Quantum of Solace (2008 Video Game)
User ReviewsReview this title
Neither does it have any of the excitement and invention we have come to expect of this fantastic series. A very poor script and a visual mess. The editing and pace of this film does not help, and it leaves the audience lost because of the uninteresting plot.
There are no Bond anecdotes whatsoever. Presumably the production team have decided to remove all those traditional moments that most of us thoroughly enjoyed, completely spoiling the subtlety and identity of the whole James Bond character and leaving Daniel Craig virtually without a single moment of humour in the entire boring saga. No gadgets to excite or amuse the audience, and nothing creative apart from one blurry very badly edited chase after another all through the film.
There was not even a titter of laughter at any point from the audience I watched it with, at the Odeon Leicester Square. Surely this must be the most dire Bond film ever made. there is not one single joke or light hearted aside in the entire movie.
Even the girls are very disappointing and fail to add the slightest hint of glamour or sexiness to this extremely boring epic .
It's possible that some of the original John Barry music may have helped the film gather pace, but even that has been reduced to short bursts of the Bond theme at the beginning and end. Instead, the score lacks any particular theme or memorable melodies that normally compliment a decent James Bond film.
I could hardly wait for it to end, and I am amazed that Craig or his agents did not demand some script changes to help keep him in character as James Bond.
First of all, there's a difference between the QoS game for the PS2 and the QoS game for next-gen consoles. While the next-gen version of the game is primarily a first-person shoot, the PS2 version of the game is exclusively third-person, offers a smaller arsenal of weapons, and has much weaker graphics. James Bond looks remarkably like Daniel Craig, but the other characters look more like something from the Nintendo 64 game. Particularly, Olga Kurylenko's character, one of the most beautiful Bond girls in decades, looks decidedly unattractive here. Also, the PS2 game is missing several of the levels from the next-gen version, including only one new level, the Haitian docks, as a consolation.
Level design in other Bond games wasn't exactly complex, but in QoS the missions are far too linear. Most of the game play in the PS2 version of the game consists of running into a fire fight, ducking behind cover, then either "blind firing" from safety or peeking out to try a more precise shot. In some instances it's possible to execute a stealth attack, but rarely worth it. Melee attacks, unlike EON or FRWL, consist solely of a pistol whip, which can be effective, but if you miss you will almost certainly die. There's no departing from the beaten path to execute "Bond moves", no playing with fancy gadgets (fair enough, since Q doesn't appear in either of the movies the game is based on, "Quantum of Solace" or "Casino Royale"). Bond isn't even able to carry grenades, though several enemies are able to lob them at him. There's also absolutely no vehicle levels, which is a shame since the source material provided plenty of great moments to drive an Aston Martin, motorcycle, boat, or a DC3 plane.
The game is at its best when its letting you reenact moments from the films. Locations like the Madagascar construction site from CR and the Sienna rooftops and Perla Las Dunas Hotel from QoS are recreated accurately in the game, so that it feels like you are actually playing through the events of the movies. These are the moments the game makes a worthy movie tie-in. On the other hand, the worst aspects of the game is when it differs from the movies. Across consoles, first of all, rather than traditional cut scenes, most of the story is told through graphics like those on M's computer module in the QoS film. Plot points are quickly communicated through conversations between M and other characters following Bond's progress. Granted, the game has to combine the stories of two major films, but in the end it's still far too brief, and there's no excuse for the "tell, don't show" approach that skips over huge chunks of the plot and doesn't allow the player to be present at events such as Bond's assault on an embassy or the climactic card game in CR.
