Not as groundbreaking as they claim.

Rating: 7/10 (11 April 2009)

I'm a little disappointed with the direction these new James Bond films have taken. First "Casino Royale" was billed as a reinvention of everyone's favorite government sanctioned assassin. Now "Quantum of Solace" is being billed as the same, if for no other reason than it's standing as a direct sequel. But, the way I see it, these films aren't rethinking Bond as much as they're just making him dirtier. Many parts of this approach do have merit.
Daniel Craig's commitment to the character of James Bond is commendable. The guy works out religiously, so he looks quite imposing and capable on screen. Also, he wears this kind of dead man, 1,000 yard stare throughout both films. In doing this, the actor really demonstrates that the secret to Bond's flippant and cavalier attitude is that he's been hollowed out and relatively dehumanized under the weight of his job—kudos to Craig.
Judy Dench as M makes me wonder what the hell the franchise had been doing without her for over thirty years. Dame Dench is old enough to be my grandmother, but she still comes off as 125% badass all of the time. And her character doesn't have the luxury of being able to shoot people down to sell how hardcore she is. For Dench, just like with Craig, the acting is all in the eyes—fierce eyes that seem to dissect you.
Also, I have to mention the inspired casting of Jeffrey Wright as Felix Lytener. He didn't have too much to do in the first film. But in this one he managed to do something which hasn't been done before. He gave Felix enough charisma and presence to actually hold several scenes all on his own. Also, Wright manages to make Felix come off as being even more burned out than Bond—pretty badass acting seeing as how we only get to see him sitting down most of the time.
The stunt-work in these two films eclipses the work done in all of the previous movies put together. I'm not talking about the Parkour. I'm talking about the fights. Combat, as depicted in most Bond films (with the exceptions of "From Russia with Love" and "Golden Eye") has always been too neat. I never really believed I was watching two characters fighting for the right to keep breathing. "Casino Royale" and "Quantum of Solace" changed this. Bond takes some serious punishment, but dishes out even more. The scene I feel really showed this was in "Solace", when he was ambushed in Haiti by another assassin. The scene was short, visceral, and relatively bloody. Yes, Bond won. But he was injured and had to wash the blood from his face and dress his arm before moving on. Having him do this without flinching or even breathing hard really put in perspective how chillingly lethal this character can be. Now is where my review takes a negative turn.
Despite the stellar casting and acting; and despite the jaw-dropping fisticuffs, this feels like an old Roger Moore Bond film. You have a bad guy who wants to control a natural resource ("The Spy Who Loved Me"). Said bad guy is wheeling and dealing with corrupt locals to further his own agenda ("A View to a Kill"). There is a high speed boat chase ("Moonraker"). An overly elaborate structure, in the middle of nowhere, is destroyed in a series of explosions (every Bond film). Last, but not least, Bond has to have one girl for each arm (one to use and one to lose), because that's how he rolls—no matter how antiquated a notion of masculinity or unrealistic.
In short, I didn't find "Quantum of Solace" to really be that different from the 22 movies that preceded it. Yeah, there are a few changes. There aren't any super cars or gadgets, which could never exist in real life, for him to lean on. Bond isn't always dressed like he just stepped out of a country club. American and British intelligence aren't always on the same page. Oh, and there is now the great taste of Parkour—something I'm rapidly growing sick of. But when it's all said and done, all of this is akin to slapping a fresh coat of paint on an old car.
When the next Bond film arrives, if it is to truly be unique, go for an R rating. Bond is an inordinately skilled killer who happens to be promiscuous. Yet, the violence is never too graphic. The love scenes are always too sanitized to have any impact. Seeing as how this is a terribly violent and highly sexual character, the gloves should finally come off. There should be blood when someone is either shot or stabbed. It would be realistic to have people swearing if they were gravelly injured or dying. Also, if nudity was a possibility, there probably wouldn't be as many love scenes which serve no purpose. And, if there still were, a little skin would make them infinitely more bearable.
Instead of Bond stopping a megalomaniacal conspiracy, target his standing as an MI-6 assassin in a smaller scale story. Have M dispatch 007 to locate and kill an enemy of the state who has gone abroad. Stay away from the good old standbys: implausible car chases, gunfights in crowded areas, exceedingly complex set pieces, free running, exploding hideouts, and ladies who are only there to service the lead. Instead of this, throw in some geopolitical intrigue by having the British and American Intelligence communities officially be at odds (save for Lytener and Bond). Lastly, show that Bond is not the only 00 agent. If this were true, Britain would be royally f*#ked. After 23 flicks, I want a story that shows how Bond is much more of an antihero than outright good guy. Hell, after 23 flicks, I think everyone does—including the actors.