Saya nonton Quantum Solace di DVD, saya agak heran juga kalau film ini di Box office Amerika bisa dapat lebih dari 161 juta dollar Amerika hanya dari peredaran di Amerika saja. kayaknya banyak penggemar bond yang ketipu trailernya ya? atau gaung iklannya yang wah jadinya banyak yang berbondong2 ke bioskop.
Menurut saya film bond yang satu ini benar2 mengecewakan. sangat jauh dari film2 bond terdahulunya.
Data dari imdb.com
USA Box Office Returns
for the weekend starting 19 December 2008 to 26 December
Rank Weekend Total Weeks Screens Weekend screen avg. Cumulative box office
1. Yes Man (2008) $18,262,471 (%) 1 3,434 $5,318 $18,262,471
2. Seven Pounds (2008) $14,851,136 (%) 1 2,758 $5,384 $14,851,136
3. The Tale of Despereaux (2008) $10,103,675 (%) 1 2,758 $3,663 $10,103,675
4. The Day the Earth Stood Still (2008) $9,890,105 (-68%) 2 3,560 $2,778 $48,366,989
5. Four Christmases (2008) $7,701,375 (-41%) 4 3,515 $2,191 $100,110,827
6. Twilight (2008/I) $5,189,319 (-35%) 5 2,991 $1,734 $158,425,218
7. Bolt (2008) $4,146,856 (-44%) 5 2,968 $1,397 $94,900,059
8. Slumdog Millionaire (2008) $3,053,760 (40%) 6 589 $5,184 $12,037,510
9. Australia (2008) $2,174,188 (-48%) 4 2,212 $982 $41,796,525
10. Quantum of Solace (2008) $2,051,882 (-45%) 6 1,874 $1,094 $161,200,412
- craig tidak pantas jadi bond, pendek, kasar, tidak berkharismatik, bukan tipe playboy, cuek, sadis, tidak necis, nyaris tidak bisa senyum, lebih mengandalkan tinju dari pada gadjet dan tips2 gaya seorang spionase / agen rahasia.
- musuh bond tidak berbobot sama sekali, pesakitan yang bukan tipe penjahat yang mau menguasai dunia seperti film2 bond dulu.
- tidak ada peralatan canggih yang bikin penonton kagum
- pemeran wanitanya tidak mengesankan, gampang dilupakan nama dan wajahnya
- adegan2 lucu dan nakal nyaris tidak ada, tidak seperti waktu diperankan oleh roger moore.
- ceritanya terlalu sederhana, tidak 'BIG' seperti bond2 terdahulu
- nafas bond nya tidak ada sama sekali, jika film ini diganti judul dan nama pemerannya, misalnya berjudul 'the brutal agent' bernama mr. Fist, orang ngga akan anggap 'ngeh' karena memang film ini tidak seperti film bond.
- actionnya standard saja. mirip film bourne.
Saya jadi penasaran lalu beli beberapa dvd film bond terdahulu seperti the man with the golden gun, moonraker, from russian with love, licence to kill, golden eye, semuanya ternyata masih enjoyable ditonton dan memorable... tidak tahu kenapa film bond yang satu ini benar2 ngga rekomend deh.
dari wiki site:
James Bond, juga dikenal sebagai 007 adalah tokoh fiksi dalam berbagai novel yang ditulis oleh Ian Fleming. Ia adalah agen rahasia untuk Britania Raya dan pertama muncul dalam novel Casino Royale di tahun 1953.
Petualangan James Bond juga telah diangkat ke dalam bentuk film. Sampai saat ini telah dirilis 20 film resmi, dan tokoh Bond dimainkan oleh aktor-aktor ini (diurutkan secara kronologis):
Sean Connery (6 film dan 1 film tidak resmi, Never Say Never Again)
George Lazenby (1 film)
Roger Moore (7 film)
Timothy Dalton (2 film)
Pierce Brosnan (4 film)
dan Daniel Craig (1 film, dan akan membintangi film Bond berikutnya)
Seri novel dan film James Bond memiliki banyak tokoh pendukung. Para pejabat British Secret Service biasanya dikenal dengan huruf, misalnya M dan Q. Dalam novel (namun tidak dalam film), Bond telah memiliki dua sekertaris, Loelia Ponsonby dan Mary Goodnight. Dalam film, keduanya dilebur menjadi sekertaris M, Miss Moneypenny. Kadang Bond ditugaskan untuk menyelidiki suatu kasus dengan temannya, Felix Leiter dari CIA. Dalam film, Leiter muncul secara teratur dalam era Connery, hanya sekali dalam era Moore, dan di kedua film Dalton. Namun ia hanya dimainkan oleh aktor yang sama dua kali. Ia absen dari era Brosnan (walaupun digantikan oleh Jack Wade), dan kembali dalam film Craig pertama Casino Royale pada 2006.
