he gets into, there are real moments of doubt until he finally does.  Continuing the style of the first movie, the amount of physical abuse Bond takes is incredible.  It's almost sadomasochistic, to tell the truth.  This is the new, gritty, twenty-first century James Bond, which, like I wrote already, I like.  But this installment misses something that each Bond, save one, had which is a sense of humor.  The mood is so heavy and dark I almost forgot I was watching a Bond movie.  It reminded me a little of the Timothy Dalton era installments, which is not a complement.  Dalton is a good actor, but his Bond was a humorless bore, and he was dismissed from the role after two forgettable movies.   While I don't think Craig's performance deserves a sacking, I hope the next film in the series, scheduled to begin filming after lengthy delays at the end of this year, lightens the tone a bit.

At the heart of this typical mad man or in this case mad people, trying to dominate the world story, is a quest for revenge.  Vesper Lynd, Bond's love interest from the first movie who died leaving him with a broken heart and shattered ideals serves as 007's motivation.  He wants to kill the man who turned her wrong.  Even though this is the first true sequel among the Bond movies, nothing really connects the two plots except the Lynd storyline, and then it seems tacked on.   That the main plot is a bit difficult to follow doesn't help.  I can put up with the ambiguity of the plot (who sees one of these things for the story anyway?) but the insistence on making this a revenge picture darkens the entire proceeding.  Craig is dower and irritable the whole way through.  Even Felix Leiter, his buddy from the CIA, is in a perpetual bad mood.  Sean Connery, who will always be the best Bond to my mind, had an edge, but there was also a lightness of touch, a macho charm that left no mystery as to why the ladies always swooned.  Here Bond is cold and determined, with none of the class and wit of Connery or Roger Moore (who I never could warm up to, but have grown to appreciate).

Then there is the collateral damage that is just staggering for a Bond movie.  Innocent bystanders are offed with impunity (always by the bad guys, but still).  There is an opening car chase scene reminiscent of the chase in  the 1998 Robert De Niro thriller Ronin where it seemed like half of Nice ended up either in the emergency room or the morgue.  This time it's Siena, and even the people attending the biannual Palio horse race are placed in danger.  Did I mention that I like the grit and realism brought to the role by Daniel Craig? Nonetheless the producers and director seemed to forget that this is still a Bond movie.  Where's the comic relief we get from the banter with Miss Moneypenny and Q?  To totally eliminate the whimsy and charm from the series, as they have, is to move so far away from its spirit as to almost create a different character.

So a mixed review here.  The action was good, I still think Craig is the best Bond since Connery, but the gloom that hangs over this picture keeps me from recommending it.