Sim1Bond on Speed Doesn't Know When To Stop
December 2nd 2008 05:00
When I heard Marc Forster was going to be helming the new Bond movie, I was reasonably excited. I've been a fan of his movies for the past few years now. "Stranger Than Fiction" and "Finding Neverland" are two movies whose stories are both magical and subtly poignant. In addition, "Stay" is, in my opinion, a very underrated and under-viewed mind-bender with another emotionally centered plot-line. Taking over the Bond series just after the central character was dealt the most vicious emotional blow of his life seemed to be a great fit. Then I saw the movie.
Of the 106 minutes that "Quantum of Solace" lasts, I'm convinced that 90 of those minutes take the form of some type of chase or action sequence. Daniel Craig, reprising his role as the new blond Bond, does more running in the first twenty minutes of this movie than he did in the entirety of the last movie. While the movie tried to film this sequences in the hectic, but stylish way that Paul Greengrass filmed the last two Bourne movies, the execution failed to deliver. The action sequences were chaotic, rushed and ultimately draining on the audience.
Instead of going overkill on the action-packed nature of the Bond series, Forster and writer, Paul Haggis ("Crash"), should have used the skills they have shown in previous movies and created a more character-centered piece. Granted, this is a Bond movie, so I am in no way calling for a tear-jerker. However, look what Christopher Nolan did for the "Batman" franchise when he dove into the emotional make-up of Batman.
This movie was primed for a similar type of story. We have a world-class special agent, who has trust issues steming from the loss of Vesper, the only woman he has ever loved, who also happened to betray him. He is left emotionally ruined and calous, yet he is still driven by the need to avenge her death. How do the love/hate feelings he holds for Vesper affect his decisions throughout the movie, his work, his relationships with the other woman in his life, especially M. These crucial elements are merely glossed over in favor of axe fights and oil-related deaths.
Which brings me to another big concern. What the hell is the movie actually about? I get that a global company facilitates government coups to place itself in profitable positions regarding the countries natural resources. And one of these people responsible tried to kill M. But how else is Bond involved? What does this have to do with Vesper? Or British intelligence for that matter? With secret deals and shady characters abound, the movie gets lost in its own ambiguity, leaving the movie unresolved and the climactic turns rather uninspiring.
The movie also fails to make use of the signature of all Bond films, the Bond woman. In the past, multiple woman have vied for Bond's attention. In this movie, there is really only one woman, Camille (Olga Kurylenko), and we never really get the sense that her and Bond share anything other than a desire for revenge. There seems to be no emotional connection or bond between these two characters, which leaves Camille feeling under-utilized. Similarly, the other supposed Bond-girl, Starwberry Fields (Gemma Arterton) falls under Bond's seductive techniques, but is only in the movie for two or three scenes. We know that they sleep together, but it feels pointless seeing as how she has no connection to the story or to James whatsoever. And falls for one of the lamest Bond pick-up lines in any movie.
Other characters, like Jeffrey Wright's Felix Leiter are equally as insignificant and under-utilized, leaving a gaping hole in the movie. With two people at the helm so talented on bringing across character relationships and inner turmoil creating a sequel that was ripe with all the elements they would have required, "Quantum of Solace" is nothing more than a tragic letdown. It's a pure example of when good moviemakers are blinded by the glitz of action and adrenaline and lose sight of the movie as a whole.
Of the 106 minutes that "Quantum of Solace" lasts, I'm convinced that 90 of those minutes take the form of some type of chase or action sequence. Daniel Craig, reprising his role as the new blond Bond, does more running in the first twenty minutes of this movie than he did in the entirety of the last movie. While the movie tried to film this sequences in the hectic, but stylish way that Paul Greengrass filmed the last two Bourne movies, the execution failed to deliver. The action sequences were chaotic, rushed and ultimately draining on the audience.
Instead of going overkill on the action-packed nature of the Bond series, Forster and writer, Paul Haggis ("Crash"), should have used the skills they have shown in previous movies and created a more character-centered piece. Granted, this is a Bond movie, so I am in no way calling for a tear-jerker. However, look what Christopher Nolan did for the "Batman" franchise when he dove into the emotional make-up of Batman.
This movie was primed for a similar type of story. We have a world-class special agent, who has trust issues steming from the loss of Vesper, the only woman he has ever loved, who also happened to betray him. He is left emotionally ruined and calous, yet he is still driven by the need to avenge her death. How do the love/hate feelings he holds for Vesper affect his decisions throughout the movie, his work, his relationships with the other woman in his life, especially M. These crucial elements are merely glossed over in favor of axe fights and oil-related deaths.
Which brings me to another big concern. What the hell is the movie actually about? I get that a global company facilitates government coups to place itself in profitable positions regarding the countries natural resources. And one of these people responsible tried to kill M. But how else is Bond involved? What does this have to do with Vesper? Or British intelligence for that matter? With secret deals and shady characters abound, the movie gets lost in its own ambiguity, leaving the movie unresolved and the climactic turns rather uninspiring.
The movie also fails to make use of the signature of all Bond films, the Bond woman. In the past, multiple woman have vied for Bond's attention. In this movie, there is really only one woman, Camille (Olga Kurylenko), and we never really get the sense that her and Bond share anything other than a desire for revenge. There seems to be no emotional connection or bond between these two characters, which leaves Camille feeling under-utilized. Similarly, the other supposed Bond-girl, Starwberry Fields (Gemma Arterton) falls under Bond's seductive techniques, but is only in the movie for two or three scenes. We know that they sleep together, but it feels pointless seeing as how she has no connection to the story or to James whatsoever. And falls for one of the lamest Bond pick-up lines in any movie.
Other characters, like Jeffrey Wright's Felix Leiter are equally as insignificant and under-utilized, leaving a gaping hole in the movie. With two people at the helm so talented on bringing across character relationships and inner turmoil creating a sequel that was ripe with all the elements they would have required, "Quantum of Solace" is nothing more than a tragic letdown. It's a pure example of when good moviemakers are blinded by the glitz of action and adrenaline and lose sight of the movie as a whole.
| 43 |
| Vote |
