Quantum of Solace

Went and saw the new Bond film last night. Pretty good. It was a solid bond flick. Not as good as Casino Royale.

Biggest thing that bugged me was the airplane chase sequence. If you know anything about airplanes, the whole thing was totally preposterous. And if Bond isn't above stealing vehicles, why did he pay money for a less capable and more complex airplane, rather than simply hopping in one of the more capable airplanes shown next to it.

Beyond that, it was good escapist fun with some great action sequences. The dangling rope fight was badass.

Salanis wrote: If you know anything about *insert technology here*, the whole thing was totally preposterous.

That's true of all Bond films...

But how was the advertising? There's no way I could tolerate more than the last movie had, they nearly ruined the whole thing with their "product placement" (which is sort of like calling a hurricane "wind placement").

Other than Ford, it wasn't too bad. Ford was pretty blatant.

I liked Casino a lot, even though the whole lovey dovey part in the middle brought the momentum to a screeching halt. Quantum didn't have that problem.... they skipped the smoochy stuff for more car chases and blowing stuff up. I'm OK with that.

You mean the never-ending parade of Fords?

That's all he ever drove, but at least they didn't go out of their way to expound the virtues of any of them.

The Ford Edges did get annoying, but I thought it was a decent movie. The only other complaint I had was the same one I have of all modern action movies: everything is filmed WAYYYY too close up, so during the action scenes you have no idea who's who.

Salanis wrote: You mean the never-ending parade of Fords? That's all he ever drove, but at least they didn't go out of their way to expound the virtues of any of them.

Nah, he also drove the Aston Martin, a Volvo, and a Range Rover (off the top of my head). Surprised they didn't stick him in a Mazda, too.

Action was good.

Plot and villian sucked. I mean, what WAS the plot? It was like reading every other page of a Clive Cussler novel.

That said, the action was very, very good, and I enjoyed it. Isn't that what a Bond flick is all about?

It was OK about what I was expecting but the chase scenes sucked. Each shot was so short, mostly less than a second, and jumped around so much I got bored with it and my eyes started wandering around the theater.

I thought Judi Dench was the best part of the film. I also think she had some of the best lines, too.

Like: "Everyone says they 'have people everywhere.' Florists say they have people everywhere."

Twin_Cam wrote: ..The only other complaint I had was the same one I have of all modern action movies: everything is filmed WAYYYY too close up, so during the action scenes you have no idea who's who.

I guess we should call that the "Bourne" effect. I can see it as appropriate in some circumstances to show the confusion of the situation (kind of like the hand held style of Private Ryan), but if it is supposed to be an action movie, I think people really want to SEE the action.

Going tonight

Not enough scantily clad Bond girls for me. Not enough Daniel Craig in speedo for my wife. Otherwise, very entertaining.

the bond girl (Olga Kurylenko...I think) was the prettiest of them all, and I really liked her Ka.

good action, very entertaining, yet somehow I was left wanting something more... the plot was very uninvolving. Not interested in seeing it again...Casino Royale was WAY better.

Yeah, the editing was a little choppy in spots, and the camera refused to sit still. At least the camera appeared to be mounted on something, and not the super-shaky Bourne style.

But my wife and friend enjoyed it, and I certainly wasn't complaining. I loved the fact that Bond is apparently a kleptomaniac.

I have to agree about the action sequences. Crap shooting. I can follow action but there were plenty of scenes where I was like "WTF just happened? Grappling hook where did what?"