I'm not even going to pretend to be in anything other than fanboy mode here.
First, the latest trailer:
A few thoughts:
1) HOLY CRAP, THIS LOOKS AWESOME!!!
2) No, seriously, it does. Apparently, Quantum Of Solace looks to expand on the admirably realized tone of Casino Royale. No stinting on the action, or the spy guy stuff we expect from James Bond (and Mathieu Amalric gives every indication he will make a supremely hissable villain), while still giving us real drama, keeping the heroics grounded to recognizable emotions, with Daniel Craig offering the most vulnerable--the most human--Bond since George Lazenby.
3) Which is great and all, but is that what we want from James Bond? Or more accurately, is that all we want from Bond? Yeah, my all-time favorite Bond picture is On Her Majesty's Secret Service--aka The One With The Incredibly Depressing Ending--and other favorites include From Russia With Love and For Your Eyes Only, comparable to Casino Royale (and, presumably, Quantum Of Solace) in that they are relatively stripped-down affairs, more interested in straightforward storytelling than indulging in spectacle for its own sake.
But a steady diet of that could grow old. Sometimes you want a Bond villain who has improbably built a massive fortress inside a volcano or has constructed a space station with no one noticing. Sometimes you want a silent henchman with a razorblade hat or teeth ground like knives. Sometimes you want hot babes named Plenty O'Toole or Holly Goodhead, plots that make no sense and plenty of big, dumb set pieces. Those are part of the World Of Bond, too.
As great a Bond as Daniel Craig has already shown himself to be, he doesn't seem like a good fit for the outrageously larger-than-life scenarios many of us associate with the character. He might simply be too good an actor to be the prop this sort of thing requires. Roger Moore, certainly a less skilled performer, could walk through something as amazingly stupid as Moonraker with just the right level of cheek; he knew it was ridiculous, too, but he played it just broad enough, never quite letting the whole shebang tip over into camp.
4) Then again, there's no reason to expect the current holders of the Bond franchise have any intention of doing it up old school. You'd have to go back to 1989's License To Kill for the last effort fully produced by members of the Old Guard (producer Albert Broccoli, writer Richard Maibaum, director John Glen). The only key member of the Guard utilized in the last two decades of Bondage has been production designer Peter Lamont, and even he's MIA for Quantum.
These are essentially a new series of movies, informed by classic Bond but not necessarily beholden to it. Maybe that's the only commercially viable way to do it anymore--and aside from the absolutely dismal Die Another Day, I've enjoyed all the recent Bonds a great deal--but I still can't help but think if contemporary audiences were served up something as gloriously foolish as You Only Live Twice, they'd swoon with delight.
5) Still, it's worth saying again: That trailer looks pretty damned sweet. You'd better believe I'll be there on opening night. Heck, I'll even spring for popcorn.
