|
 |
QOS: The 2nd film in
Ian Fleming's James Bond Film Series by Will Haun
Grade: A-
For as distinctive as Casino Royale was in re-defining the Bond series around the conception Ian Fleming had for both the 007 character and his world, Quantum of Solace is even more distinguishable from the traditional James Bond film. In fact, I would argue that it is perhaps the least convention-based Bond film ever. While Casino Royale’s lack of Q, Moneypenny and throwaway humor threw the critics who see every proceeding Bond film as born of the Goldfinger blueprint for a loop, Quantum of Solace takes the series’ very tone in a new direction. Here, action is faster, right and wrong is easily blurred, and we come to realize that at the core of the Bond character is a story not of vengeance, but how Bond makes peace with his profession. Such an approach produced a bold, but imperfect film that is both connected and detached from its immediate predecessor, but very much in keeping with the series’ newfound respect for Ian Fleming. This lack of convention has left many audiences confused, I think, about the point of Quantum of Solace. Those who see this film as a revenge tale are likely to be disappointed as this film is not about revenge. Bond does wrestle with it, but decides against it because he realizes that it will not be through revenge that he gains the comfort he seeks. If there is any underlying quest throughout the course of the film, it is how Bond grows to be okay with being a professional killer. This is, without question, one of the most important elements of the Fleming novels. Fleming mentions in the Goldfinger novel that, while it is ”his duty to be as cool about death as a surgeon,“ Bond does not like to kill. As we saw in Casino Royale, Vesper opened Bond to the possibility that perhaps he would not have to live such a life anymore. Now that she is gone, Bond is challenged to realize how much she sacrificed for him, so that he can gain the peace within himself to carry out his license to kill without being filled with the ”uncontrollable rage“ M fears he has. The best parts of Quantum of Solace are the parts that help develop this character arc. Camille’s question of “now what?” after she kills Medrano helps to emphasize the fruitless nature of revenge. Bond’s realization when confronting M at the hotel before meeting up with Leiter that he and he alone is the only person he can trust to perform the ”duty“ required to his country is a key moment in Bond’s development. The same is true for Bond’s reaction to the death of Mathis. His reaction about throwing him in a dumpster, noting that ”he wouldn’t have cared” is a testament to his fatalism towards life, an element Fleming often noted that allows Bond to be able to kill without going insane. And, perhaps most notably, the final scene in which Bond is able to control his rage with Vesper’s boyfriend, and instead, place an emphasis on preventing another loss of life in an intelligence operation by QUANTUM is when Bond finally becomes the trained killer Fleming penned and the film series so often forgot before Casino Royale. While a real respect for Fleming clearly permeates the screenwriters’ product, true credit has to be again handed to Daniel Craig for his master work as James Bond. For me, there is little doubt that he manifests the character Fleming conceived in the novels. In Casino Royale, I had described Craig in the way Fleming described Bond, “ironical, brutal and cold“. Here, especially in the final scene with Vesper’s boyfriend, Craig possesses ”the look of controlled venom“ Fleming conceived in the You Only Live Twice novel when Bond discovers who he is after. He has taken the time to let us watch Bond grow into a more assertive, witty, and resourceful secret agent. One that is less prone to mistakes, more thoughtful, while still possessing the physical alpha male dominance that he broke ground with in Casino Royale. He is the cornerstone of this film in so many ways. True credit should also be given to Judi Dench, who is given some of the best dialogue in the film (and some of her best in her many performances as M). Giancarlo Giannini is again wonderful as Mathis, showing off a father-like figure to Bond while helping him grasp the reality of the life he leads. And while Fields is of no real consequence to the plot, her character does provide some great entertainment value, particularly the scene posing as teachers on sabbatical who won the lottery. Olga Kurylenko as Camille epitomizes the departure from convention that Quantum of Solace wants to show. She may have a role that is far different from that of the ”traditional Bond girl,“ but she serves an important purpose in the overall message of the story: she helps Bond see the fruitlessness in revenge. In doing so, she plays a pivotal role The film’s additional pluses lie in sharp dialogue that is far more humorous than the critics who insist this film is ”no fun“ think (hats off again to Paul Haggis). The song by Jack White and Alica Keys fits the titles fairly well. I don’t see why it was necessary to get rid of Danny Klieman but the desert motif, failing bodies, and big brass sounds is reminiscent of Maurice Binder’s work on the 1970’s Bond films. Not bad. The Felix Leiter character is again solid, as is David Arnold’s score (excellent use of ”Vesper’s song“ in particular), the locations are beautifully shot by Marc Forster, who juxtaposes the rising tension in both the chase scene with Mitchell and the Opera scene with the action. And speaking of the Opera scene, it is one of the best parts of the film. Forster was able to maximize the use of the film’s many locations without losing pace, well done. Yet surrounding these positive attributes which help to build the character arc I fleshed out above, there are some elements that keep Quantum of Solace from living up to Casino Royale’s gold standard. Quantum of Solace is far more fast-paced than Casino Royale, which by itself is not a flaw, but requires a heighted sense of attention to really get the most out of every scene. I was amazed at how much of the plot’s construction I missed in my first viewing because some person in the theater made a noise during the cab ride in Bolivia. Quantum of Solace can be a very rewarding film for a viewer, but one has to be an attentive audience member to get the most out of it. A similar critique can be made of the action scenes. While very impressive on the second go-’round, the use of the hand camera shots and frequent edits force the viewer to glue their eyes to the action to comprehend who is shooting/punching who. Again, this can be very intense and rewarding, but one has to be ready to really follow along. More substantively, Dominc Greene is an average villain. He does not offer the darkness offered by Le Chiffre or other baddies, and seems more like just another middle man rather than someone who is moving us up the QUANTUM chain. Medrano and Elvis were, too, overhyped. In the final analysis, Quantum of Solace is an enjoyable Bond film with plenty to appreciate for those who enjoy the primacy placed on Fleming’s Bond character and his world in this ”new“ Bond series. It leaves us much to go on for future films, namely, how do the Americans and British re-act to knowing that their business deals were not with a shady environmental conglomerate but with a world-wide terror syndicate? The future of Mr. White (strange as he is the only QUANTUM member not to leave the opera, as if he did not want Bond to know he was alive), and the leader of QUANTUM are all still uncertain. What we do know however, as evidenced by the gun barrel concluding both the film and his character arc throughout the past two films, is that Ian Fleming’s (emphasis added) James Bond has finally been given his due. And through a gratifying combination of his 1950’s character with 21st century cinema, he has been given a level of respect over the past two films that is unrivaled since the film series began. An accomplishment indeed.
Contact the Author: Will Haun
|
 | Return to
HMSS on QOS HMSS FILMS SECTION HMSS CONTENTS |
