Mild Spoilers

Suitably suave in black tie, an event to launch a global media network, escorted to a backroom by henchmen, Pierce Brosnan as James Bond, disposed mercilessly of the last man standing with a single sharp blow to his head using a nearby glass ash tray.

There are the slick lunacies of the plans of Bond villains and polished quips on defeating them that lends to the parody and humour associated with Bond. Equally though there is a brutality to his actions, a coldness and detachment that keeps him alive. This brutality seems to have consumed the re-booted Bond. There’s a possibility Mike Leigh might consider getting behind the lense for the next installment so miserable, joyless and sexless ‘Quantum of Solace’ proves to be. Exotic locations, relatively attractive people and sophisticated action cannot lift the mood of this sulky movie. My views on Casino Royale have been rejected with the point that we are meeting Bond in the early stages of his profession. ‘Quatum of Solace’ picks up mere minutes after the end of ‘Royale’ and every action of this near mute Bond are that of a charmless man, who has potential to become nothing more with a gruff manner usually reserved for villains, designed to be killed.

The movie rests solely on Craig’s shoulders, as it should, he seems to ramble aimlessly from dangerous set piece to well dressed event, never a glimmer of a personality to endear us to him. Jason Bourne is a blank canvas, yet the audience cares about him, he puts people he cares for out of the way, here Bond saves a girl, and casually disposes of her unconscious body. None of his motivations or actions gel. What is meant to pass for a story hardly helps – a new word in my vocabulary – ‘faffing’ – occurs a lot. The villainous plot is underdeveloped, Bonds investigation is a haphazard shoot em up, obviously his battle is personal, one of revenge but this is relayed through his alienating brooding. Timothy Dalton disobeyed orders and followed his conscience, and still managed to defend Afghans from evil Russians while resolving a personal vendetta, why do we need this harsher style to show depth of character and abandon any of the scale that can be captured in Bond plots.

Again, like in Casino Royale, M trusts Bond faultlessly – this novice spy. Why? Judi Dench’s ‘M’ gets the second largest amount of screen time, but gone is the acerbic, respectful eye that kept Brosnan in toe when we meet her in ‘Golden Eye’. A maternal instinct is suggested at one point, she may veer dangerously close to Aunt May of Spiderman territory should she continue to speak such non-sensical prose. The girls are wash outs, leading lady Camile (Olga Kurylenko) shares the poster undeservedly, her arc adds to the downtrodden mood of the movie and she flits in and out of the rambling story, making no impact. The villain (Mathieu Amalric), again is a fish in a large pond, and is pathetically feeble, the influence of Bonds rivals is referred to throughout, the men they have working for them however are neither sinister nor engaging. The fantasy of Bond was destroyed in Casino Royale, so that the quips the squealish script writers put in, and the rapport between Bond and ‘M’ (Judi Dench) belongs to another more fun movie. In one instance Bond has his hand gripped over the neck of a dieing man, minutes later he is flung from a car having met the Bond girl of the movie and quips how that wasn’t very nice. None of the humour works, not a single line. It is out of place and forced and counteracts any of the profundity the movie strives for.The whole experience of these characters leaves you cold. We never hear that Ms. Fields first name is Strawberry, Moneypenny fails to appear again, perhaps its best.

The movie itself veers towards over direction indulging in establishing shots, pointless car ads adding no value and formal events with countless extras in shot, wandering around while the story seems to be having a rest off screen. An exchange between Bond and sullen Bond girl in a sink hole at one point gave me some form of visual motion sickness, how quickly the camera darted between the two, in one moment a long profile shot, the next up close on Craig, the next back to his female company now framed in one side of the screen. Director Mark Foster has made such wonderful films as “The Kite Runner and ‘Finding Neverland’, nevertheless it is in the action stakes he excels the most. There is an excellent chase immediately after the opening titles. Ultimately, there is almost an inevitability to the action, never a sense of adventure and never a sense the events are tied to the story. Also, a special request to Bond movie makers to give up on CGI, or at the very least ask the people who made ‘Get Smart’ how to film a someway realistic sky dive. The finale is a standard ‘insert volatile building here allowing as much as possible to blow up’, it’s the weakest part of the movie and leaves a bad after taste. Overall, this formula of remove the silly kitsch, but leave the ludicrous in a real world setting falls flat.

A movie comprised of poor parts and a resounding disappointment - the cliche of the trailer being better than the movie more than applies here. Craig can act, but he is not Bond. Overall joyless, without a scintila of class.