Bonding With Spyfilm Fans

The newest James Bond film is the 22nd in the popular series of action adventure films that has capitalized on the public’s yearning for an incorruptible yet often ruthless hero they can trust to save an uneasy and unstable world from international intrigue and self-serving evil.

It’s also the second featuring Daniel Craig in the starring role, the first to be an outright sequel to the film that preceded it, and has the highest-grossing opening weekend of all the Bond films (at over $70 million).

“Quantum of Solace” (or translated into perhaps plainer but equally Latin-based English, “Measurable Amount of Consolation”) obviously takes its title from the film’s focus on Bond’s desire for personal revenge on those responsible for the death of his true love in the 2006 film “Casino Royale.”

But the revenge aspect of the plot is merely an excuse to hook viewers who liked the last movie and perhaps use one more element of the proven formula used by Matt Damon’s Bourne films, to which the latest two Bonds have often been compared.

It is true that the two Daniel Craig Bond films have shifted their style away from the “classic” Bond formula with its over-the-top villains and high-tech gadget factor, and towards today’s trendy paranoia spy thrillers epitomized by the Bourne films.

In “Quantum of Solace” Bond is even on the run from his own organization as well as the CIA.

While there is a fair share of cutting-edge technology for gadget fans (there needs to be something to show for its huge $200 million budget), there is nothing like the sci-fi angle of 2002’s “Die Another Day” (with its ice palace, satellite mirrors, and invisible car) or all the amazing devices that Sean Connery’s Bond enjoyed and usually destroyed in the 1960s.

Like the past decade or two of Bond pictures, action scenes have a more frenetic, faster paced editing than the first 20 years of Bonds, but the basic plot structure of “Quantum of Solace” follows classic Bond formula.

Craig’s Bond charms various women who may be dangerous rivals, helpful allies, or both at different times, and at least one of whom winds up dead (in an homage to Shirley Eaton’s famous “Goldfinger” demise).

True motivation of the action revolves not around revenge but around current world issues—in this case, oil and water supplies, third-world dictatorships, multinational corporations, and environmentalism.

As in the best Bond tradition, scenes jump around the world to exotic locations at least once every reel.

Typical of Bond films, there is one seemingly unstoppable villain (played to the slimy hilt by Mathieu Amalric) whose personal goals manipulate world politics to his own ends. More in keeping with today’s spy thrillers, there is the underlying implication that he is just one of many lesser players in a more ominous worldwide organization little-known or understood by international intelligence agencies. However even that element is simply a variation on the specter of S.P.E.C.T.R.E. that was behind the villainy in Bond’s first decade.

The classic Bond films of Sean Connery, Roger Moore, and Pierce Brosnan were just as notable for their witty dialogue, clever puns, and flippant remarks as for their bizarre gadgets, exotic action, and attractive if disposable women. “Quantum of Solace” has a certain amount of darkly cynical humor and a few Bondian one-liners, and certainly has several show-stopping action sequences, but both of the Daniel Craig Bond pictures play down the tongue-in-cheek attitude for a grittier, more worldly and comparatively realistic approach.

Fans of spy thrillers should be pleased with “Quantum of Solace” even if they find it more routine than Craig’s impressive Bond debut in “Casino Royale.” It’s a bit more like a James Bond movie than just another action adventure about spies.

The Bond films are really just superhero movies with a slightly greater degree of plausibility. James Bond with his womanizing, his champagne tastes, and his personal determination to save the world from evil is essentially “Iron Man” without the hi-tech suit (or is Iron Man really James Bond without the British Secret Service designing his gadgets?).

Viewers who enjoyed the Daniel Craig James Bond films should check out (if they haven’t already) a selection from the previous 20 titles in the series, all of which are on DVD. Six good representatives covering the three major actors to play Bond have recently been released on Blu Ray with stunningly restored high-definition transfers. Not coincidentally, the purchase of one of the three-film box sets includes two free tickets to see “Quantum of Solace” in theatres.

Volume One of the Blu Ray Bonds may be the best place to start for those unfamiliar with the Bond legacy. It has the very first Bond picture, “Dr. No” (1962) with Sean Connery, the first Roger Moore Bond picture, “Live and Let Die” (1973), and the last Pierce Brosnan Bond picture, “Die Another Day” (2002). This 20th Bond includes a number of references to previous Bond titles, such as Halle Berry’s recreation of the entrance of Ursula Andress from the original “Dr. No,” and was the final pre-Craig Bond.

Volume Two has two more of the classic Connerys, “From Russia with Love” (1963) and “Thunderball” (1965), along with one of the best Moore titles, “For Your Eyes Only” (1982), and is probably the best choice for long-time Bond fans.

All films include a generous amount of extras, some in high-definition and others in standard-definition. These six titles cover exactly 40 years, providing an entertaining time capsule into changing attitudes, technology, and predominant socio-political concerns over the past half-century.

The films themselves, when viewed on a full-HD projection system, now look just as good as they did in theatres when they first came out. The titles from the 1960s are as sharp and crisp as if they were shot this year.

The only slightly disappointing transfer is 1982’s “For Your Eyes Only,” which seems a bit softer than the rest, as if intentionally thrown a hair out-of-focus to eliminate the appearance of film grain.