(no subject)
I watched a matinee of the new James Bond movie, Quantum of Solace, this afternoon. All in all, it was an enjoyable hour and forty-five minutes; I do, however, regret disregarding my impulse to rewatch Casino Royale before heading to the theatre. Unlike most Bond films, this one seems to be pursuing direct continuity with its predecessor, to which many references were made.
On the other hand, it may have been a good thing that I didn't revisit Daniel Craig's first outing as 007, since I'm sure it would have only thrown the sequel's failings into even starker relief. The plot itself is straightforward but serviceable, revolving mainly around Bond's desire to wreak cold-blooded revenge for his ladyfriend Vesper Lynd, who died at the end of Casino Royale. Along the way, he meets an attractive Bolivian operative who happens to be thirsty for some vengeance of her own. Both of them are involved in efforts to unravel the nefarious deeds of a businessman who is attempting to overthrow the Bolivian government. More importantly, he seems to be part of a shadowy international conspiracy which likes money very much, and is unafraid to do bad things to acquire it. Stunts and setpieces ensue, with both leads eventually achieving some measure of closure.
I do not count the lack of intricate twists and turns as a failing. Bond movies can deliver some good spy-movie intrigue, but they just as often go for straight action thrills. The problem here is that the action, while plentiful, is not effectively presented. One of Casino Royale's strong points was its extremely well-staged and edited action sequences; for instance, the scene in which Bond tangles with an enemy in a stairwell, tumbling from landing to landing just behind Bond's fleeing charge, struck me as memorable and well-conceived. It had a great sense of urgency and momentum. Just as importantly, I never lost track of the characters or what they were doing; indeed, the scene's urgency depended on me being precisely aware of their position in relationship to each other. This lucidity is not present in any of Quantum of Solace's action scenes, most of which consist of rapid cuts between jerky close-ups. I'm sure the intent was to evoke a sense of chaotic, fight-or-flight immediacy, and it's somewhat successful. However, it does so at the expense of the audience having any idea of what the hell is going on. This is a shame, since some of the pieces would have been quite interesting if not for the obfuscatory camera work and editing.
The other (much less substantive) thing which disappointed me was that the mysterious enemy organization ended up being called Quantum, not SPECTRE. I know, "Special Executor for Counterintelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion" is a little bit too silly for the more "realistic" tone of the two recent movies, but it would have been such a great reference, and I had been hoping for it ever since seeing the trailer.
Quantum of Solace is ultimately a solid effort, worth a watch if you're a fan of 007 or espionage-themed action movies in general. My one hope is that when James Bond returns, he will do so in the company of a better action coreographer and film editor.
On the other hand, it may have been a good thing that I didn't revisit Daniel Craig's first outing as 007, since I'm sure it would have only thrown the sequel's failings into even starker relief. The plot itself is straightforward but serviceable, revolving mainly around Bond's desire to wreak cold-blooded revenge for his ladyfriend Vesper Lynd, who died at the end of Casino Royale. Along the way, he meets an attractive Bolivian operative who happens to be thirsty for some vengeance of her own. Both of them are involved in efforts to unravel the nefarious deeds of a businessman who is attempting to overthrow the Bolivian government. More importantly, he seems to be part of a shadowy international conspiracy which likes money very much, and is unafraid to do bad things to acquire it. Stunts and setpieces ensue, with both leads eventually achieving some measure of closure.
I do not count the lack of intricate twists and turns as a failing. Bond movies can deliver some good spy-movie intrigue, but they just as often go for straight action thrills. The problem here is that the action, while plentiful, is not effectively presented. One of Casino Royale's strong points was its extremely well-staged and edited action sequences; for instance, the scene in which Bond tangles with an enemy in a stairwell, tumbling from landing to landing just behind Bond's fleeing charge, struck me as memorable and well-conceived. It had a great sense of urgency and momentum. Just as importantly, I never lost track of the characters or what they were doing; indeed, the scene's urgency depended on me being precisely aware of their position in relationship to each other. This lucidity is not present in any of Quantum of Solace's action scenes, most of which consist of rapid cuts between jerky close-ups. I'm sure the intent was to evoke a sense of chaotic, fight-or-flight immediacy, and it's somewhat successful. However, it does so at the expense of the audience having any idea of what the hell is going on. This is a shame, since some of the pieces would have been quite interesting if not for the obfuscatory camera work and editing.
The other (much less substantive) thing which disappointed me was that the mysterious enemy organization ended up being called Quantum, not SPECTRE. I know, "Special Executor for Counterintelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion" is a little bit too silly for the more "realistic" tone of the two recent movies, but it would have been such a great reference, and I had been hoping for it ever since seeing the trailer.
Quantum of Solace is ultimately a solid effort, worth a watch if you're a fan of 007 or espionage-themed action movies in general. My one hope is that when James Bond returns, he will do so in the company of a better action coreographer and film editor.