Oh boy I feel I'm going to be in the minority on this one. I've been very vocal since the beginning of this site in July (and for much longer for anyone who knows me) that I thought Daniel Craig was a terrible choice for James Bond. He lacked the charm or the likability factor to be the world's most famous spy from where I was sitting, the screen presence of the past actors who had this role I couldn't see in him. Not only that but I hated the franchise restart idea that they went with, a terrible big F U to Bond's 40 year film legacy. And my worst fear of all... Casino Royale looked to have taken away the fun element out of the character for a modern day update that would be too much BOURNE and not even BOND! Having said that, I had put aside my fears for the film as I sat waiting for the movie to start. Casino Royale had been getting such good reviews, maybe they had managed to hit it out of the ball park. That optimism soon vanished as the film starts and we get an extremely bland and badly executed opening black and white sequence to remind us (as if we needed it) that this Bond movie is about his early days as a double 0 agent. I think my girlfriend said it best when she remarked that the sequence reminded her of the quick and generic cut scenes in video games that are always just very simple and mindless plot devices, it felt gimmicky and unnecessary. We see Daniel Craig as Bond for the first time laid back in his chair looking as if he is about to fall asleep. He would later remark on being asked if he would like his drink shaken or stirred.... "Do I look like I give a damn?". And right there in that opening sequence... I believed it. He really didn't give a damn and nor did I for his portrayal of James Bond (not blaming him, blaming the studio) which was too often as cold as his damn blue eyes. The movie does get a little bit better after that though as we get a thrilling chase sequence which mostly takes place through a construction site, with Bond chasing after a terrorist bomber. The guy has more agility than our favourite spy and he is almost like a cat jumping off buildings. Apparently it's Sebastien Foucan, a world famous free runner (it's said he invented the sport) whose amazing leaps off dangerously high places and squeezing himself through tiny vents is no match for Bond's intelligence, and is duly caught. One particularly fun part of the scene is when Bond decides the best way to go through a gap is to run straight through a wall, rather than attempting to jump into the impossibly small space above it. A truly great sequence that should have been the film's opening scene and shows an intelligent side of Bond which is too often neglected on screen. But it soon goes down hill again as we get an awful sequence with Judi Dench as "M" lecturing Bond about how reckless he is and she tells him how little faith she has in him. Why on earth did they bring her back for this movie I have no idea, I thought she was one of the worst things about the previous movies, I never thought a female M really worked with the James Bond character and I still don't. She's probably even worse in this movie than before, you feel like M fucking hates Bond with all her guts.... it's a terribly written role. And what was all that about Bond breaking into her home, and later we get her being awoken in bed during the night? LAME, LAME, LAME! What happened to the great moments in M's office which always had the miraculous way of being able to move around from location to location? I always loved those scenes, the "exposition" scenes that were typically the most laidback from the film. The poker scenes take up the most of the second act of the film and they aren't shot too badly and don't become as boring a card game as they usually do in movies (we all know it's scripted, so the tension is always limited). Craig for one moment, and it is probably the only moment in the whole film, feels like James Bond and it's with a classic Connery one-liner which you will all know what I'm talking about as soon as you hear it. So what did we get from Daniel Craig in the end then? Well he has a great body for sure and yeah he looks like he can hold his own in a fight and would kick my ass any day but I found it difficult to like the guy. He is just so cold, intense and downright arrogant. Sure they were portraying Bond as being this overzealous new agent, getting himself caught all the time and making mistakes as he is new to the job but I felt they pushed the arrogance button to hard and it became too far removed from my vision of the character. Casino Royle is an intelligent take on a character that had become so over the top and quite frankly ridiculous in Die Another Day but I really miss the fun elements of what makes Bond... Bond. I missed Q and the fantastic array of gadgets (always my favourite moments), I missed the quirky one-liners that Brosnan (early days), Moore (early days) and especially Sean Connery were all able to pull of so well and most of all I missed the John Barry theme tune which is barely utilized in the whole flick. This new franchise has stripped down all the main elements of James Bond and has left us with any other spy flick. There are two things I really liked about Casino Royale that I just have to mention. Mads Mikkelsen as the villain Le Chiffre is fantastic, at least they got that right! He has the trademark eccentric feature... a eye that sheds tears of blood which is mysteriously left ambiguous to it's origins (the way it should be!). Eva Green as Vesper Lynd has suddenly become one of my favourite Bond girls of all time. The French actress is super talented and of course super hot and it's only in the scenes where she plays off Craig that he becomes even remotely likeable. My overall thoughts then? Well the film was slightly too long and did (like many critics were saying) fall down in the third act, a strange occurrence happens in the shifting of the movie's plot which I didn't particularly like. I hated the "torture" sequence... that has no place in a Bond movie for me and Craig just became some deranged psycho in those moments. You might think I'm saying Casino Royale is a bad film but it's not. Not at all. It's not a great film either but it's a very competent spy movie that although has a weak plot is mildly enjoyable. Is it better than Die Another Day.... hell yes! Is it a good Bond film..... absolutley not. Is the future of Bond looking bright..... not from where i'm sitting. Is it worth seeing...... probably, but if your even the slightest a Bond fan and love the "classic" movies then you won't find much to like about Casino Royale.
rating: 3
Advertisement
A competent spy film but not one that deserves the James Bond title. Martin Campbell for the second time has put life back into a dead franchise, but not in the way I (or I suspect many) fans will like. Daniel Craig is a hard sell as Bond and at times very difficult to root for, only in brief glimpses did he look at all comfortable. The future for Bond is looking bleak for me and it's a shame.... a real, real shame.