Daniel Craig has a real future as James Bond. He is the coldest and least complicated 007 ever, in the tough-guy department he is up in Sean Connery's orbit which is an icy ruthless trajectory indeed.
he is none too handsome, but like Bruce Lee and Clint Eastwood Craig has an almighty "I-mean-it" look that was made for the movies.
Moreover, in his love-hate-relationship with M (Judy Dench the series other casting coup) you get every sort of tension right up to the doors of King Oedipus' bedroom.
But for the franchise to survive someone has to insist on more coherent scripts, I can do without the gadgetry and the labored quips but the alternately grunted and panted dialogue from "The Quantum of Solace" is a serious bring-down. The plot is more or less a direct sequel to "Casino Royale" with 007 still on the trail of Vesper Lind's employers/killers. Much is made of his quest for vengeance although that was more or less the link between "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" and "Diamonds are Forever"...so even revenge is nothing ne for 007.
Alas as far as this film is concerned, who the villains are and why they wanna corner the world's supply of fresh water is bore and a trifle. best I can determine it's a conspiracy of more evil businessmen, ho-hum.
The action set pieces are fun, but without a plot and without a real plan for the character it is all for naught.
Joseph Zamparelli Jr has idly proposed that the film-makers ought to revisit some of the less well adapted novels for inspiration..."Moonraker" perhaps or certainly "The Spy Who Loved Me" both of which were camped to death back in the daze of Roger Moore. They have the right Bond now what they lack are the right scripts.