"Quantum Of Solace": Cutting To The Chase

(CBS)  They don't make chase scenes like they used to, which is not entirely a good thing, in the view of our critic David Edelstein:

---

"Quantum of Solace" opens in the middle of a car chase, which wouldn't be so bad if you could tell where any car was in relation to any other car.

But you can't - the action makes no spatial sense.

As a whole the movie is fun, and Daniel Craig is a great Bond - his eyes are so cold that they chill and burn at once.

But the chases and fights remind me of that other big mash-up, "The Dark Knight."

I know people loved it, but could they follow it?

We're in a new world when it comes to on-screen action, a world where close and fast and jangled and deafening have replaced, well, something like this:

(MGM Pictures)

"North by Northwest" is an extreme case. But look at the elegance. Look how Alfred Hitchcock enlarges the space and then contracts it; how he gives you your bearings but still completely upends you.Or as long as we're on Bond, look at the duel between Sean Connery and Harold Sakata's Oddjob in "Goldfinger": there's the simplicity, the deceptive simplicity, of the staging.

It's a dance of death.

(Universal Pictures )

I think most filmmakers have abandoned the idea that chases and fights are dances ... that it's better to see whole bodies in fluid motion in relation to the larger environment.

Nowadays, action directors take their cues from the Jason Bourne movies (left), in which everything is shot documentary-style with a hand-held camera to put you right in the middle of the melee.

The "Bourne" films are exciting, but they're all sensation, the action is almost abstract.

They're not motion pictures; they're motion-sickness pictures. They trigger your primitive fight-or-flight instincts.

(Twentieth Century Fox)

Look, I'm a movie nut: I love speed and noise and pow!!! But at "Quantum of Solace," I was so disoriented that nothing seemed at stake.

It's not like in "The French Connection" (left), where you knew there was a car moving through that space at that time.

The forward motion of that scene is thrilling. But it doesn't have to be forward!

Look at Brian De Palma's "Carlito's Way."

The final chase and shoot-out is a geometrically ingenious progression of horizontals, verticals and slingshot angles.

(Universal Pictures )

Give me action that makes me marvel at the miracles of space, time and motion ...

... instead of, as in "Bourne" and "The Dark Knight" and "Quantum of Solace," reach for a Dramamine.

[trumpetmomx2]

I love the first one so much, I was so ready to see the next one, and made the mistake right before I went, of reading a review, that only gave it two starts, and talked about how they had a new director. I refused to continue reading it, but I sat in the movie, during the beginning chase scene, and the thing was so blurry and jerky, compared to Casino, all I could think of was, omg, they were right. WHY did they change directors. It was not for the better. Again, it will probably make a lot of money, only because people will think it''s a continuation of the Casino, which was fantastic. I had to go home and watch Casino again, to make it right. My husband thought they had cut the budget. The action camera work was so fantastic in the first one, that you hung on to see what was going to happen next, not to keep from throwing up. Daniel, please insist on your first director for the next one. And more dialog, bantering like with Vesper. More car too. I should have known when the aston-martin was destroyed in the beginning, that it couldn''t be good.

[majomor]

a very good observation-talented action directors like don seigel(dirty harry,charlie varrick)and john flynn(the outfit,rolling thunder,best seller) have passed on and guys like john irvin(dogs of war,city of industry) don''t seem to be active anymore-heck,even the directors of great old tv shows like the rockford files had a better sense of where to put the camera and how to direct an action scene than the current crop of directors who i like to refer as the "jigglers"...

[jim2938]

Quantum of Solace is quite good. Its a fast action movie where Daniel Craig is excellent as James Bond along with his female co-star.

[jodiver]

I saw the movie last night and aggree with the previous comments. It has been said that the Bond payed by Daniel Craig is closer to the ruthless character that Flemming intended. However, this movie was boring and had no entertainment value. Casino Royal wasn''t much better. Neither was in the same class as the 60s classics like Goldfinger and Thunderball. Bond has lost his way - maybe we''ve just used up all the great Flemming stories. Will definitely not bother to watch this one again when it comes out on DVD.

[roadracer9x]

I agree with a lot of the negative reviews. There was definitely something missing. Although I liked Casino Royal because it was a throwback to earlier Bond films with Sean Connery where the hero has only his wits to get him out of danger, I did not like this one because the plot was very weak and the movie was essentially a collection of chase scenes broken up by some uninteresting dialogue and none of the Bond wit we have become accustomed to. I would not recommend going to the theater for this movie. Rent it if you must see it.

[bobgee_1999]

Action movies put me to sleep. The occasional car chase or *** scene is ok, since it gives you a chance to go to the bathroom, but two hours of explosions and wire-assisted jumping around is booooooring.

[huanaco]

THIS IS THE WORST BOND MOVIE, NO GLAMOUR, THE CHASE, UNDEFINED. THE DESRT SCENES AWFUL. WHAT IN HELL HAPPENED TO THE DIRECTOR ? IT IS A MISTERY. THE VILLAIN, WSA HE ONE ? I CAN,T UNDERSTAND HOW THIS MOVIE BOKE RECORDS IN ENGLAND, LUCKILY MYSELF I BOUGHT A PIRATE VERSION OF THIS MOVIE SO I SAVE A BUNCH OF MONEY. THE LAST BOND STINKS.

[coronalu]

I was disapponted with this one, Daniel Craig plays a great Bond but the chase scenes are crappy, there is not much more that Daniel Craig and the rest of the crew could have done with this story, I believe that the reason why this Bond movie will always remain a tanker is because the director did not include the viewer in his vision. I saw this movie last night and the theater was packed and I sense the same thing from everyone, it was a sense of disppointment. I know that they are going to make a lot of money on this one but it is only because of the previous film, this movie is perhaps the worse Bond movie that has been made, I have all the Bond movies on DVD from the first to the last one but for this one, I am sure I will not even spend the money to buy it once it gets on DVD.

[professorai-2009]

we (4 adults) contributed to the "opening" but think it will sink like a stone in 1 week. Inpenetrable plot, no clear good and bad sides, no romance, no supervillain, undefined shallow characters enter and exit, drunk CIA agents who do nothing, chase and claustrophobic fight scenes borrowed from Bourne. This was the worst Bond movie, period. even opening credits and song weren''t entertaining.

[hypnotoad72]

Posted by DeckardBR at 01:00 PM : Nov 16, 2008
---

I didn''t see any gay ''pride'' in "Quantum of Solace", fortunately. I''m there to see a spy genre flick. Not a sappy love story.

And the media uses vapid and rapid stories because it appeals to the base; the least common denominator of people. Mass audiences. Left-wing or right-wing has nothing to do with it; the media is as cowardly as a plucked chicken in that respect. Why else would democrats say the media is conservative-friendly, while republicans say the media is too liberal?

Theaters are closing down because I suspect, in this economy, more people would rather pay for food and netflix rentals.