Post #418793 by The Gnomon on Thu, Nov 13, 2008 9:48 AM

I can appreciate Ebert's disappointment, but no doubt, I'll be seeing it anyway. No Q and no Moneypenny? No diabolical plot? No getting the girl in the end? Certainly, the whole Bond enterprise has changed several times over the years. Ebert complains that Bond has lost his Bond character and has now been made into a simple action hero, which he hates. I think he prefers a Derek Flint Bond or an Austin Powers Bond, rather than an Ethan Hunt Bond. But in today's market, post Cold War (as if), action IS appropriate.

Clearly, action was introduced early on in the series. In Dr. No Bond drove an out-of-the-showroom Sunbeam. By the time Goldfinger came out, two movies later, he was in an Aston Martin equipped with combat gadgetry. I think Ebert wants a Dean Martin Bond to schmooze about with his shaken martini, zoned out amidst flurries of action when Bond only has to lift his pinky finger to defeat the enemy. The Daniel Craig version of Bond in Casino Royale was a more human champion and I'm expecting the Quantum will be the same.

But I am bothered by the no Q, no Moneypenny, no lots of other traditional Bond expectations, including diabolical plot.