ROTTEN TOMATOES: UK Tomatometer Preview: Quantum Of Solace - Is the New Bond Shaken or Stirred? Comments

UK Tomatometer Preview: Quantum Of Solace - Is the New Bond Shaken or Stirred?

by Tom Butler | October 31, 2008

Summary

Today is Halloween, traditionally a big day for horror movies, but for 2008 this long standing tradition has been usurped by the return of a bigger, better, badder and more British institution. Today sees the release of Bond 22. Daniel Craig returns in his sophomore outing as Commander James Bond of Her Majesty's Secret Service in Quantum Of Solace, but what did the critics have think? Back to Article

(1-38 of 38 posts) | Reply

tomwaitsjr writes:
on Oct 31 2008 09:35 AM

It'll be great. Mathieu Amalric is a phenomenol actor, with the ability to control the physics of his face better than most anyone else.

If you've seen "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly" then you know what I mean.

For those that can't wait the 2 weeks, rent "Layer Cake" with Craig if you haven't seen it yet. Great film.

(Reply to this)

thereign writes:
on Oct 31 2008 09:44 AM

Layer Cake is one of the most overrated films ever. However, I will say there's a GREAT scene in it where Colm Meany beats the living s.h.it out of Daniel Craig. Hysterically funny scene! :-)

(Reply to this)

jokerboy1991 writes:
on Oct 31 2008 09:53 AM

In reply to this comment (#2104342)
Come on man, u think it will really be great? Its only 1 hour 40 mins without credits, and the bond girl is a terrible actress she was terrible in HITMAN and I hear she was terrible in Max Payne, I really like Marc Foster but he cant shoot action I'm sure and thats what a lot of the reviews are saying, also from the ads it looks like it has so many action pieces. I am not saying it wont be good, I think it will be, but I think the writing is on the wall that it will just be a B moive or a B plus movie. Just saying dont keep you hopes too high.

(Reply to this)

jokerboy1991 writes:
on Oct 31 2008 09:58 AM

In reply to this comment (#2104342)
I am sure he will be a good villian but I bet we wont see enough of him in the movie and Jeffery Wright too I bet.

(Reply to this)

chasetinnell writes:
on Oct 31 2008 10:33 AM

Layer Cake is a great film, but i guess that depends on your taste. Im excited for this installment, yet i think they should bring back some of the suave and charm of James Bond, which I think theyll do next time.

(Reply to this)

golrush007 writes:
on Nov 01 2008 01:25 AM

I'm really looking forward to seeing this - I have read quite a few negative comments, but these haven't put me off at all. And I certainly wouldn't judge the film before seeing it. Have to wait until the 21st of this month to see it down here in South Africa. It's going to be a long 3 weeks!!

(Reply to this)

luishere writes:
on Nov 01 2008 08:30 AM

The movie opens here next friday, november 7.. cool

(Reply to this)

collex writes:
on Nov 01 2008 09:14 AM

Wher are you luishere to be so lucky6

I can't wait to see it. It's short, but hey, who says it can't be good?

Jokerboy, never trust the advertisement. Never trust the crtics. Never trust anybody else,s opinion.

(Reply to this)

Shahid N. writes:
on Nov 01 2008 10:56 AM

I'm just afraid that this movie might have too much action for a 106 min. long film, as can be seen from the trailers. I hope its a good mix of drama and action like it was in Casino Royale. Cant wait to watch Craig back as Bond.

(Reply to this)

justjohn writes:
on Nov 01 2008 12:37 PM

Looking forward to it but at 106 minutes I'm a little worried that all the action might overwhelm the rest of the movie. Having what appears to be very little humor won't help either. If you want to see a bond reboot that was both serious and funny watch Goldeneye.

(Reply to this)

jokerboy1991 writes:
on Nov 01 2008 01:08 PM

In reply to this comment (#2106821)
Come on man 100 minutes long! There are so many action sequences from the ads that makes you know this movie will be more action driven then probably character driven. Also Marc Forster, he is a very good director but I highly doubt he can shoot big action sequences well. Also the bond girl is the girl from HITMAN and MAX PAYNE, she is terrible actress and she will probably look worse because there is no way she will be able to top Eva Green from CASINO. Im just saying I wouldn't get my hopes up too high, also I think you can trust critics on BOND because most critics loved CASINO ROYALE and all the reviews so far say it isn't as good.

(Reply to this)

martinscorsese25 writes:
on Nov 01 2008 04:30 PM

i heard the action sequences were shot and edited paul greengrass style... They say that dramatic directors that don't know how to shoot action scenes edit their movie that way... that was the critique with Chris Nolan on Batman Begins.. Well f*** those bashers... there's nothing wrong doing a Greengrass style action movie... if somebody else done it at first, that doesnt mean that you can't do it again...

(Reply to this)

wordweaver12 writes:
on Nov 01 2008 04:59 PM

Am I the only one who doesn't give a f$#^^#%@k about James Bond or Daniel Craig? seems like it. Oh well...

