4/7     Along the lines of Indiana Jones, I recently watched the two new
        Bond movies back-to-back (Casino Royale and QoS). Most critics
        liked the first and were lukewarm on the second. However, I
        thought QoS was far more enjoyable. I'm not a big Bond fan, but I
        like Daniel Craig and his brooding, reckless Bond without a lot of
        gadgetry appealed to me.
        \_ CR was one of the best Bond movies I've seen.  QoS was a meandering
           mess, with a bizarrely placed crotch shot in a PG-13 movie.
           \_ Didn't understand that shot at all, but I found CR to be
              rather boring and unbelieveable with no real villain. The
              evil mastermind's plan is to win a poker tournament and if
              he wins he gets back all the money the bad guys had to begin
              with and if he loses then he's deadmeat. Not much was at
              stake. Vesper subplot was ridiculous. She drowns herself even as
              he has forgiven her?. I admit to being confused by QoS, but
              he has forgiven her? We know M's assertion that she made a
              deal for his life is false. They spared him because only
              he knew the password.  All of the screentime in Africa was a
              complete waste. I admit to being confused by QoS, but
              the directing was much better and there was a lot more action.
              How can you not like the CIA guy being on the same plane as
              the villain or the shot of the two of them, bloodied and in
              formalwear, walking through the desert? Visually, QoS really
              grabbed me. CR was more like a typical Bond movie.
              \_ Vesper is from the book Casino Royale and in the book
                 she kills herself for the same reasons.  I did like how
                 QoS built on the story from CR and actually felt like
                 a sequel.
                 \_ Well, I realize it's based on a book and so they had
                    to somewhat stay true to the book. That doesn't mean
                    it makes sense. It seems like a contrived way to give a
                    tragic backstory to Bond and also prevent Vesper from
                    spilling all the details about the people she worked for.
              \_ The purpose of the Madagascar scene, apart from simply being
                 an awesome parkour chase, was to establish that Bond was look-
                 ing for the funding behind the bomber. The bomber's info leads
                 to Dimitrios and Dimitrios leads Bond to Le Chiffre. Le
                 Chiffre's original plan is to short the airline stock and then
                 have Dimitrios blow up their Airbus; Bond foils that, so now
                 Le Chiffre falls back on a poker game to get his clients'
                 money back. Bond's investment in seeing Le Chiffre defeated is
                 first and foremost one of pride and sadism: two qualities that
                 Ian Fleming's Bond had in spades. Le Chiffre's own clients
                 recognize that he's flailing; it's why they pay him a visit
                 at his hotel and threaten him with a machete.
                 But base defense of CR aside, I thoroughly enjoyed both films.
                 I particularly enjoyed how QoS picks up minutes after CR ends.
                 I wasn't thrilled with the Tosca montage, but the rest held up
                 very nicely. Looking forward to the third movie.