Bond girl biasanya (walaupun tidak selalu) memiliki nama-nama double entendre, misalnya "Pussy Galore" dalam Goldfinger, "Plenty O'Toole" dalam Diamonds Are Forever, dan "Xenia Onatopp" dalam GoldenEye.
Beberapa tokoh yang sering muncul dalam novel dan film adalah Bill Tanner, Rene Mathis, Felix Leiter, Jack Wade, Jaws, Charles Robinson, dan J.W. Pepper.
Film-film James Bond
Dr. No • From Russia with Love • Goldfinger • Thunderball • You Only Live Twice • On Her Majesty's Secret Service • Diamonds Are Forever • Live and Let Die • The Man with the Golden Gun • The Spy Who Loved Me • Moonraker • For Your Eyes Only • Octopussy • A View to a Kill • The Living Daylights • Licence to Kill • GoldenEye • Tomorrow Never Dies • The World Is Not Enough • Die Another Day • Casino Royale • Quantum of Solace • Bond 23
Casino Royale (1954 TV) • Casino Royale (1967) • Never Say Never Again
ini beberapa pendapat negative tentang fim ini:
Poor filming, chopped up action sequences, 6 November 2008
Author: unggrabb from United Kingdom
Thought this was one of the worst Bond movies ever. Nothing of the magic that made many of the other 007 movies so special was to be found here. The cutting of the film is terrible. masses of 2 second sequences thrown together - for no apparent reason. (as the movie is so boring I found myself counting "one...two...) over and over again. If the action is poor it appears a cheap trick to try to "create interest" by chopping it all up and using 25 cameras to shoot that which has no interest. It just comes across as irritating and silly.
The end scenes with the building which is designed to explode step by step was the last straw. I have rarely seen anything more staged and unbelievable. I considered leaving a few times as the movie was so boring but then I thought that "can it get any worse"? and yes, it could and did.
We want James Bond 007 back again, lets pass this "experiment" into history and forget that it ever happened.
The previous movie Casino Royale was a good action movie, though it wasn't a Bon movie (either). The Jason Bourne formula works, but Bourne is Not Bond and this is not a Bourne movie, i don't really know how to classify other than "utterly pointless", I couldn't see any redeeming features, no plausbile plot, no interesting characters, no fantastic sceneries, awful title song, no "Bond"-ness - at all
Utter garbage, 14 November 2008
Author: Tom Kludy from United States
Save your money. This movie is terrible and has nothing whatsoever to do with the iconic character of James Bond.
Story: 0/10. The main plot was the worst of any Bond movie. Instead of saving the world, Bond is saving the people of a 3rd world country a few pennies on their water bill. Instead of fighting for the good of the free world, Bond is on a heartless revenge killing spree, and the free world is portrayed as almost universally corrupt. But the worst offense is the contrived "explosive hotel" in the middle of nowhere, in the desert. I'll bet they get a lot of tourism there! At least its made of some kind of material that burns without a single trace of smoke... -groan-!
Characters: 1/10. Craig is terrible as bond, he has no charisma whatsoever. He broods for the entire film, never smiling, never delivering that cheeky charm that Bond should. The main Bond girl is a bundle of laughs... no wait, strike that, she's a depressing lump. The CIA girl is actually OK (thus the 1 point) but only sticks around for about 2 minutes before being killed. Felix, instead of being a smart, useful, and funny friend, is a waste of screen time and contributes nothing at all to the story. The villain does not even seem evil, just like a corrupt businessman (FAR from the world-domination-seeking villains of past). The deposed dictator is unbelievable and the implied rape scene at the end should NOT be in a bond film. M is the same as the last few Bond movies, a weak, bleeding-heart "mother" who could not possibly have the respect of MI6 agents in the real world.
Production: 0/10. The action scenes have such short cuts that you can't focus on any of them. The result is utter confusion about who is punching whom. There are obvious and avoidable errors such as cutting between two scenes and the actors have changed positions.
Franchise Loyalty: 0/10. Rename the main character and you would never be able to guess that this is a Bond film. You would probably guess it's a Bourne film. I don't demand the clichés such as "Bond, James Bond" (though you certainly won't find that here). But I do demand that the main character be a likable British guy showing off cool spy gadgets and attacking problems with intelligence rather than always brute force. There were no gadgets-not a single one!-and Bond was a cold-blooded murderer.
