Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #444 in DVD
• Released on: 2009-03-23
• Rating: Suitable for 12 years and over
• Format: PAL
• Original language: English
• Subtitled in: English, Danish, Finnish, Swedish, Norwegian
• Number of discs: 1
• Running time: 100 minutes

Synopsis
Daniel Craig returns as Ian Fleming's most famous creation in Quantum of Solace, the first film in the James Bond series to follow directly on from the previous entry. Continuing where Casino Royale concluded, Quantum of Solace finds Bond on a perilous mission to uncover the truth behind the betrayal of his beloved Vesper, while keeping one step ahead of M (Judi Dench – Mrs Henderson Presents, Shakespeare In Love), the CIA and a shadowy organisation fronted by the diabolical Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric – The Diving Bell And The Butterfly, Marie Antoinette).


Felix Leiter (Jeffrey Wright – Basquiat, Oliver Stone's W) and the dubious Rene Mathis (Giancarlo Giannini – Black Belly of the Tarantula, Seven Beauties) also return for this high octane sequel directed by internationally-renowned German filmmaker Marc Forster (The Kite Runner, Finding Neverland). Though Quantum of Solace takes its gritty and uncompromising lead from Casino Royale, many of the series' hallmark ingredients are present, including a bevy of beautiful women which includes Gemma Arterton (St Trinians, Rocknrolla) and Olga Kurylenko (Le Serpent, Hitman), and a post-modern music score from series veteran David Arnold.

James Bond returns	Judi Dench as ‘M’	Olga Kurylenko
Mathieu Almaric	Judi Dench, Jesper Christensen and Daniel Craig	Jeffrey Wright as Felix Leiter
Olga Kurylenko	Giancarlo Giannini as Mathis	Daniel Craig and Jeffrey Wright
Jeffrey Wright and Daniel Craig	Olga Kurylenko

Customer Reviews

Casino Royale: Act Two
Let's be honest, everyone has an opinion on what a Bond film should be like. In terms of 'I would have done it this way' or 'they shouldn't have done it like that' a Bond film ranks up there with how the country should be run or the management of the national football team where everyone is an expert. Too much sex, not enough glamour, ridiculous gadgets, not enough gadgets, the stunts are too far fetched, it's too realistic....and so on; whatever combination the producers put in their films they'd be criticised for any of the above.

Quantum of Solace is no different, whilst still hugely successful Marc Forster's film has split audiences and critics alike. The storyline sees Bond pursuing the organisation he holds responsible for the death of his love Vesper Lynd in Casino Royale. It turns out that this organisation, Quantum, is unknown to MI6 yet is highly powerful and internationally connected and Bond stumbles on its plot to control Bolivia's water supply. Like M, we are never quite sure if Bond is on the mission or pursuing his personal agenda, as he gives little away whilst displaying his resourcefulness in following various leads around the world.

Quantum of Solace starts half an hour after Casino Royale and immediately you are into the film. An exhilarating car chase by Lake Garda is followed by an innovative title sequence and then we have a bit of exposition from M before another chase ensues, this time by foot and before you notice twenty minutes have passed and you haven't breathed. The plot proceeds more like a sequence of events as opposed to a structured build-up as Bond, hopping countries, goes from one chase (land, sea and air) or fight to the next, with just enough dialogue in between to balance the tempo. Following the predictably explosive third act the film's final scene lets the audience take stock and breathe out.

The reoccurring criticism levied at Quantum of Solace is its lack of build-up and depth, with Bond too solemn throughout. For me this misses the point, as producers were at pains to point out that this is a direct sequel to Casino Royale. I would go a step further and add that it's actually Act Two of one big film; where Casino Royale is the prelude and Quantum of Solace the finale where Bond, angry, lets loose. Viewing it this way will give you a different perspective.

There are a few downsides. The premise of a secret organisation whose evil aim is to up the price of water is, if not far fetched for today's audience, hardly blood-curdling stuff. And insisting on an explosive denouement is one thing, but to achieve it by having the enemies clash in a hotel powered by ultra flammable pressurised gas is, to say the least, a bit contrived.

