FROM THAT DEGREE HANGING ON JASON’S WALL — Hey, MGM, that didn’t go over so well, did it?
Mike Dawson aside, I haven’t heard anyone rejoice about the title of the new Bond movie due out Nov. 7 — and I think even he’s just taking the unpopular view for the fun of it.
Quantum of Solace has several big problems. First, it doesn’t flow well. You’ve really got to contort your mouth to shove it past your teeth.
Second, people (erroneously) think of “quantum” as an adjective. Quantum mechanics, right? But the word isn’t so much a descriptor as a sub-genre. It’s actually a noun, meaning a portion or the smallest part of an object that can exist independently.
So what Ian Fleming really meant when he penned the title in 1960 was “A Tiny Amount of Solace” — which seems fitting. In Casino Royale, we saw Bond’s soul crushed by lost love. The trauma made him push emotion away and become a killing machine for MI5.
He deserves at least a little comfort. That doesn’t change my opinion about the movie’s name, though. My third issue with Quantum of Solace is that it can be said so much more simply and elegantly. The way it’s written makes it sound like a fourth-grader with a thesaurus.
The franchise’s caretakers have been obsessed in recent years with using official Fleming story/book titles, but that’s trend that just can’t continue. Remaining titles include Risico, The Hildebrand Rarity, 007 in New York, and The Property of a Lady. By today’s standards, those are pretty slim pickings.