Exactly what I expected for a sequel...

Rating: 6/10 (9 November 2008)

Firstly, I went into this movie with an open mind, and not with high expectations, I mean there was no way that it could surpass Casino Royale, could it? I'm a fairly big Bond fan, and always enjoy watching them when they come out at the cinema or whenever they're on. From watching the reviews and preview shows on TV, I was actually quite excited to hear that there would be no gadgets and the 'cheesey' one liners that you could usually expect in a Bond film ('I'm here for the birds' and 'Buy me a pint!' from Die another Day and Goldeneye are the freshest ones in my mind) This I thought, would hopefully be refreshing and maybe take Bond into a different new and exciting direction.
As soon as the film started with an action packed car chase, I was sucked in, thinking this looks like its going to be brilliant..but I was wrong. Now, i'm no camera expert, I don't know anything about how a film is shot, nor would I know how to make a action sequence any good. But i have to say, the all the action scenes were done terribly in my opinion. Its not that they weren't exciting or boring, its just that I actually felt like my head was spinning watching them, i mean during the car chase, the chase over the rooftops, the boat scene; the camera seemed to shaking all over the place. It was difficult to focus on what was happening, and was zoomed in a bit to close for my liking, which I know sounds strange. Its just that I remember in Casino Royale for example, the chase around the construction site, it was shot so smoothly and was actually breathtaking in parts. Even Brosnan's ice chase scene in DAD was more enjoyable to watch. Sure, its was supposed to be like that right? Bond's grittier, angrier and out for revenge, so lets show it in that style, but it was just plain annoying, because they could have been great scenes, especially the boat chase, which again annoyed me because I couldn't see what was going on! Don't get me wrong, I thought all the people who said Cloverfield was bad because of the shaky camera, were idiots, but that was actually supposed to shot like the guy was holding a video camera!!! Anyway enough of that rant. The story I thought was pretty good, even though I only understood the plot fully about half way through the film, it was entertaining and again what I expected for a follow up storyline. At times it seemed pointless, and could have been explained a bit better, but I didn't mind, most Bond films are usually a bit perplexing. The acting was again very good from Craig, and the bond girls were delightful to look at. I thought Olga Kurylenko did a nice job as playing the woman scarred (no pun intended) and out for revenge. Dame Judi Dench was also in top form as M again, and the chemistry between her and Craig was funny and a pleasure to watch. Greene, the villain, was mediocre, but quite interesting to watch, his character was a slimy and a pathetic man, which made me both love and hate him. I'd also like to point out that the locations and the score used for the film were super, and were chosen well. To conclude, I thought Quantum of Solace was a very good addition to the bond franchise, it was a step in a new direction, but i don't think it totally paid off. I was hugely let down by the action sequences, and if they had been done better, i would have given the film a healthy 7.5/10. As i've said the story and acting were above average, and the end scene at the hotel was gripping at parts. But I when I left the cinema, I just felt that the film was very 'filler' material, and went completely over my head. It was almost like i'd just gone to see a decent action film, which was OK, but didn't really have an impact on me like the other bond films. However, as I keep saying..its what i expected really! I think if I went to see it a second time, i'd probably enjoy it more. Definitely worth going to see though!! I mean....it is James Bond ;)