It has the curse of a sequel, Never better than its predecessor

Rating: 10/10 (21 November 2008)

I have seen every Bond film from the beginnings' Casino Royale to Craig's era and have to say that out of the seven actors including David Niven that have played Bond, Daniel Craig is, in my opinion, as good as Sean Cannery's depiction. I have learnt from growing up with the Bond franchise that there are two different types of Bond. You have the interesting, suave, sexy, brooding killer that hooks you to the screen and makes you feel in danger and they are played by Connery, Dalton and Craig. Then you have the hilarious, Witty, Sexy, cool and gadget, girls and Q filled Bonds played by Moore and Brosnan. I'm not even going to get into Lazenby who quite frankly was the worst Bond ever and although I did enjoy On Her Majesty's Secret Service, his Bond was a joke that spoke to the camera. To get back on point I have to say that I think Casino Royale is up there as one of the best Bond films of all time with Diamonds are Forever, The Spy Who Loved Me, Licence to Kill and Tomorrow Never Dies, but Quantum of Solace, no offence to Craig was as bad as Octopussy. The cinematography was messy and horrible, the action was bafflingly unwatchable and the story was, when understood finally after further reading, absolutely pathetically simple. Mark Forster should never have directed a high profile Film such as this which requires a lot of responsibility. They say they've removed Bond's iconic trademarks like the Bond girls, the Gadgets, the cars, the Q's and the Money penny's because Bond has to earn them first, but I think they've also removed Bond and replaced him with Jason Bourne. In my opinion the Bond movies should be made by British film makers, British directors and written by British writers because it's getting too Americanised and with no offence to America which is fantastic at making interesting and exhilarating Films, they're just not good at making Bond films and therefore the next Bond should star Craig because he is fantastic, taking Bond right back to the beginning and making him vulnerably charming, but it should be an original story of Bonds original iconic status, the double O agent, serving her majesty and protecting her ideas and the world from evil, ironically scarred villains and why not in the mean time get some women, shoot some bad guys and use some ridiculously imaginative gadgets in the process, that make Bond what he is. To some up, Quantum of Solace is not a Bond film and should never have been called one but it is a good film, just not worthy of the Bond title. If you object then think about this scenario, a film director called Mark Forster decides to make an action film called Quantum of solace with the protagonist called special agent Steven Johnson of the British Government, whilst Martin Campbell makes another epic Bond after his Casino Royale, which one would make the big bucks as they say? The action film exactly the same as quantum of solace but not called a James Bond film or Campbell's follow up Bond film called Ian Flemings 007 James Bond in My votes on Campbell's.