The upsides though are many. The action is superb (if a little Bourne-juddery at times) as are the several fight sequences. You actually believe Bond is a highly trained killer and your expectancy doesn't let you blink when he gets into a clash (do you remember watching the Roger Moore fights slightly embarrassed?). The cinematography may not fully capture the pseudo glamour of the Bond countries of old, but you really feel you are in these places with Bond, sharing his claustrophobic world. And I loved the odd retro touch the film endows such as where Bond, all stealth and dressed like Steve McQueen, sneaks around a seedy Bolivian town in the dead of night and actually uses a public telephone.

The characters are mostly all well played too. The highlights being Gemma Arterton's breath of fresh air as Miss Fields and Jeffrey Wright's brooding Felix Leiter. But the plaudits have to go to Judy Dench and Daniel Craig who are both class acts. Whilst deadly serious, Craig delivers his witticisms with perfect timing and reassuring arrogance with a healthy disregard for authority. And the chemistry he shares with Dench's maternal, eternally reproachful M can't be faked.

All said and done Quantum of Solace is a hugely enjoyable film. It might not have the suave assuredness of the Connery films, nor the glamour of the some of the Moore's but what it has is Daniel Craig who, and this is coming from a lifelong Connery fan, is hands-down the best Bond of the series.

Not A Patch on "Casino Royale"
Reading through the existing reviews, they appear to fall into two camps. Negative ones complain about the lack of Q, Moneypenny, and the saucy quips of Roger and Pierce. Positive ones invoke Ian Fleming, and reckon he'd love "Quantum of Solace".

Actually - no he wouldn't - because QoS the film is a total mess. I'm aware that it's a direct sequel to "Casino Royale", which makes the comparison all the more stark. CR is the definitive Bond film because it is a supremely classy piece of cinema that stood comparison with the best grown-up films released in 2006. It has at its heart that superb performance from Daniel Craig as 007. There is action in abundance, beautifully shot with a minimum of CGI and with a clarity and flow of editing that makes following the plot a breezy pleasure.

QoS. Is chopped. Up into tiny. Snippets. As the inexperienced. Director. More famiiar with. Emotional material such as. "The Kite Runner". Hasn't. The Foggiest Notion how. Action Scenes should be. Shot. And. More. Importantly Edited.

Craig can't take the blame, there's nothing wrong with his steely, driven, performance. And he's ably supported - Dench is wonderful as ever and Bond Girl Kurylenko equips herself well in scenes where the pacing slows down. The stunt work is able, a shame we couldn't take more time to enjoy it.

A massive opportunity squandered after the genius of CR, then, but three stars because it's still James Bond.

Triumph of Stunts over Substance
Quantum of Solace [Blu-ray] [2008]

Quantum of Solace is written by the same team as Casino Royale and has the same James Bond, so what went wrong.

Undoubtedly Marc Forster the Director who was entrusted with the ultimate high budget action franchise without any experience of action thrillers, there is no other explanation.

He seems unaware that the build up of tension to a stunt is as important as the stunt itself, allowing the execution of the stunt time to register the danger of what is happening.

Next a screenplay that appears to have been edited down to near incomprehensibility, why when the run time is only 100 minutes and a further 20 minutes or so of drama would have made all the difference? I cannot believe the original screen play was this inadequate, or that a director with Marc Forster's background could have let this happen.

After Daniel Craig raised Bond to the next level in Casino Royale but this film reduces Bond to a generic action hero (more Jason Bourne than James Bond but non of the Bourne depth and momentum) there is no effort at character development or relationships either for Bond or anyone else.

Mathieu Amalric is a superb actor but is woefully miscast as the very feeble wheeler dealer villain Dominic Greene.

Casino Royale raised the profile of the James Bond franchise to the status of serious thriller, and muct closer to what Ian Fleming created, I read the novel to make sure, all that good work is completely undone by this effort.

It is just possible a Director's cut could save this film on Blu ray, I would certainly give it a try.