Major characters are excluded from the plot altogether. While Daniel Craig, Olga Kurylenko, Eva Green, Mads Mikkelson, and Judi Dench all provide their voice and likeness to the game, memorable characters like Gemma Arterton's Agent Strawberry Fields, Caterina Murino's Solange, and Ivana Milicevic's Valenka fail to appear at all. The characters of Renee Mathis and Felix Leiter, major players in both movies, are left out entirely. Instead, forgettable characters like Elvis, Kratt, and Dimitrios become major boss fights. Apart from Craig and Dench, the other talents from the movie (at least in the PS2 version) are underutilized, only getting a few lines a piece. Also, scenes from the movie like the Bregenz Opera House and the Miama science museum have been changed for video game reasons. While both scenes in the movies were open to the public and crowded with civilians, the game has the locations closed, forcing Bond to sneak around them after hours. Once Bond is finally in the science museum, instead of the movie's captivating body works exhibit, the room contains a few model helicopters and some boring artifacts. The game's credits even spell Judi Dench's name wrong. (They credit "Judy Dench" as the voice of M.) The game is fun while it lasts, but it only takes a few hours to play through once. With no unlockable content and no multi-player for this console, the game has very little re-playability. While fun while it lasts, QoS, particularly on the PS2, doesn't quite capture what it means to be 007, and is worth only a rental, even for hardcore 007 fans.
The movie is plot less. Bond is emotionless. The movie lacks in so many ways except one: chase scenes. Characters are introduced without any basis. An unknown organization is named once but without any details. The leader is exposed but with know indication as to what they're up to. A poor end to a once great character (glad I have the old ones on DVD).
Daniel Craig doesn't know how to smile and the movie fails to deliver. A huge disappointment. Thus, the "4" (and I as kind).
So now for the depressing part; I read that Quantum was the second highest grossing Bond movie to date so my fear is that the producers of the next bond movie will have no incentive to deviate from their current formula and will deliver yet another most substandard effort. I will hope for the opposite, but I'm not holding my breath because Quantum was really, really, that BAD.
The plot and characters were weak. The end was dull with no real conclusion, the villain was just left, although he was killed, but not by Bond. I thought the best character was Agent Fields, and she got killed off after about half an hour!
A lot of people have also stated about the title, but I think it's good, It's mysterious, it was designed especially for Bond by his creator (Fleming) rather than by a balding producer or already bald director!
Too much trying to be like Bourne, not enough trying to be like Bond for me. Lets hope the next installment makes up for it.
The chase scenes were not that exciting although the one with the DC-3 was a little different, but in all the cases the camera work was so jiggly that it was hard to figure who was being chased and who the chasers were. I think that when Spielberg did it for D-Day it made sense, but now it seems everything making a movie seems to think it is the trendy thing to do. Well I disagree. When one can not figure out where the action is going, and who is who, then it has lost its intent.
Not only that it seemed as though the idea was "hey its about time we had another chase" just for the gratuitousness of it rather than leading up to it like most other Bond movies.
The title song has to be the worst yet for these movies and was a real turnoff for me, in fact I turned off my hearing aids about a quarter of the way into it to try and not hear it.
The acting certainly was nothing to talk about either. I think Daniel Craig was fine in his first movie, but this one he seemed about as wooden as Jean Claude Van Damme was in his movies, and George Lazenby in "On Her Majesty's Secret Service". The women were totally forgettable also whoever they were.
It looks to me like the Bond franchise has run out of ideas and steam and that it is time to retire this series. Doubt that I will go to another one even though I am a big fan of James Bond, but the movies have slowly declined in quality and interest over the years since "From Russia With Love", and "Goldfinger". I will be content watching DVDs of the better Bond films and re-reading the original stories from Ian Fleming.
Final comment is that this movie was so exciting that wife went to sleep part way thru it.
Well OK, besides the Actionscenes that nobody in the cinema could follow, the storyline is very confusing too and the bondgirls are so boring.
The next disappointing is, that there is no James Bond anymore. No British upperclass Gentleman, no Ladykiller, no Wodka Martini, no Q, no Moneypenny...buaahhh this movie is so frustrating.
The positive aspects are:
- 100% nothing, i want my money back !!!!
Undoubtedly, the "X's" and "Y's" opinions will champion their perpetual mediocrity, and CRAIG again, as though he could possibly hold a candle, née, a FLARE, to Connery.
As for me, I'd say wait for cable on this one on a Sunday afternoon when you have absolutely NOTHING better to do but justify your monthly premium channel purchase.
For me at least, Bond movies are: adrenaline + glamour + seduction (which is very much human btw) + exotic landscapes + action (why not)
Flemming's bad guys were not typically on the scale of the movie villains and that could have been all right. An organization with the motives we see would be a great nuisance to governments and Bond could have been sent to do something that could never be official (if I remember correctly he has a similar task in the book 'You Only Live Twice'). That this type of operation should be such an all powerful one is however totally inconceivable and gives the whole affair a shimmer of the ridiculous.