This movie would be a below-average effort for a generic action flick. But putting the name "Bond" on it debases and defiles the Bond franchise. Those responsible for this atrocity should be ashamed of what they've done to try to turn a quick buck on a legendary franchise.
Non Bond !!, 9 November 2008
Author: paulamichelle from United Kingdom
*Plot Spoilers* but there is very little plot to be given away in this film! I had a hard time with CR and really hoped that QoS would be more Bond but I was to be sadly disappointed! Am I the only person left who likes a good plot, strong characters, gadgets, car chases and romance in a Bond film.....
Daniel Craig is the most heartless Bond I have seen, He does not seem to a loyalty to anyone or his country, He's supposed to be everything thats cool about being a British agent but he was empty and charmless! The scene where Rene Mathis ends up in the boot of the car, gets shot and dies in Bonds arm, then has his money stolen was utterly immoral and unheroic.
Many people have already written about how badly shot and directed QoS was. So I will get to main concern with QoS,
What UPSET and OFFENDED me most was the implied rape scene near the end! This was disgusting and should not be in a Bond film or any film with a 12A rating!! The subplot of sexual assault shocked me. If it has been a 15 or even a 18 I might have expected to see something of this nature in the film. I have a 12 year old niece who would have had nightmares if she'd seen QoS. I think the 12A rating is a complete cop out !!!! QoS to me is a 15 .
I hope is not just me that believes that films are becoming too desensitised, QoS is a plain example of this. I don't think I'll waste time and money seeing any future Bond films. Bring back Pierce Brosnan and his charm and warmth!
quantum of crap, 17 November 2008
Author: (firstname.lastname@example.org) from Los Angeles
I have seen bad James Bond movies. I have seen Bond fight a midget in THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN, pigeons doing double takes in MOONRAKER, a villain flapping his arms trying to fly in MOONRAKER, Bond hanging from a swinging firetruck ladder while making cartoon sounds in A VIEW TO A KILL, and a middle-aged Bond exchanging cringe-worthy sexual quips with a middle-aged Madonna in DIE ANOTHER DAY. But no Bond film has ever been as unpleasant, distasteful, headache-inducing (in every action scene) and witlessly bad as QUANTUM OF SOLACE.
worst pre-credits sequence in the entire series, and there have been some awful ones. A jumble of tight camera angles, frenetic movements and rapid cutting are meant to give the viewer the impression that an exciting car chase is in progress through an Alpine tollway but instead completely detaches us from the mess on screen. This segues into the worst credits sequence accompanied by the worst song in the series.
Now I can take a gritty hard-boiled Bond, and Daniel Craig is very good. But a charmless monotone Bond trudging through two of the poorest nations on the planet after a laughably lame little French villain who can't even dispose of his ex-mistress, partly due to a Jim Carrey lookalike henchman who's literally tripped up by Bond's female assistant then wears a neck brace for the duration of the movie, these things just exhaust one. Sean Connery's Bond would have shot "Dominick Greene" before the opening credits on the way to fight Goldfinger, Largo, Blofeld or some real badass villain. And after spying in Haiti and Bolivia, I expected Bond to go to Darfour next for some more pleasant scenery.
You would think you can escape the sheer inanity of the plot, the phony action, the Opra-esquire oppressive mood, the horrible settings, and the lousy character support by enjoying the requisite Bond girls. Sorry but there are none. Well there are two pretty women who alternately hang around the droopy Bond sharing no chemistry or seductive charm with him. Bond only perfunctorily sleeps with one of them, not even bothering to charm her, before resuming his confusing dreary mission and pathetic moping with girl number two.
In one of the many nonsensical sequences, Bond finds M and four British Secret Service agents in his hotel room. M orders her men to escort Bond back to London. After Bond demolishes the four and escapes, M tells a colleague that she trusts Bond and will stand by her agent, suggesting that Bond proved his loyalty by beating up her men.
The movie made 70-million dollars opening weekend on the good will from CASINO ROYALE, which although mediocre was like THUNDERBALL compared to this film. The producers must be patting themselves for their good judgments. But if there is any artistic justice, the next installment's box-office will suffer for this atrocity and die another day.
