Saving the world with fist and gun

Saw Quantum of Solace over Thanksgiving.  What you want to know as a Bond movie consumer is:

a) Is Daniel Craig cool as Bond? 
b) Are there quant. suff. of high-speed chases, dramatic fights, exotic locations, depraved villains, and shaggable women?

Don’t worry; the answer to both questions is a solid yes.  And as an added plus, there are naked women in the title sequence again!

But I have to say, this was one incoherent flick.  Besides a few mentions of Vesper Lynd, there’s no evident connection to the last movie.  I’m sure the screenwriters had some in mind; they just didn’t care to fill us in.  A perfect example (and a spoiler, so watch out): at the end of the movie, the main villain says something like “I’ve answered all your questions about Quantum.”  But we didn’t see either the questions or the answers.  Clearly, there was no intention for the viewers to have questions or need explanations at this point; that is, there is no plot. 

Events seem reasonable enough as they happen, but they make no sense if you think them over.  The villain is making a play for Bolivian water resources… come on, that’s like Dr. Evil’s demand for one million dollars.  In La Paz, Bond is dissatisfied with his fleabag hotel and moves to a luxury hotel– despite theoretically being on his own resources, and despite the last movie’s considerable effort to establish this Bond as more of a thug than a socialite. 

What the moviemakers did focus on was the relationship between Bond and M.  And that works. (Well, if you accept the basic premise of Bond films, that a lone superagent can solve our geopolitical problems.  But if you’re watching a Bond film you accept that, at least for a couple of hours.)

The first half-hour or so shows off some rather neat technology, notably a tabletop monitor supporting multiple touch points, as well as some use of Bond’s PDA that make him, for once, seem like he’s actually part of a global intelligence organization.