Summing up: you can't have it both ways either it's the new/old Bond or the movie Bond - here we get a strange combination that doesn't satisfy.
Sorry, but this is a true..
Hope not to see him as a Bond anymore.
Hope England has MUCH better actors than that..
Hope this serial will last a little bit longer than 2010
Unfortunately, this was the worst of all they made with Bond so far... Hope they will never make the "Bond" with the same "star" - Kreig -- somebody pulled him to be a star but he will soon be down cause he's nothing.
We all watch the Bond movies for a reason, for me is watch that shake but not stir dude with his fancy gadgets and sexy ladies. With Craig, why even stir when a Bug Lite seem most appropriate. It's hard to follow the plot when Bond suddenly resemble an longshoremen.
James Bond movies were character and gadget driven, plot falls apart when the main character is not 'it'. In this movie, even the gadgets were not up to the usual standard. Sad.
-Sorry for the short post. Lastly, people will enjoy many of the action sequences, especially my favorite part, the car chase in the beginning of the film.
In fact, even back in the day the 007 films were implausible, sexist, and a lot of fun to watch. I'm old enough to have seen those films when they were first released.
The 2006 version of Casino Royale was, if anything, an homage to the original literary vision of what was, in Fleming's mind, a no-nonsense Bond.
That's why Quantum of Solace is, for me, such an enjoyable film. James Bond is no longer a caricature. Instead, he's fleshed out, and is driven by psychological motivations - revenge, patriotism, upbringing. None of these motivations are clear-cut in meaning, either to 007 or to us.
In Casino Royale, in both the book and the film, Vesper was a cipher to Bond, and he ended up both falling in love with her as well as hating her, never quite sure if she'd saved him or betrayed him. And that carried over in Quantum of Solace.
In short, Bond - like Vesper - is human, even if the events around him are, in the classic mold of previous Bond films, still as improbable as ever.
The women are different, too. They are still beautiful, but they are also capable human beings (and M is a woman, now, and a mother figure for Bond).
Fields of course pays the ultimate penalty for immediately falling in love with - and making love to - a double 0. Yet she's not a weak character, and only seals her doom when she purposefully trips one of the chief villain's minions.
The love scene between Fields and Bond is, by both the standard of early Bond films and by today's films, chaste. It was a scene that perfectly communicated what Bond and Fields had just consummated, without showing us anything but the tender aftermath.
Camille, too, is as purposeful as Bond and is as capable as Bond at seeking and achieving revenge.
In the original films, the magnificent Sean Connery was sophisticated, and sure - not full - of himself. Unlike Flemming's creation, Connery was also quick with the quips, quite often of the double entendre variety. Daniel Craig is sophisticated, too (whatever his upbringing), is capable of the occasional quip, but exudes exponentially more confidence in himself than Connery or any of the other movie Bonds could muster.
If he's a spy, 007 is also part Terminator. Nothing keeps him from his appointed task. There could not be the slightest doubt, in the scene when he entered the elevator, handcuffed between two guards, of what about to happen to the guards.
Having read the Bond books, having seen the Bond films, I'll take this version of 007 over all the others. And that's why, for me, this film more than succeeded. Bond has become worth watching in equal measure as much as for who he is as for what he does.
The same criticism can be stated for action scenes which happen to be very fast but difficult to watch.
I really liked the complex scenario where we see the CIA about to strike a deal with the villain for desperate political control. If you know about the Middle East, you will see it true. This seems more realistic and closer to reality with almost Ludlumesque intensity where the hero is caught in a serious imbroglio where even his own government will not support mission completion (except the well played M of course).
This movies seems to be moving away from propaganda where the world is portrayed no longer as two sides where everyone is spread between the good and the bad. Now, this movie brings shades of grey which at last makes these movies closer to real espionage.
I am still not sure if I like Craig in James Bond or not. But, we can now appreciate a strong man who goes into a lot of fights.
But one can see some goofs here and there such as why there were so many hydrogen bottles in that building in the middle of the desert.
This movie could have been better, much better.