Bond is back, and Daniel Craig's performance in "Quantum of Solace" will do nothing to dissuade you from thinking he is the best incarnation of the character to date."Quantum" is a worthy successor to "Casino Royale," but it's a follow-up that misses a step or two on its follow-through.
Borrowing from Bourne: I've stated before my appreciation for how the Jason Bourne franchise managed to take it up a notch with each movie. Sure ... Matt Damon is still around for each production, but the action and pacing is handled well for the genre.
With the new Bond, there are at least two sequences (and I might argue a third) that appear to be "borrowed" from the Bourne line. And the imitation was not a one-upping or better representation of intent.
Which brings me to one of the "Quantum" quandaries -- how could they have messed this up so badly?
The first on-the-ground action sequence (outside of the car chase) felt like bad Bourne. The cinematography was sloppy and dizzy to the point of distraction. I was disappointed to see such a downer in the overall dramatic development due to the shoddy quality.
And the overall story development slips a little from "Casino." There are times where the subplot so overshadows that you might feel as though you missed something. Do yourself the favor of going back to review the "Casino" title before heading out to the theater.
While there's some sophomore slump here, it isn't so terrible as to make it unwatchable. These easily avoidable flaws might distract you as they did me, and yet the final half of the film will make up for it all.
Grade: B - A pretty good action flick even with its flaws. We're promised in the end credits that Bond's going to be back, and I think he'll be better than ever when he does now that this one's out of his system.
Posts
