Quantum of Sorrows (AKA Quark)

[Mazer Rackham]

I went to see Quark last Friday night, the showing at the local multiple had a overwhelming crowd of about 40 people. I expected more but there you have it.

I am shamelessly going to repurpose the saying about Ishtar ( "It was film so bad that even Warren Beatty couldn't save it.") With the latest Eon offering Bond 22 I have to acknowledge that it was a film so bad that the fabled Sean Connery couldn't have saved it.

Starting with the car chase the movies gets confused and stays that way. The producers forgot the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) rule. The direction, camera angels and story line are trying to do something sophisticated and it might have looked good on paper, on film it fails miserably.

Way too much attention was paid to stressing in the dialog that Bond is supposed to be experiencing emotional turmoil. Most of it comes off as completely unconvincing and worse over doing it. Very much like bad play where the actors think they are doing something edgy and emotionally gripping only to bore and confuse the audience with their hyperbole.

Since we talked about it here I did notice the tone of the movie and the political messages embedded. I don't think there have been many complaints about it elsewhere becasue I doubt the average movie goer caught it becasue the movie is so damned convoluted. But it definitely exists and in fact added to the disaffection I feel towards Quark (AKA QOS).
Beyond the frequent breaks for political pontification the tone is a miserable brooding one. No Joy In Mudville kind of deal. Who wants that when they go to the movies.

Quark is an high dollar film (around $260 million) to make but it does not show up on the screen. It looks very much like a low dollar direct to DVD effort. Sony shouldn't feel to bad about all the money spent because it's the same way with the action. Considerable time and effort was put towards the action scenes for all the good it did it might as well had the BIFF BAM POW of the 1960s Batman tv show.

About the leading man if I may call him that. I can't honestly say he ruined the film, because it was trash before it was filmed..However his humorless mechanized like portrayal was subhuman and lacking in anything to make it interesting. Just as the water stealing plot of the pseudo environmentalist bad guy was limp, inefficient and unconvincing. Almost akin to the Dr Evil schemes of the Austin Powers series.

The final show down left a lot to be desired and the use of classic Bond standbys ended up throw away scenes when they should have been show stoppers.

I'll hand it to Eon they make every second count, what is the shortest Bond film in their history feels like the longest. What the end result is that Quark is a short tag on to CR and probably shouldn't have had a feature film built up around that premise. Craig continue his dower monotone personage of Bond much to the detriment of the ionic character.

There is no need to go back to the drawing broad for Bond 23, they need to just go.

[James]

I can't believe this film cost $260 million. What did they spend the budget on? The producer's fee? To me it was like watching a rough cut of a film that wasn't finished.

[Mazer Rackham]

I can't believe this film cost $260 million. What did they spend the budget on? The producer's fee? To me it was like watching a rough cut of a film that wasn't finished.

I think that was the intended feel. More gritty and realistic, so much so that it isn't even a finished film

I thought CRs backdrops looked cheap Quarks look pathetic in their own right.