this is possibly the best review anyone could ever write about QOS:
<LINK_TEXT text=“http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net … of_phallus”>Quantum of Solace</LINK_TEXT>
[quote=“Crazy Kenneth”]
this is possibly the best review anyone could ever write about QOS:
<LINK_TEXT text=“http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net … of_phallus”>Quantum of Solace</LINK_TEXT>
[/quote]
That review is funny, the writer has an incredibly random imagination.
I didn’t read all of it, but I don’t agree with his implication that Casino Royale is also a silly film. I loved it.
Also, the tite “Quantum of Solace” actually comes from Ian Flemming. Here:
<LINK_TEXT text=“http://www.tjbd.co.uk/news/quantum-of-s … t-mean.htm”>Quantum of Solace - what does it mean? | The James Bond Dossier</LINK_TEXT>
Here is my review from the Track Your Pictures 2008 thread:
[quote=“Ify”]
Quantum of Solace - 6.5/10
*** Warning: Spoilers within ***
This film was pretty much doomed after the absolutely appaling opening credits theme. I think it was a microcosm of the film itself - un-Bond!
The opening car chase scene seemed like something akin to the Matrix: Reloaded. It was obvious Marc Forster was going for something different, unfortunately different doesn’t in this case mean better. The whole film was pretty much on the same monotonous level, apart from a few adrenaline-fuelled action scenes. However, even those were poorly directed. Too fast paced, too many cuts and far too much camera movement. I found myself yawning as the film reached half-way point, it really was just boring and predicatable. Characterisation of major characters wasn’t a problem, but Agent Fields’ role in this film was next to pointless. Some of the cliche’s were cringeworthy. Although Paul Haggis was once again called upon to add his magic to the writing, I’m sorry to say none of it showed. The dialogue for the most part was dull - as was the story. I mean I have a weirdly strong emotional connection to Casino Royale, I felt no such attachment to this film. What irked me the most though, and this is not the worst aspect of the film generally speaking, but it just didn’t feel like a Bond film at all. There were no full-blown Bond moments with the theme tune glaring, there was hardly any style and sophistication. It lacked the cool factor.
I can’t keep going on about the negatives, so I’ll add a few points to Quantum of Solace’s favour. Daniel Craig once again was awesome. His performance was pretty much faultless. The one segment I got excited about was right after Bond went back to his hotel room to find M et al. there, up until he escaped - all of that was very well done. It actually felt like a Bond scene. Lastly, Olga Kurylenko is a fucking revelation. The Broccoli’s (and Wilson’s) knack of getting these tremendously beautiful girls with such presence and depth is unsurpassed.
To conclude, I was quite disappointed with the film, and was expecting something at least on it’s predecessor’s level. What I got was a fairly average flick, with cheap thrills and a dull plotline. I knocked off half a point for not making me feel like I was watching a “Bond film”, but dare I say it - a Bourne ripoff.
I’ll leave you with a pretty face:
[/quote]
i mean, it had the great Arnold score, great scenery, rough action, cool moments, an interesting story, uber-hot bondgirls (even though today’s bond movies are super tame compared to the brosnan and pre-brosnan era) and it was just tons of fun. low expectations = lots of fun watching 
should have had more sex in it though I think the Sean Connery bond films had more sex in them than Quantum did… MPAA are such prudes these day I say more nudity and sex…
yeah that’s really lame. especially since the girls are getting hotter and hotter with each movie. at least brosnan got to pretend he was giving Halle the bone… that lucky SOB
the one thing i liked about QOS is that the film was short. not one of those 2hrs45min popcorn blockbuster. a solid 90 minutes. that was good.