It's no secret that I'm a 007 fan. Naturally I've been excited about the latest installment "Quantum of Solace". I finally saw it and now I will offer my review of it. My review won't be so much a review as a scathing response to the film critics out there that have been highly critical of this film. As I've stated before, if you're going to get paid to offer your opinion on a movie, you need to actually go and make one first. It's because of this that critics are basically lucky fanboys who somehow dropped into the opportunity to share their opinion to make money, yet really know nothing of the filmmaking process or anything else for that matter. So here we go!
Leading up to my viewing of "Quantum", I had peered at various reviews critics had posted, even critics overseas. The consensus seemed mixed. Common criticisms were that Bond seemed to be nothing more than a cold-hearted killer with zero emotion. Variety critics stated that the film didn't seem like a stand-alone film, just a short anecdote. Roger Ebert (who I've had a distaste for ever since he berated "Gladiator", yet praised "Tomb Raider"), went as far as to say that Bond wasn't an "action hero", but a man that just wants to mill around, finish the job, and then have a cigarette (NOTE: Pierce Brosnan ended Bond's smoking habit. Why should a man that can get shot and not die be killed by a cigarette?). The editing was also criticized for being too frantic and hard to decipher. It was criticized for not having a strong female lead outside of Judi Dench and losing all of that "traditional" Bond humor and charm. Reading all of this actually prepared me for something that was going to be less than my original expectations. I watched it and about half-way through the film, I became puzzled. I was puzzled about all of the criticisms that I had read. I saw no evidence of such things, almost as though the critics had seen a different film. I very much enjoyed "Quantum"! Allow me to debunk these criticisms individually;
1. Bond is a cold-hearted killer with no emotion and no humor. He is nothing more than a "blunt instrument".
This couldn't be more untrue. Daniel Craig's Bond is probably the most emotionally complex of any previous Bond incarnations. In "Quantum" we pretty much experience a Bond that is still grieving from the loss of Vesper Lynd in "Casino Royale". He feels a deep sense of pain, yet tries to shrug his feelings off on the exterior when asked about Vesper. He even secretly pockets a file photo of Vesper in the film, just so he can carry her image with him, which he looks at later in the film with a somber manner. This is an emotionally broken Bond. As far as humor goes, Bond delivers all of the sarcastic quips and smart-arse remarks that you would normally expect. None of that has been lost, despite what critics say. People in the theater were laughing at his colorful remarks. Yes, Craig's Bond is a blunt instrument of sorts, but he's James Bond, not Cliff Huxtable!
2. The film did not seem like a stand-alone film, was edited frantically, and was more action than substance.
I can only partially agree with one criticism here. The action sequences at the beginning of the film are cut a little frantically and are sometimes hard to follow, but I have a feeling that this is due mostly in-part to the fact that it's on a big screen and cutting like that can have that effect. On a smaller screen, it would be less frantic. I know these things, I'm an editor and a cinematographer... Is Ebert? No. The film felt very much like a stand-alone film, only it would be best for it to stand as a companion to "Casino Royale" since it is the first direct Bond sequel in the franchise's history. The ending of the film almost presents itself as a beginning of greater things to come. I'm really at a loss when I hear critics say that it was all action and no substance. "Quantum" feels a lot like any other Bond film in that the action is broken-up throughout, with story and plot development filling the gaps. No substance? What do critics expect?! "The English Patient"?!
3. There are no strong female leads in the film outside of Judi Dench. There is nothing "traditional" Bond.
I agree that Judi Dench's M is a strong character, but she seems to be more like Bond's mother than anything else. "Quantum" introduces Olga Kurylenko as Camille. Kurylenko is actually of Ukrainian descent, yet plays a South American woman. I found her to be a great companion to Bond. She didn't really act as Bond's lover either. She was more of a "I'll watch your back, if you watch mine" kind of partner. Not only is she beautiful, but she is a woman who is aggressive and independent. I've had a longtime affinity for women that can hold their own and beat the crap out of an aggressor. The whole "damsel in distress" thing doesn't do it for me. There is also Gemma Arterton who is equally beautiful, although she only has what could amount to a cameo in the film. Arterton portrays Strawberry Fields, which brings me to the criticisms about the film straying from "traditional" Bond fare. Take the name Strawberry Fields for example. Is that not traditional Bond? Remember, this is the franchise that has featured women with names like Pussy Galore and Christmas Jones. Without spoiling anything, I'll also note that there is a stark homage to "Goldfinger" featuring the Fields character. Just because Craig doesn't say "The name's Bond. James Bond." at any point in the film doesn't make it an outcast from the franchise. "Casino Royal" and "Quantum" have reinvented the franchise and have brought about a new sense of realism, albeit heightened. The Fields character even goes so far as to not utter her first name for fear of embarrassment. Modern international politics are discussed a few times during the film, a quality that some critics have criticized. Bond is a secret service agent for the British government! If he didn't know about international politics, than he wouldn't be in the line of work that he is in! You may fret when you don't see the iconic gun barrel opening, but don't despair! You'll see it by the end of the film!
Overall, I really enjoyed "Quantum of Solace". I invite you to ignore the critics on this one. Typically, while I don't always agree, I can see why critics say what they do about a film. With "Quantum" I just don't understand their interpretation. What I saw was great! Sure it's not as awesome as "Casino Royale", but it was still very enjoyable! Go see it!
0 comments:
Post a Comment