To me the movie was inferior to Casino Royale. So if you want to see my review of the movie. Type Casino Royale. I give it 2 and a half stars out of 5.

09/28/2009, 8:59 pm

really good. by far the best 007!!!

03/03/2009, 11:40 pm

Regarding the Oscars, I thought Hugh Jackman was the best emcee we have ever had - he was charming, talented and the Oscars had a new flair, thanks to him. I have an opposite feelng on almost every category in your Oscars re-cap - you guys are way off base.

02/24/2009, 9:55 pm

I thought it was good i would give it a 7 out of 10. althought it was disapointing because the one before ot was just so good. yes the action scenes were great but they felt to much like the Bournie movie. but i got to give them creadit for the first james bond sequal it was good. the plot was weak and the bad guy just was not a good james bond bad guy and would have worded a whole lolt better if it was one of piers's bad guy because he was just to weak for craig.i did liked it though and i do think that craig does better than piers, alot better. i hope the next one is alittle better

01/04/2009, 8:55 pm

Whether you leave a Bond film feeling satisfied or stymied, one thing has always been certain about the dashing Brit portraying the world's greatest secret-agent: Gadgets, one-liners, and martinis (shaken, not stirred). It has always been certain, relatively speaking, until the reveal of Quantum of Solace, director Marc Forester's (Monster's Ball) attempt at shaking up the industry. In this somewhat revamped, and seemingly prequel-esque film, Daniel Craig portrays a 007 unknown to most followers of the past 40+ years. Gone are Q's famous gadgets which usually riddle a Bond film and added are some much more thrill-ride action sequences, albeit still the same head-shaking 'how did he survive that' moments. Gone also is the trademark 'Shaken, not stirred' comment, lines left to a male flight attendant. Gone is the constant seduction of a female co-star, a former staple of past films. I am not sure how to comment on the lack of the above Bond features from the past, because this film stands alone as a decent action thriller filled with a discernable plot, packed action, some romance, and an intriguing twist on Bond's emotional state. I just don't know if it is a Bond film without all the bells and whistles. Craig does a very good job (better than Casino Royale) at bringing out the deep states of emotion a double agent must seemingly go through all the time, and it comes through well on the big screen. Here lies a distinct difference from former Bond films, in that the usually focused character who hits on the secretary with a charming one-liner and saunters off to the spa in search of a masseuse, all the while carrying a gun close to his hip ready to take on the bad guy around the corner, is now replaced by a darker version of this character of the past, one who thinks of revenge and kill first, rather than detaining for information. The dark issues Craig struggles with stem from the loss of his love and the resulting revenge he seeks, but somehow it all seems very much like a stand-alone action film (a decent one at that) but not a Bond film. I am quite sure viewers will leave this film with the satisfaction that their money was not wasted, but also with a vague sense of being cheated.

01/03/2009, 2:44 am

forgot to give it a rating. Sorry

01/01/2009, 11:03 pm

kicked butt... action packed. I really liked it

12/24/2008, 3:31 am

I loved this movie even though I havent seen it yet..

12/19/2008, 4:20 pm

sclay318 Save your time and your cash..... big disappointment.

12/19/2008, 12:52 am