Hmm, I did watch this again after all, but remain disappointed.
The transition between the end of the opening sequence and the beginning of the opening credits is such a big moment in these Bond films. It's supposed to be cool. An exclamation point. The cherry on top. Here it's just kind of like, "oh, there's a man in the trunk". Bond says something unremarkable, freeze frame, cut to credits...
I dunno... it's just not a good moment! It's too bad too bacause the music kicks in right after, and that opening riff is pretty great. But the transition! I wanted it to be like "boom" and I'd be like "awesome". You should be smiling going into the opening credits. I wasn't smiling.
IIRC the Casino Royale transition is much cooler. It's got that great line, "Yes.... considerably." It's a much better moment and leaves me feeling like "whoa!"
I agree completely about the editing. I mean it's noticable! When do you ever even notice
Another problem I had with the film is how little they explain the villain's master plan. He acquires this 80 sq mile region somewhere in the Bolivia, which appears to be nothing but a desert. But we find out that somehow this one spot is the water reservoir for the entire country or multiple countries. Later we learn that this is only the case because the villain somehow diverted some rivers to make it so. But the film is SO vague about it. It's this monstrous geological feat but we don't even know how he did it. And there's no moment where the villain has Bond captured, so he can explain it to him (and us).
The film spends so much time chasing this mystery organization which doesn't really amount to anything, but no time at all demonstrating the villainy of the actual villain.
At the end of the film Bond kills the villain and the general, and that's good, but the issue of the water is never resolved! It's still trapped in the villain's secret underground reservoir. Just because the villain is dead doesn't mean the waterflow is restored to that thirsty village we kept seeing. It just means he won't be around to profit from his plan. As far as I could tell all that happens is bond blows up an inconsequential hotel in the desert.
It's like if the plot had been a moon laser to blow up earth, and at the end of the film the villain died but they just left the moon lazer where it was. It doesn't make sense.
Aside from how vague the main plot is I actually like the idea of the more realistic "corner the market on water" scheme. It's devious and not that far from something that probably has already or will eventually happen.
Is it just me or is there NO sexual chemistry between bond and this character?
Besides that I found her very uninteresting. No sass... no anything really.