(Reply to this)

tfortier writes:
on Nov 01 2008 06:21 PM

The action scenes in the first one where great. Im a bit sad about the short 106min though...

(Reply to this)

jokerboy1991 writes:
on Nov 01 2008 09:11 PM

In reply to this comment (#2108013)
I can understand why people would like Bond, he is a cliched character that always prevails. I really liked Casino because it avoided alot of cliches.

(Reply to this)

Shahid N. writes:
on Nov 02 2008 01:35 AM

Come on guys lets be optimistic, ok it wont be as good as Casino Royale but not as bad as Die Another Day either. I know I would be getting my admission tickets worth the moment I see Craig as Bond..the best since Connery if not better! The action looks great too, real old fashioned stunts and minimal CGI, thanks God!

(Reply to this)

tfortier writes:
on Nov 02 2008 03:21 AM

Im with Shahid!!

(Reply to this)

jeremyd4 writes:
on Nov 02 2008 05:09 AM

The action in the trailer looks pretty phenomenal to me! In particular, the motor cycle jump and Bond smashing through the glass ceiling onto the scaffolding. I can understand why some people might like the camera pulled back a bit more with less cuts; resulting in steadier (less headache inducing) sequences and ultimately a more classical looking fight scene. But to me, that seems more suited to, say, something like martial arts films. It can come across as too choreographed and even too 'elegant' for my liking. There's something very raw and confronting about the way these "dramatic directors" have approached stuff like this, and I'm a fan of the frenetic action that's come about since the Bourne trilogy, through to Nolan's Batmans, and the Bond reboot.

(Reply to this)

Shahid N. writes:
on Nov 02 2008 07:51 AM

In reply to this comment (#2108833)
thanks ! let keep our fingers crossed. By the way in Dec. Craig will be starring in another great looking drama Defiance.

(Reply to this)

James S. writes:
on Nov 02 2008 10:40 AM

Having seen the film, I can say that it is definately not as good as Casino Royale, but the action sequences are brilliant, Daniel Craigs performance continually dominant, and Olga Kurylenko is the best Bond girl in years! She's not a damsil in distress, she's the fiesty, hard headed female equivelent to Craig, perfect for the role. The only problems I have are with the shabby editing, it could have been put together a lot better, and theres no more arrogant one-liners from 007 we've come to know and love. Its a outstanding jigsaw puzzle, with a few pieces missing, or in the wrong place.

(Reply to this)

Russ H. writes:
on Nov 02 2008 10:55 AM

After seeing yesterday, I can say that it's a phenominal film, deserving of an 80% something RT score at least. All of the performances are played to the hilt, there is a lot of style, a few quips, explosive action, and a memorable slimy villain.

4 out of 5 stars. Ebert will probably rate it a 3 out of 4.

(Reply to this)

jokerboy1991 writes:
on Nov 02 2008 11:24 AM

In reply to this comment (#2109700)
He gave Casino 4 stars.

(Reply to this)

jokerboy1991 writes:
on Nov 02 2008 12:07 PM

Also am I the only one who thought Pierce Bronson was a good Bond. I mean GOLDEN EYE was pretty awesome, and I though Tomorrow Never Dies and The World Is Not Enough were good B movies, and Die Another Day was meh. It wasn't his fault the scripts were weak, he was always good. Die Another Day was kind of ridiculous though. I do like Craig more and I think he is the best Bond since Connery, but I think Bronson never gets credit because most of his 007 flicks were kind of fun especially Golden Eye.

(Reply to this)

xenogears writes:
on Nov 02 2008 12:51 PM

I liked Pierce as well but i'm enjoying the much more realistic new Bond Films. Bond is still suave but he cuts to the point and keeps it moving like what I imagine a real secrete agent would do, especially one out for revenge. One liners are nice but a man out for true vengence hardly has comedy on the mind. And the gadgets are fun but I like the fact that he doesn't need those to get the job done. His Badassness is amplified by the fact that he doesn't use the gadgets and is ready kill you where you stand if you had anything to do with Vespers death. I'm looking forward to this so much.

(Reply to this)

collex writes:
on Nov 02 2008 01:06 PM

First it's Brosnan, not Bronsons ( Getting confused with Charles Bronsons maybe? lol) I liked Brosnan as a Bond especially in Goldeneye. And it was my Mom's favourite. I pretty like Craig too. He is not better than Brosnan, just different.

The only actor who really sucked at James Bond was Lazenby. All the others wer at the same level, but with a different style.

(Reply to this)

coolio d. writes:
on Nov 02 2008 01:21 PM

I thought QOS was a great film and every actor played their parts incredible

(Reply to this)

jokerboy1991 writes:
on Nov 02 2008 03:57 PM

In reply to this comment (#2110012)
Oh yeah definitely, I liked Casino more then all of Pierce's Bond movies, the problem with his flicks were they went way too crazy with gadgets and the scripts were weak but they were still fun movies. Roger Moore was terrible I thought, Lazenby and Dalton were ok, and of course Connery was totally boss. Also Pierce Bronsan was my moms fav too.