Not Bond, 3 November 2008
Author: bdevons from United Kingdom
Quantum of Solace is by far the worst 'Bond' film to date. What makes it so bad is the fact that is pretends to be a 'Bond' film! The previous Bond films have gained their legendary cult status due to the effortless class and smooth operation of Bond along with a gripping plot. The additional quirks, such as gadgets, one-liners and, charismatic Bond Girls gave them their uniqueness. Partly due to the cheesy plot and the completely miscasting of Daniel Craig, Casino Royal departed somewhat from the 'Bondness' which all its predecessors possessed. What it did have was a little suspense however. Quantum of Solace has gone one step further in respect of all the bad points of Casino Royal, plus is has lost all the good points. If the word's '007' and 'Bond' were not mentioned in Quantum of Solace you wouldn't know you were watching a Bond film, perhaps just a poor man's Arnold Shwartznigger film. There were no gadgets, no jokes, zero suspense, the Bond Girls were instantly forgettable and (partly due to the script) Daniel Craig lacked any subtlety, class or depth. I honestly cannot understand how anyone could give this film more than a 3/10. If you are unfortunate enough to waste almost 2 hours of your life watching this film, try watching any other pre-Daniel Craig Bond film afterwards and you will feel like Die Another Day should have finished with the words "The End". I feel I owe it to Judi Dench to mention that she added the only bits of quality and appropriateness to this film.
Have a New Coke with the New Bond / Bring Fields back, 17 November 2008
Author: filmalinda from United States
I am a HUGE Bond fan, books and movies. Loved Casino -- music, credits, gags, plot. Just watched it again. I will shell out bucks to see Daniel Craig's CHEST and his million watt smile, both MIA in this movie except for a nanosecond. They shot in Italy, for crying out loud -- couldn't they scare up a Lamborghini or a Testa Rossa for Bond to play with? No great cars; no sex, just talking about self-hate; no gadgets; Dench was wasted. Feeble plot, like bad 70's TV. Did anybody else notice that the girl's backstory was lifted from Hemingway's For Whom the Bell Tolls?
TO THE PRODUCERS:
1. Bring back Gemma Aterton as the Bond Girl in the next one. Say that they made a mistake in IDing her in Quantum. She's got it all -- the Bond Style, wit, looks. And smarts enough that she isn't demeaning to women.
2. Give Bond a CAR and some GADGETS to play with.
3. Give us the theme back. If you have to have a new Bond theme, why not use You Know My Name from Casino?
4. Opening credits have to be DYNAMITE -- pic and sound. We go to the movie so that we can stamp our feet and clap and cheer when the theme and the gun barrel slam onto the screen..
5. Let us LAUGH. The world is a disaster, so give us some escapism.
The wait isn't over. It's just beginning.
Bond minus style and soul, 1 November 2008
Author: Andreas from England
A very confusing Bondfilm. The editing is too Bourne like and not very effective. Forster's direction makes the film look rushed. The story is very weak and there is far too much action. This looks like just another action movie. I missed classic lines, style, wit and some TRUE Bond-moments. There is a lack of originality here, sadly.
However, all the people who hates Bondmovies should be happy with this, because as an action movie it is decent. But as a Bondmovie: Very disappointing.
Come back Pierce Brosnan - we forgive you :)
What was that all about then????, 8 November 2008
Author: Benjamin from Poole, England
I've just got back from the Quantum of Solace. Without comparing this to any other Bond or even calling this a Bond movie, this is undoubtedly the worst movie I've seen in such a long time. There was action ALL THE TIME! Sound good? Well try and watching that for an hour and a half. It felt longer than the extended box set of lord of the rings. If I had to download the script then what would it be? 1 kilobyte? The camera-work is shoddy and left me feeling dizzy. It was cutting all over the place and was more suited to a movie like the Blair Witch Project. Until about half way through I was quite alert then all of a sudden my head just dropped and I realised how boring the movie was. There's NO STORY, NO GADGETS, NO Q, NO DIALOGUE. Most of the acting wasn't bad but then again there wasn't anything to act with. The stunt guys should have been paid more than the actors. No this isn't a good Bond movie. It's not even a good action movie. I can't tell you what it's about because I don't know and I don't care. How on earth it has a score over 7 on here astounds me because after the movie I was listening out for reactions from a full cinema and didn't hear anything positive. Casino Royale puts this rubbish to shame. Sack the director, sack the script writers and sack the camera team.
Very weak. can't believe people have to watch that., 17 November 2008
Author: Jm Ash from Canada
Real crap. waste of time, has nothing to do with 007. 1 is for the action but otherwise 0. My main problem with Quantum Of Solace is the obvious lack of plot. The action scenes are well directed, but they mean little to the plot. For example, the opening sequence features two car chases. We don't know why they're chasing Bond, but as soon as it's over, they still don't explain it. Another is when Bond and Camille grab a plane, and for some reason that I don't remember being explained, they are shot down by a bunch of planes. It comes across as random, and really means nothing to the 'plot'. The race scene in Siena was utterly stupid. The cut back and forth from the Bond action to the race action again and again was utterly unrelated and therefore pointless.
