Definitely not fantastic, but not one of the worst!

Rating: 6/10 (5 November 2012)

Of course, the expectations were high after the masterpiece Casino Royale. Too high, perhaps! It was almost impossible for a direct sequel to Casino Royale could please everyone, and of course it didn't! I mean, i've seen it many times and calling it the worst Bond film ever, is perhaps a little fetch too far. I can think of many Bond films more worse than this (Moonraker, Diamonds Are Forever, The Man With The Golden Gun, Die Another Day, etc.). My point is that it's not fantastic, but it's not that bad! Yeah, he doesn't say "Bond, James Bond" at any point in the movie... but come on, you'll survive. I know, I did. However, I will say that of course there were a lack of humor, the action was so poorly edited and there were so much action, that you actually felt bored at some times! It's definitely not one of the best, but it is a decent Bond film for some, including me.
The movie starts out almost right after Casino Royale ended. That's actually a pretty cool feeling, because you don't see that often in a Bond film. Mr. White is in the trunk of Bond's Aston Martin and Bond is being pursued by two black Alfa Romeo cars. It is actually a pretty cool opening to a Bond film, but the poorly editing leaves you with a feeling, that it could have been so much better. But editing aside it's one of the more cooler Bond openings i guess. Bond loses his pursuers, and takes White out of the trunk with the words "Time to get out." A pretty cheesy and boring Bond line if you ask me. Alicia Keys' and Jack White's new Bond song swoops in on the big screen. It's OK, but kinda different. In the rest of the movie, you can clearly see that the writer's strike has gut-punched this movie. The film uses the same formula over and over; 10 minutes action, 2 minutes talk, 10 minutes action, 2 minutes talk. It's like Forster and the producers knew they couldn't pull this film off with the plot, so they tried to fill this movie with as much action as possible. The result is too much action, poorly editing and a weak plot. Not because the plot is stupid, but because it's plain boring and so not like a Bond plot should be! However if you ignore the editing, the action is decent, and the film has some beautiful settings. But the plot doesn't work.
Daniel Craig steals the show again with his brilliant portrayal of 007. Only this time it's a different kind of portrayal than in Casino Royale. He's angry, brutal, sinister-looking and revenge-driven in the whole movie, and while I think none of the other Bond actors could have pulled it off, Craig does... and with Bravour! Craig luckily doesn't disappoint. Mathieu Almaric as Dominic Greene, the film's villain, is perhaps the most BORING Bond villain ever! He is kinda nasty in the movie, with bug-eyes and all that, and while I think Forster and co. thought that would make him memorable, the whole thing just seems kinda awkward. His performance is OK, but we never actually relate to the character (talk about lack of character development, phew!). He's basically there to be a villain, and do evil things. BIG disappointment, I must say. I don't blame Almaric, though. Olga Kurylenko is a decent Bond babe. She's kinda badass, and some few emotional scenes saves her from being marked as a bad Bond babe. Gemma Arterton's performance seems kinda dry at times, and it looks like she's afraid of taking chances with her acting, and is just staying in the secure area. Judi Dench as M is good as she always is. I've always thought that Jeffrey Wright was the right choice to play Felix Leiter, and he doesn't disappoint here, luckily. Anatole Taubman and Joaquin Cosio also manages to create unmemorable villains.
Quantum of Solace isn't one of the worst Bond films, but definitely not one of the best.
6/10