I assumed it was from her earlier fire experience.

Roger Moore will always be the "least best" James Bond.

Nice try.

Moonraker out.

the magic from CR was gone. i agree with many reviewers in saying this Bond was boring. the action scenes were uninspired and the plot seemed unoriginal given "Tomorrow Never Dies". very meh feelings and wish it stuck to more heart like CR did, but i guess the ending of that seemed to set up his lack of emotion in this. disappointed.

But could Daniel Craig pull off a leisure suit?

I think not.

Craig is just getting started with this character.

I like it a alot and having seen every Bond from start to finished and this is one of best.

I think alot people are upset because it's a short film (103 mins).

I like a Quick-Action from time-to-time and this fits the bill and I LOVE IT.

They explained that her mother was a Russian ballerina.

This was Bond at his most sympathetic. I think he saw himself in Camille and that's why there wasn't any sexual tension between them.

I saw it yesterday and enjoyed it. It wasn't as good as CR, but it was fun. I actually sort of like the lack of gadgets. There were too many gadgets in Pierce's Bond films.

i enjoyed that the story picked up after CR ended for the most part. Looks like Mr. White is the new Blofeld. The fact that this "organization" is off the radar of the CIA and MI6 is a good twist.

Anyway, the use of the close camera during the action shots was a much, but overall I enjoyed it.

3 out of 4 stars from me.

Whatever Ebert. Living Daylights was way better than License to Kill and any of the Brosnan pics except maybe Tomorrow Never Dies. Also Living Daylights was MASSIVELY better than View To A Kill.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but did Timothy Dalton have sex with either Maryam d'Abo in The Living Daylights or Carey Lowell in License to Kill?

Just saw this last night and was pleased. I will say I prefered CR over this, but it was still good.

I thought the directing was good - especially the slow-motion edited into speed up action - opening chaes scene and the opera scene. I do wish that his upside down shot of the guy was the last one into the opening sequence.

I liked how there was a presence given to "the organizaton" and how that was the driving force behind the film. Remember, the money trail is what led him across the Atlantic in the first place. He just happened to stumble upon Camille.

Also, as Greene's plot was uncovered - and partially not until the end with the control of the dictators water supply - the point became obvious to me that much like LaCiffe, Greene is not a over the top villain. Instead, he's part of the villain - which is Quantum itself. They are trying to use their technology, resources, etc. to obtain influence across the world to as a means to an end to control what they want.

I do feel the plot wasn't obvious, but I think it unfolded for the viewer as it unfolded for Bond. Also, I think it was obvious this ties into whatever the next Bond film will be and was meant as such. Mostly the reason why it felt dangling. Sure it could have been longer, but I'd rather it was purposeful and to the point, rather than bloated for the sake of time.

I was very pleased to see the M/Bond relationship continue to mature. She is his boss and she's also trying to make sure he continues to grow into the agent she needs. I thought the segment on trust in the hotel was partiuclarly telling.

Finally, I have to completely disagree with brianluvdvd and his two followers thus far. It's obvious that you were happy with the orginal 20 Bond films, and I'd say your probably better of sticking with those. This new series of films with Craig has updated Bond for the 21st century to match what viewers have come to expect from their characters and films - smart, well written and not somebody or thing that relies on technical wonders to solve issues.

This annoys the shit out of me, & if you actually read brianluvdvd's post, & mine (since I was one of his 2 "followers". You would see that I LOVED Casino Royale. After coming off of what IMO were the 3 absolute worste Bonds in the franchise, this new direction is exactly what the Bond-legacy needed. But just b/c Bond isn't full of humerous quips & movie-gadgets, doesn't mean the film is instantly "intelligent". CR was a fresh & smart beginning. QoS is not a worthy succesor.

More than half of my problem with QoS, is the directing, which has been dumbded down, for the 21st century, & lacks the "intelligence" that you claim this movie has. The action scenes are a mess, completely derivitive, & chopped & edited to hell, like a bromide copy of so many other modern action films & MTV music videos for people with no attention spans. This is something that Casino Royale did not do or rely on.

For me, it was the psycholigical approach that CR had, that made it so interesting & fresh. This movie had none of that, yeah, I get it tried to be a pure revenge movie, but that is no reason it can't delve further into the psyche of this new bond, in fact it's all the more reason to do exactly that. The exteme lack of dialogue by Bond, left the character stagnant. I wanted to see more of Craig, as this new Bond, & less of shaky cameras, cliched action, a boring villain & horrendously overrated & annoying M. Putting her in a role completely taken from the Bourne movies is NOT intelligent. This movie is not intelligent. And M goint to a crime scene like a CSI menber & then interogating a prisoner is flat out retarded.

Seriously, where do you think this movie is "intelligent"? What was the deal with the building that's powered by hydrogen fuel cells? "We'll make this building that keeps exploding!"

And I swear to Christ I want to dick-punch the next person that posts or that I hear say "this is the way Fleming meant Bond to be"! Pick up a damn book & try reading it, instead of just quoting some blurb you read in a magazine by an ignorant critic. Casino Royale is a phenomenal film, this one is a steaming pile of cliche, does not feel like a Bond film & most certainly is nothing like Fleming's Bond.