The scene in the movie were Bond discovers the underground lake and states "he is draining all the water" as an explanation to the central "badness" that the villain is about to do is utterly laughable and silly.
Quantum leap into the dumpster., 16 November 2008
Author: biohazardehw from Pennsylvania, USA
If I wasn't so bored, I might have felt violated by this awful suckfest.
Seriously...who greenlights a script this bad? I'll give you a quick excerpt of the "plot": Bond gets to the hotel and kills the geologist, gets the briefcase and walks out just in time for the car to pull up. He gets in and the girl pulls a gun on him. He gets out just in time to hop on the motorcycle. Follows the car to the dock just in time to overhear the conversation and see the boat take off just in time. Follows on motorcycle and drives off the ramp of a boat that was lined up just in time for him to land in a powerboat. Fights off baddies and in the process, the girl gets KO'ed just in time for Bond to reach land and drop her off so he can get to the airport just in time to see the villains take off, etc.
Notice the excessive usage of the phrase "just in time".
There's even a spot where Bond has left a party and is driving in the middle of the desert where he just so happens to come across a man who just so happens to sell Bond his plane. Bond flies the plane for less than 5 minutes and just so happens to get shot out of the air. Bond and the girl (did they even say her name more than once?) open the parachute just in time - oops, sorry. About a minute too late. Sorry, but if you open a parachute 12 feet from the ground, you're dead. I don't care if you're James Bond. You're dead. So anyway, they just so happen to land directly above a sinkhole which just so happens to have the most easily accessible exit in the history of any place where any character was ever trapped in film history, and then just so happen to end up in a spot where they can easily recognize the villain's plan (which was over AN HOUR into the film - didn't know the purpose of any of the action up to that point, which made it tedious and boring), etc, etc.
Notice the excessive usage of the phrase "just so happens".
There is absolutely no plot to this film whatsoever. There are no characters. There is no dialogue. There are no relationships. There is no originality at all. None. Everything about this film is one - yes, ONE dimensional. Not two, and definitely not three. Just one.
This is action porn...but even the action sucks.
It opens with a car chase where one dark vehicle is shooting at another dark vehicle, so you can't tell what the hell is going on, who is in which car, who is shooting at Bond and why they are shooting at him. It makes no sense to a viewer. Neither does any of the action that follows. Bond leaves bodies in his wake, never even encountering a real challenge. Coincidences move him from place to place and stuff blows up and people shoot guns in the process. That is this movie.
Bond doesn't struggle at all. The villain's henchman is supposed to be the brawn to the villain's brain. Look at Odd Job and Goldfinger. Here, we have this guy with a flo-be bowl cut who gets tripped by a girl in a cocktail dress. And the main baddie himself looks like a young Roman Polanski...and the members of his super-secret organization that nobody knows anything about just so happen to conveniently sport little Q lapels, making them so easy to identify. Smart.
Even action porn needs to be exciting. There have to be reversals. Watch the truck chase at the end of The Road Warrior and you'll see more reversals in that one 10 minute scene than this entire movie. That is why that scene is great and this movie sucks. Both have cars driving fast and people shooting one another and things blowing up. Hint: THAT IS NOT WHY PEOPLE WATCH MOVIES! People watch movies for an experience. We want to see reversals in action, character relationships develop and change, a plot that actually makes sense. We want to see characters develop beyond a thuggish menace before they go and wreak havoc. We want to see this person that we now care about actually struggle and fight for victory. We want to be able to follow what is going on, in terms of story and visuals. You can't do that if the camera is swaying violently and cutting every 3/8ths of a second and the main plot isn't revealed until a majority of the movie is over.
This is perhaps the worst movie I have seen in a decade. An absolutely epic failure on every front, including the future of film-making, which appears to be heading toward a depression of it's own if a film like this, completely void of quality, gets made.
The cinematic apocalypse has begun.
PS: Who the f--k edited this movie?! I want to track this person down and murder them with my bare hands in their own home in front of his or her children. My 5 year-old dog could have done a better job. Is there a bet going on with you and Paul Greengrass as to who will be the first to make a film that will literally cause people's heads to explode from an overload of underprocessed information...or do you just suck that bad? Quit your job immediately and find something that you're actually good at.