Not Bad, Just Not Bond

Rating: 7/10 (28 November 2008)

I've been a Bond fan for a long time. I don't mind the occasional "re-interpretations" of Bond and enjoyed Casino Royale (although it did need the "Bond, James Bond" quote and music at the end to keep me happy).
The problem with Quantum of Solace is not that its a bad film. Its actually a quite good thriller, although I could do without Marc Foster's blurring camera-work during the action scenes, that moves along quickly and which looks like an expensive, slick Hollywood movie is expected to.
No, my problem with Quantum of Solace is that its like those movie adaptations of popular novels. You know the ones - where the director/writer/producer decide to "interpret" the novel and so what you end up with is a familiar title, character names and not much else that got you into the cinema in the first place.
So, like a lot of people, I'm asking where are the elements that make this a Bond film? Why have the producers almost completely removed the traditional Bond music? Why does the "gunbarrel" opening now take place right at the end? Why is there virtually no humour? (I don't need Roger Moore, but an occasional one-liner wouldn't hurt). Why is there no Q? (I don't need an invisible car, but one gadget would be nice) Of even more concern is an excessive ugliness of tone in the film. Its only brief, but there is a closeup of a gunshot wound, that seems completely gratuitous, as does the photo of a mutilated head. Likewise the attempted rape scene at the end is not what I expect in Bond.
Daniel Craig is a fine Bond and if the writers can have him looking a little less like the victim of a car crash for most of the movie and give him a clever quip now and then, I think he will rank with Brosnan and Connery.
Like the dedicated fan I am, I'll go along to the next Bond in a couple of years - but Michael Wilson and Barbara Broccoli, it better be Bond I'm going to see and not some well made clone.