What about Quantum of Solace for the audience?

To say that the new James Bond movie is monumentally disappointing may be overstating the case a bit, but I left the cinema viewing underwhelmed and unimpressed. Quantum of Solace for me is like how many viewed Die Another Day - a film that prompted a retooling of the franchise, but given the record-breaking box office is unlikely to occur on this occasion.
Essentially the high concept of Q of S was all over the place, summed up by the pointless display of the moving white circle (a villain’s eye) into which JB appears then shoots bringing the downward swash of blood, at the end of the film and right before the credits. That sequence sets the scene for all official Bond films, but if one chooses not to have it at the beginning, it might as well be dispensed with altogether.
To the fundamentals of the movie, it wanted to be gritty, modern and realistic, but combines it with ludicrous, over-the-top action - it doesn’t know whether to be Ipcress File or camp Bond. Ultimately, the Bourne franchise has had a big influence on the Bond one, but Bourne is currently superior since, like the vast bulk of Bondage, it doesn’t take itself entirely too seriously, tacitly conceding that the rapid-cut fights are hokum while remaining exciting. The same goes for the plot (one renegade agent can outwit and take down the whole CIA). In fact, sometimes Q of S goes for outright plagiarism since JB makes more than one precipitous leap onto a dilapidated balcony á là Bourne Ultimatum in Tangier.
So, if Bond is to be more like a conventional spy then the action needs to be less unbelievable - I don’t remember Harry Palmer careering about in a speed boat on the Caribbean, fighting off hordes of gun-toting hoodlums. The choreography was wonderful - and completely transparent; if Bond puts a foot wrong, he’s dead, yet he improbably does this throughout the whole movie, breaking the illusion into which one is to be immersed, something most Bond spectaculars did not have to worry about overly, since they were obviously more about fun entertainment than gritty excitement.
Further, the jerky action sequences are cut so fast it’s impossible tot ell either what’s happening or who’s the good guy and who his opponent is - something that the Bourne films largely avoided - in those it was so well-handled as to almost always keep one in the know which tussling character was Bourne or which vehicle he was driving. Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery, but Q of S shows that what the Bourne pictures make look easy, is actually considerably harder to achieve. Marc Foster is no Paul Greengrass, even when recruiting the Bourne Ultimatum’s fight scene honcho - the director has the final say. Bond’s action shots can be incredibly frustrating through not knowing what’s going on and therefore commits the cardinal sin of losing the interest of the of its audience at the times it should be most compelling.
Other niggling points abound. The anticlimax of the flick, for example. Okay, so a hotel blows up, but there is a considerable longeur between that and the credits rolling. Even the outward show of the destruction of the building left me unmoved, filmed at a safe distance from the roiling explosions, an unremarkable chimney stack being dynamited would have been more thrilling. The jagged theme tune written by Jack White and performed by him and Alicia Keyes, but more meaningless than most of the its Bond ilk and fairly impossible to warm to. Regarding the shortcomings of the plot, JB is up against a nefarious set-up that, as in Batman Begins, has a scarcely credulous penetration of countless organisations, right down to even remote individuals whom Bond is not predicted to visit. The low-key ending was a turn-off. Real life may be full of unresolved dramas but generally movies, however they end, are expected to deliver a pay-off for demanding the attention of the audience for the last couple of hours. This just felt like a feature length episode of a serial transposed to the silver screen. The wasting of Gemma Arterton is another bone of contention (or if you’re going to do so, why push her so high up the credits?), as is the oh-so predictable death of Bond’s friend. The moment he agreed to go to Bolivia with Bond I knew his fate was sealed, pointing out to Altaa that he was going to die shortly. I know it’s a template stretching back to Dr No, to give Bond more righteousness in what he does., but if the screenwriters wanted to surprise, it would have been to have let the character survive the movie.
Basically, by stripping Bond down, it makes it look like an average action movie with a big budget. Plenty of the super-spy’s films might be said to be just like that, but they do have something in their DNA that differentiates them from the rest of the bobbing pack. This film merely joins the rest of the pack, as if being guided by an invisible sheepdog. The makers had the examples of From Russia With Love, For Your Eyes Only, Licence to Kill or even the immediate predecessor, Casino Royale in how to play Bond fairly straight, but they chose their own path.
On the plus side, Daniel Craig effortlessly inhabits the central role; barely one does think ‘oh, that’s Daniel Craig’ rather than what’s James Bond doing now. The pivotal villain played by Matthieu Almaric was also good, but the film was so diffuse in its plot focus, that he wasn’t allowed to have the impact he might have had in affecting the movie (as opposed to the story). I liked the return of Matthis despite the, how many times do I feel this adjective needs to be said, unbelievable plot twist involving him. The location titles were pleasantly refined, a touch of class. The homages were agreeable, if superfluous in a Bond film that is trying to break free from its antecedents - the Goldfinger tribute with the girl covered in oil, instead of gold paint; the night at the opera reminiscent of the Venice fight in Moonraker; and the villain wielding an axe reminded me of the climatic fight in A View to a Kill. I found the wistful background music engaging too. Having said all this, the previous Bond film, written by the same guys, that is, Casino Royale, was far superior.