I don't know if there are any Bond fans on here, but something kind of bugs me: "Quantum of Solace sucks for not having a world-domination plot, a non-over the top Goldfinger or Pleasence Blofeld, for not having gadgets, for being dark, for being an action film!"... What!? CR received SO much praise for these aspects (and rightfully so, it's definitely the best Bond in terms of a character-study) , so why when QoS implements them do people complain!? Sure, CR is a MUCH better film, but liking CR for what QoS does but hating QoS for it is ridiculous. CR didn't have a Goldfinger/P. Blofeld villain in LeCheiffre, or a world domination plot, and Bond was human... Sound familia? Something that reviewers should've taken into account:
3 things:
1.) QoS is a continuation of CR
2.) Jumping straight into a YOLT type Bond film after CR would be a bad move
3.) If it was over the top and inspired by films like YOLT, it would have been criticized for being silly and dated, especially in the post Austin Powers world.
QoS to Skyfall works because we're getting a more natural progression of the Bond regulars, like gadgets, over the top villains, Q, Moneypenny, and a male M. To bring those elements in while the CR story needs a little more finishing wouldn't have worked. Having a separate story for Skyfall to introduce those elements is what needed to happen. It's almost like they forgot CR came out and changed the Bond franchise, and are acting as if QoS is a follow up from DaD or something. I'm not saying QoS is a perfect film, but it's definitely better than what fans are starting to make of it. It's problems (such as some overly-quick edits at parts) don't stem from what it isn't/ Going by how QoS was reviewed, CR should've been reviewed poorly too. It's just stupid of the reviewers. I'm not saying reviewers have to be Bond fans to review, that would be silly. I'm just saying they shouldn't be hypocritical.