finally got around to seeing the film tonight. i thought it was pretty good!
I neither loved it nor hated it. I am, however, a little confused as to why they didn't call the film "Another Way to Die," given that would actually be a better film title.
i did like the song. oddly enough, i think i've liked most all of the bond songs, as incredibly varied as they are. i have my favorites, but can't think of any that i've outright hated. but i agree - "another way to die" is not only a better name, its a more accurate one, reflecting on james burying his past; letting his humanity "die".
Storywise its a continuation of the previous film, with a lot of plot points and characters carrying over to this film.
that's actually another first for the franchise, no? i enjoyed it, made it feel more like an indepth serial -- like a four-hour origin -- but they did an awful job of making this movie stand-alone. if you didn't see the first one (and, i'd imagine if you didn't see it
recently) you had no idea what the fuck they were going on about at times. no flashbacks, barely a reference, etc. terrible.
Yes, there were some nice touches such as the origin of the vodka martini etc, but there was very little within the two movies that really tied in with the previous films. The humourous one liners were pretty much gone.
i would agree with this. i did
not get the same thought after watching casino royale, which still felt very "james bond" to me, despite the updated tone / action. however, as quantum ended, i realized there was almost nothing about the movie that made it james bond. it was an enjoyable film, but entirely detached from the series.
