Quantum is an enjoyable piece of work, but the 'masters' behind the picture disappoint.

Rating: 6/10 (2 November 2008)

There have been some pretty stupid James Bond films. A wining media mogul has tried to start WWIII so he can get 24-hour news coverage exclusivity in China, and someone has tried to make a deadly satellite out of diamonds. But beyond the stupidity of diamonds and boring villains, there is a presence, a style in every Bond films that makes a statement and provides an explanation for why Bond has lasted 22(+) films. Then, after 20 films, Casino Royale was released. Arguably one of the best bond films ever, its gritty violence and stylish brutality seemed to fuse the old, witty James Bond, with a new, revamped '00' together perfectly. This showed in the box-office results too, becoming the highest grossing bond film so for, meaning there was bound to be a sequel.
So, where to go for the sequel? Nearly all the books had already been transferred on to celluloid in varying amounts of success, and a remake would seem like the bond franchise had finally ran out of steam. So EON hire Paul Haggis, writer of Best Picture winner Crash, along with 'master' director Marc Forster, responsible for Monsters Ball and Stranger than Fiction. However, does it not seem a strange choice to assemble a cast of 'character' and 'drama' directors, producers and storytellers to present a James Bond film that should be laden with style, wit, irony and action? It is a strange choice, and it has back-fired on the new Bond instalment harshly. Forster seems lost amongst the need for big explosions and pirouetting cars, his mind only having the capacity to command the cold Daniel Craig, who performs at a level Sean Connery would admire, if not feel threatened by. The story by Haggis jumps around incoherently more than James Bonds need to travel to every exotic location. The organisation of Quantum appears, then disappears, characters twiddle their thumbs and sit in the background uneasy, all because again of the action sequences. The film's narrative and direction is halted by Craig slamming into walls and punching foreigners, which fail to fuse and cohere to any aspect of the film. Perhaps these action sequences are a result of another peculiar cast member, Second Unit Director Dan Bradley, who worked on the previous two Jason Bourne instalments. Would he bring over the shaky-camera shots that Paul Greengrass (director of the two previous Bourne movies) has made a signature style that many action movies have recently imitated? Unfortunately, yes, he did, and it may work for the reclusive Bourne, but it doesn't work for Bond. In the opening action sequences (there are two really), the camera feels like it has been operated by a drunken man running away from lion, and the $200 million worth of scenes are almost wasted by frenetic, out-of-control and unnecessarily fast-cutting editing and barely watchable camera shaking.
It's a shame really, but it is strange that at the end of the film you feel pleasantly happy and satisfied with Quantum of Solace. For the camera direction may be shaky, but it is immensely engaging. The Jason Bourne series was better than Quantum of Solace, so Bourne added to Bond is in some way a good connection. The plot may be a jungle of incoherence and insoluble plot threads, but it is a level up and provides a solid base for the coming films. The villain may have a dim character reminiscent of a mouse, but Daniel Craig puts on a 'true' Bond performance. Flemming actually described bond as 'cold, ironic and brutal,' and Craig is exactly that, whereas Pierce Brosnon was a slimy, grimy character whose dialogue consisted of innuendo and nothing else. Quantum of Solace may feel like a set up for a new series of Bond films, but it is a passable set up for its collection of Bourne-like action sequences and unsentimental, vicious conviction. However, may the producers heed a warning from Bond's latest outing. They have stripped Bond bare of his gadgets, one-liners, seeming invincibility and shaken-not-stirred style; but they can't forget it, and layering all that carefully and delicately back on may prove a challenge.