23 February 2009

Now I can make fun of Quantum of Solace

I actually had to buy a bootleg copy of Quantum of Solace so I could finally find out what Maddox was ranting about on The Best Page in the Universe.  I think I can honestly say that this is one of the worst James Bond movies of all time, as it combines the worst of a whole host of bad Bond movies.

1.) Forget plot and just string together a bunch of action sequences.  I call this the "Moonraker" approach, due to the fact that the "plot" of the movie is just a thinly-veiled attempt to get James Bond to different locations, different women, and different modes of transportation so that he can have some sort of chase sequence.  A clue leads him to Venice where he has a gondola chase, another clue leads him to the Amazon where he has another motorboat chase, finally leading him into space where he has a giant "laser" battle.  Quantum of Solace, for the first hour, has EXACTLY this same plot.  It didn't work for Roger Moore, and it didn't work here either.

2.) If your evil organization is so insidious and so secret that it is everywhere, then why does every member of your organization wear a "Q" on their lapel?  I'm just saying.

3.) I get that Casino Royale (one of the best Bonds ever, due to the fact that it had a great plot) was a reboot, so we didn't see Q, Moneypenny, or the gadgets.  But by the second Daniel Craig movie, we need a better gadget than a Sony Ericson phone and a first aid kit in the Aston Martin.   We need to bring Q and Moneypenny back just like every other Bond movie.

4.) We need a villian with a dastardly plan.  In this movie, a terrorist organization known as Quantum agrees to start a coup in Bolivia in order to allow a military dictator to seize power.  That's the plot.  A military coup in a Latin American country.  You know why Sean Connery, and Roger Moore never had to deal with this?  Because this happened every other week in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.  (I was going to make some smart comment about who was usually behind these coups, but I don't want people breaking down my door).

5.) Maddox actually pointed this out, but I will go over it for your sake.  The dastardly terrorist organization, in exchange for initiating the coup, has agreed to a piece of land which secretly contains most of the water in Bolivia.  They then intend to...sell the water to Bolivia at twice the cost, generating cprofits in excess of (EXTREME CLOSE UP, RAISE PINKY) ONE MILLION DOLLARS!  

What's actually sad is that someone actually DID do this in Bolivia, but they sold the water for triple the cost.  So yeah, why don't you come up with a better scheme like, you know, hijacking nuclear missiles or something.  

Jesus Christ, just when I thought that the Daniel Craig movies were an improvement over the last Pierce Brosnan movie (where 007 has to wind-surf over the ice as a giant space "laser" melts the ice behind him, while he tries to get to his Aston Martin, which is equipped with a cloaking device), they come up with this.

Seriously, WTF.  

1 comment:

SunJun said...

The movie was a real disappointment and a waste of Daniel Craig's talents; I think that it was only bearable because of Craig. At least Moonraker had a conspiracy on a large enough scale to justify utilizing an asset like 007.

What made Casino Royale was that it showed the versatility of Bond and the art of espionage. He's not just a killing machine but a charmer, a card shark, and skilled tradesman. QoS felt more like a Bourne film, and while I enjoyed the Bourne trilogy, Bond is not Bourne and in my opinion has no reason to imitate him.

Here's hoping they learned the right lessons this time around and won't screw up again.