ARTICLE TOOLS

E-mail story

Comments

Printer friendly version

iPod friendly version

Share This

Text Size: A A A A

New Bond flick lacks the franchise's trademark flair

By: Holly Leber
(Contact)

By: Casey Phillips
(Contact)

Included in this article

CASEY PHILLIPS: I really wanted to love “Quantum of Solace.” The combination of a new James Bond; Daniel Craig, a new director; Marc Forster; and a more down-to-Earth approach to the franchise made 2006’s “Casino Royale” easily my favorite Bond flick.

That set my expectation level into the stratosphere for “Quantum,” but the plausibility of the plot actually works against it this time around.

The lack of a clear antagonist with a significantly evil agenda, a dearth of traditional Bond trappings such gadgets and bedroom antics and a much darker tone mean that, even though it’s still a very good action/spy flick, “Quantum” ends up feeling more “Bourne” than “Bond.” With any other movie, that wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing, but here, it just feels like a loss of identity (no pun intended).

HOLLY LEBER: Call me sacrilegious, but I’ve never been one to ride on the Bond bandwagon. In fact, the recent ones especially seem to all have the same effect on me — I tend to black out during at least a portion of it. “Quantum of Solace” was no different. The sections that did hold my interest had me vacillating between primal enjoyment of watching buildings explode and people getting the applesauce beaten out of them, and contemplation of what brand of logic the Bond franchise is meant to have us following.

And truly, let’s be logical for a moment — James Bond ought to be leaning on a walker and popping Viagara. So abandoning the camp just doesn’t really work. Even more, for the degree to which the movie tries to take itself seriously, I found myself actually caring for a total of about six minutes. If it ain’t broke...

CASEY: I cared, just less than I expected. “Casino Royale” managed to insert some clever in-jokes and homages to Bond days of yore, but this movie’s tale of a fight against Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), a faux environmentalist out to ransom a South American country for the use of its water supply, seemed too realistic for its own good.

That’s not to say there weren’t over-the-top stunt sequences. There were plenty, including a spectacular opening car chase/gun battle and the mid-air fisticuffs atop scaffolding that ended the trailers.

Still, I often found myself scratching my head going, “OK, this is cool, but why does (Bad Guy A) deserve this?”

One of the greatest disappointments was requisite “Bond girl” Camille (Olga Kurylenko), whose backstory I found less compelling than that of “Casino’s” Vesper Lynd (Eva Green). The romantic chemistry between Bond and Camille is but a shadow of that with Lynd.

HOLLY: Kurylenko definitely has the prerequisite hot girl factor going — she looks equally good coiffed in a cocktail dress or post-trauma in cargos, but sexy plus sexy does not necessarily equal chemistry, and the spark between her and Craig didn’t really catch. Frankly, I don’t think the audience would have believed a “Do Not Disturb” sign unless there was a proposition of pinochle, so perhaps it was best to not even try to fake a romance there.

Actually, the non-romantic chemistry between Craig and Judi Dench, as M, was pretty interesting. She, he says, looks on him as something of a son. It’s fun to see the moments in which her no-nonsense exterior is cracked.

CASEY: Ultimately, I think Bond fans should see this movie, regardless of what we say.

I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone who hasn’t seen “Casino Royale,” though, since this film depends more on its predecessor than any other in the series. Keep your expectations high — but tempered.

HOLLY: One day, when all of us over 25 are either dead or wearing dentures, the Bond swan song will come and will reveal that James Bond is actually a unique nano-robot. If I’m still alive when that time arrives, I will raise my tapioca in triumph.

Considering the box office numbers, however, it’s not unlikely that Bond will outlive us all.

Comments