(Reply to this)

jokerboy1991 writes:
on Nov 02 2008 09:26 PM

Also I think Craig has proven himself as a good actor with the bond films, Layer Cake, Road to Perdition, Renaissance, and I for one thought The Golden Compass was pretty good.

(Reply to this)

Jimmy n. writes:
on Nov 03 2008 06:14 AM

The 1 second frame shots left me with a headache. Why do directors think
that by showing action scenes like this,it makes greater impact. Perhaps if I had a "nerd" transplant and thought I was playing a video game, it might appeal. This film has no soul,is not in the same class as Bourne, and there are better action scenes in Diehard.Perhaps it's time to go back to the future, and learn from the quality of the timeless classic that is Goldfinger

(Reply to this)

Gimy writes:
on Nov 03 2008 08:52 AM

i'm hopeful this will be good, but its no bond. sorry, not buyin' the "it's james bond!" theme. by name only. but at least it looks to be a really good movie, and thats all that counts. just wish they'd go by a different name because all the things we've come to love 'bout the character are now gone. will definitely see it opening weekend and HOPEFULLY the game will be kick2ss too

to me, the new bond is like breaking up with a chic that was great in bed...and finding a better looking chic...but she's loose. she's better looking but, you kind of long for the greatness you had before. bond was great before, but gettin' a bit old. if they could somehow...KEGAL this new bond. a few one liners, some kind of gadget...a personality. it'd be perfect...

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on Nov 03 2008 01:54 PM

Are you done with the mike jokerboy? Who care's about the length, because you also complained about the Watchmen length and now this. Who care's about the length? You might love the new Bond. Oh and I agree with you on Pierce, he is a good Bond.

(Reply to this)

Kokushi writes:
on Nov 03 2008 02:14 PM

Jokerboy, he was good in Munich too.

(Reply to this)

DodgeyDude writes:
on Nov 04 2008 01:50 AM

I thought the film was great and it had everything a good bond film needs, girls, guns, car chases, kick as$ fight scenes and snappy dialogue. And I love the professional relationship building between M and Bond, and Felix also grows in this as well. It rounds off the whole Vesper story nicely and you see Bond mature, all in all a great sequel to Casino Royale. And now they have a new enemy, of which Mr Greene was just a part of.

Looking forward to see what they do next!

If you view both movies as one big movie then I think you'll enjoy it more, as it does kick off moments after Casino Royale ends.

(Reply to this)

jokerboy1991 writes:
on Nov 06 2008 10:18 AM

In reply to this comment (#2113015)
Thats right he was the information guy, he was very good in that.

(Reply to this)

jokerboy1991 writes:
on Nov 06 2008 10:19 AM

In reply to this comment (#2113000)
Also I dont mean to rag on Mike, but I just think with so many action squences in such a short movie that character development will be thrown aside.

(Reply to this)

han z. writes:
on Nov 08 2008 11:30 AM

I've seen it. Great film. Daniel Craig's Bond films are definitely several notches higher than the predecessors. Less gadgets? yes. Less suave persona of james? yes. But these are not necessarily bad contributions to a tightly-packed high-intensity film. And i should say that his leading ladies (including Casino Royale's Vesper) are way, waayyy better than the previous Bond girls! Quantum of Solace is worth watching in the big screen!

(Reply to this)

han z. writes:
on Nov 08 2008 11:33 AM

I've seen it. Great film. Daniel Craig's Bond films are definitely several notches higher than the predecessors. Less gadgets? yes. Less suave persona of james? yes. But these are not necessarily bad contributions to a tightly-packed high-intensity film. And i should say that his leading ladies (including Casino Royale's Vesper) are way, waayyy better than the previous Bond girls! Quantum of Solace is worth watching in the big screen!

(Reply to this)

ToPCatUK writes:
on Nov 10 2008 04:43 PM

Casino Royale whilst it veered from the established formula was a fantastic, well made, entertaining, hard hitting blockbuster of a film. Quantum of Solace is sadly the opposite.

Marc Forster's direction is awful. The 1 second cuts during the action scenes confuse you, take you out of the movie instead of drawing you in make the action scenes look one tenth the cost and probably one tenth as good as if you were there watching them make the stunts. Ruined. Butchered. If he ever directs an action film again I shall be certain to avoid it. Also what's that scene about with M in the bath and taking off her makeup??? Why???

Daniel Craig is good. Unfortunately along with the film-breaking direction there is weak title music, bland opening credits, an ineffective bad guy, poor story, nothing really to identify the film as 'Bond' and an underwhelming ending. Bond films should wow an audience and this one falls flat.

A bitter dissapointment.

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Quantum of Solace

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links