Your first response to brianluvdvd is very inconsistent. I can understand if you don't like the role given to M by the script - ala CSI on the spot investigation - but to turn that on Judi Dench is unfair that's exactly what you have done. By contrast, you say Bond wasn't very good because he didnt have enough lines to work with. You blame that on the script, but you're letting Craig slide because you know what he's capable of. It's coming across as a double standard for the two.

I thought there were plenty of character moments. Bond continued to show that he's willing to continue his job no matter what he's being told. He can take clues he finds and follow them to their source. I thought it was particularly smart how he waited for the dialogue to unfold and then chime in, which in turn casued them to all get up and identify themselves. Additionally, the progression of the Vesper story was still present. He nicked the picture from the file M had, had the same drink on the plane, was using Mathis as sort of a crutch/reminder, and then in part when Mathis dies it's the beginning of closure. Not to mention the end where he find the boyfriend and finally drops the necklace signifying he's done with revenge. That may have been where the story started, but Bond matured along the way, to the point where revenge was no longer his driving force.

I can understand that you didn't like a lot of the direction and frankly anything I say won't change your mind on that point. And for what it's worth it didn't bother me or take me out of the film.

I hate people giving Judi Dench shit. She's been hands down the best M of the franchise. It's not her fault if Haggis and the others who wrote the script turned M into a nervous girl on the edge of a breakdown because she couldn't handle the possibility of spies in her spy organization. She did her best, just like all the other stars. If there's anyone you can't blame for this being one of the worst Bond movies ever made, it's the actors.

This was a MAJOR DISAPPOINTMENT! This was one of the most lazy, unimpressive action films in a while. I loved Casino ROyale. Best Bond and Bond movie ever IMO.
Quantum Of Solace is easily one of the worst. It doesnt even feel like a full movie. It was ending and I Was like:
"No way that all I get from a Bond film, are you fucking serious?"
which is something I have never said before after a Bond film ending. It was way too short and lacked any substance and originality that CR had. The film comes off as extremely lazy and the filmmakers should be ashamed of themselves for rushing to put together a half-assed Bond movie that they put out solely to make money.

I don't like Dench in this role, but the larger problem is the script & her prominent role in this film, being portrayed completely against the mythos of her character, there is a difference b/w "upadating" a character, & just completely re-working a character going against type (crime scene inverstigator) simply to make the movie feel more like other films by adding a story element utterly ripped from another film (having Dench in the exact same role as the Langley team in the Bourne films). This was part of the big picture, & big problem where this movie IMO doesn't feel like a Bond film.

I have the exact same problem with Craig in this movie. It's not a double-standard. It just has a difference, I don't like the actress that plays M, and I like Craig a lot.

But. . . . going by the pole here & the box office results, clearly I'm wrong about all this & this film more than ever, is exactly what the masses want out of the Bond franchise. I just prefer the directory & writers of the last film.

Whoa... Was this really budgetted at $230mil?

I liked it, didn't think it matched Casino Royale obviously, but still very enoyable. I understand the criticisms like the lack of "Bondness" and non-stop action, but I nevertheless ebjoyed it. I liked the touch of the gun barrel at the end.

It may have had a SHORTER running time, but I thought this felt LONG as it was, so the short length did not contribute to my displeasure with the movie. (as cranberries suggested... and of course chris sc77 would list the short length as a negative ) but I certainly didn't feel that a shitty Bond movie would have been made better with an extra 20 minutes - it would have just been 20 minutes shittier... I think more character scenes with the chick would maybe have gone a long way, but the other problems would still be there and 75% of them lie with Forester...

Agreed. And I do think that they're clearly setting up Quantum as a modern day Spectre (although I wish they had kept the name, Spectre sounds so much cooler than Quantum). I also hope that there is someone above Mr. White. He doesn't have the gravitas to pull off a Blofeld, imo.

I have one question. How did Bond make that one boat flip with the anchor? Did I miss something?

I think this film is highly underrated. It's not as good as Casino Royale, but it's still a solid offering...better than any of the non-Goldeneye Brosnan flicks.

My only complaint is that the action sequences were a mess. Too much close-ups and fast cutting instead of pulling the camera back and showing us what was going on.

This James Bond sucked ass! This was one of the most poorly filmed/edited and most boring James Bond film i've ever seen. Excellent acting, but it doesn't make a movie good or even fair. What a shame since Casino Royale is one of the best James Bond films ever. Bring back Martin Campbell again! It's being compared to a Borne movie because people really want to like this film or compare it to a positive action movie. They are just being nice, because even the quick-cut, shaky-cam editing in the Bourne movies are still better than this James Bond flick. The only intense scene in the whole movie was James Bond taking pictures of the criminals in the theater. Great Bond scene, other than that, it's like Foster was trying to make a better film than Campbell's Casino Royale...at least Die Another Day (a bad James Bond film) was more entertaining than this one.

I would rate this either worst Bond film ever or the 2nd worst after Live and Let die.

I've talked to people today about it and they said to keep in mind that this was right after CR and Vesper's death, so it was understandable if he wasn't in the mood to sleep with another woman so soon.

I'd like to think that QoS was just a short tale while the third film will be 2h45m and about Bond taking down Mr. White once for all - the "real" sequel to CR.