Where was Q, and Miss MoneyPenny?!

Rating: 6/10 (26 November 2006)

Q was missing! Gadgetry was missing - it makes Bond what it is.
The only trouble with being a Bond character after a very good Bond character, is that they tend not to last very long, i.e. Timothy Dalton after Sean Connery. For some reason, the new films seem to detract from what Bond is supposed to be and film goers will soon dictate whether a bond movie is successful or not. I suspect that Daniel Craig, although a very good and professional actor, may not last for very many films, unlike Connery, Moore, and Brosnan. Making the film away from the traditional way a bond film is made, just is not the right way to treat the bond culture. The public will have their say and will vote with their pockets on this one.
Where were Miss Money Penny, Q, and the laboratory of gadgets and engineer's working on them at HQ in London? OK, we realise that this was a way to get Daniel Craig into the role, but was this the way Pierce Brosnan was given the role?!
I am unfortunately tempted to think that this may go down as another alternative bond movie, but as it steers away from the normal style, and may not win the complete public vote. It is full of action, suspense and thriller, Yes, but Bond has always also had that element of prediction in the films as well, it was missing here. Plus there were not as many comedy moments either, and no high speed car or vehicle chases, like we are used to seeing.
I hope Daniel Craig is able to turn things around and be another Brosnan, otherwise he will simply turn into another 'in between' bond like Timothy Dalton. Sorry Daniel, but please prove me wrong!
(c) Neil Burns 2006