Comments on: Gadget-less Bond

Despite the vaguely technical title, the latest James Bond installment, Quantum of Solace, is almost completely devoid of gadgets.

[Thomas, David]

*chuckle*

Been looking forward to the Bond film, and the gadgets were not even a thought. The new bond is nittier, grittier, and less cliche than all of the previous Bonds. If the new Bond film is even close to the last Bond film, I will be greatly pleased.

[Gigatexel]

Actually, Ford owns only has 70 million dollar stake in Aston Martin. It sold off the bulk of its shares to a consortium led by ProDrive Chairman David Richards in March 2007.

[clr36]

Sounds like this new Bond is not worthy of my hard earned money. Sad that the writers can't come up with a few neat little toys to wow us with today. They leave it up to the people in the graphics department wow us with eye candy. I'm sure we're all tried of that now. Maybe the next one will get back to the basics.

[pjhenry1216]

I'd say the movies were the exact opposites. Those tech toys were neat because of the effects involved. Cars turning invisible? Come on. The current Bond seems to be much more realistic. It uses special effects but only to pull of things that could actually happen (well, ok, not all of it) but are too dangerous to actually perform. The comment from above uses the only phrase that i can really think of to describe it, "nitty and gritty." its just more... raw. daniel craig acts like a guy who can actually do all those things, not like some royal egotistical guy. granted, he still comes off with a big ego, but he also is a lot colder in a way that makes him fit the role of someone who has a license to kill.

[Regulator7]

Discalimer: I haven't seen QoS yet, but I'm a fan of JB in general, and so I had certainly intended to go see it. I hadn't heard that QoS was devoid of gadgets.

James Bond without the gadgets? That's sort of like doing Star Wars without the 'Force'. It's not the same series. If the writers truly believe that we've reached a point where real gadgets are 'cooler' than fictional ones, they all need to be fired. The innovative, impossibly-amazing gadgets should be part of JB. I'd rather see the writers re-hash old ideas for gadgets than eliminate them entirely. I still don't own a submarine car, or a laser-firing-watch, explosive bolos, a jetpack, acid-dispensing fountain pens, or dozens of other 'Bond' gadgets. I, for one, miss the days of the 'softer' James Bond where he'd use his intellect and gadgets to get him out of a bind, rather than the new 'hard' James Bond that uses impossible physicality. It's James Bond, not Rambo-with-a-Martini.

And so happy to hear that the extensive advertising by Ford & Sony will be back in action in QoS like it was in CR. Ford Edges? Seriously? I can hardly wait. So I get to pay my $15 to sit through a two-hour Ford & Sony commercial. Awesome. :-(

[pjhenry1216]

The last James Bond was somewhat devoid of gadgets as well. If you liked the last one, you'll like this one. If you didn't, well, then you only *might* like this one.

[Rageje]

Would you rather have the invisible car? Gadgets were only added after the movies had less to offer.

[KayakFun]

I saw it yesterday evening. All action scenes were so packed with a too-fast successions of too-short camera viewpoints that I could not tell what was happening, even sitting on the 3rd row from the back. This must be the worst Bond movie ever. Even the Roger Moore Bond with the 2CV chase was better. Granted, the invisible car was a joke too, but at least you could follow the action.