Focus on the film not the legend

Rating: 8/10 (2 November 2008)

I think the problem here is that a lot of people are either bemoaning QoS because of its lack of Bond elements and because it is not as good as Casino Royale. This isn't really the best way to approach a film is it? I take on board the too fast - too close editing and the fast forward travelogue style of the film, but overall this is a really gripping film. Casino Royale was successful partly because it followed a run of tired Bond cliché's and Daniel Craig was not deemed suitable by many as a successor to Brosnan (unbelievable now). QoS is never going to have that same surprise element as CR, but it does exactly what it said it would, it has continued in the same gritty no holds barred style. To re-introduce Q, Moneypenny and unbelievable gadgets would be redundant now, they would be a parody of former glories from a time when they were a novelty, nothing more. Even M's interactive Minority Report style "table" in QoS jars a little and seems a step too close to the days of Q - and pointless. I am also puzzled by claims that we don't get to know much about Bond's character in the film, when we do. The action does dominate about the first third of the film, but we do get to know Bond sufficiently after that for what is essentially an action film. The final segments particularly reveal a great deal about his character. For the very first time with CR, I totally bought into the romance story, and I was so glad to see a lack of one in QoS, what would be the point. His one sexual encounter proves that he is still the Bond we expect and love, but there are no deep feelings yet, Vesper's still fresh in her grave. My only concession to the bring back our Bond campaigners would be for the return of the gun barrel opening. Through all Bond's many changes, yes this has happened before (OHMSS, FYEO), the opening gunshot has remained a welcome constant, and unlike Q, Moneypenny and gadgets, it has not become dated. It did work at the end of QoS but would have been much better placed at the start where it belongs. Watch it again people, not as a Bourne imitation or a poor relation to its predecessor, but as a good Bond movie that finally puts the hard hearted bastard that Ian Fleming envisaged on the screen.