Casino Royale: Bond Begins
Written: Nov 22 '06
|
Product Rating:
|
|
| Bang For The Buck |
 |
|
|
Pros: Overall, one of the best bonds yet made. Amazing action, realistic plot and characters.
Cons: Possibly too dark and gritty for fans of earlier Bond films.
The Bottom Line: A dark, gritty, realistic portrayal of Bond. One of the best to date, despite running a bit long to ensure continuity with the rest of the universe.
|
|
|
| Action_Snark's Full Review: Casino Royale |
Two of the most loved, and long-running film series in hollywood history are Ian Fleming's James Bond series, and the Batman series. The Bond series is the uncontested heavyweight, with 21 films to it's name. However, it's quite obvious that the bond producers kept an eye on their winged bretheren. After years of increasingly comical offerings, the Batman series recently underwent a serious reinvention with a dark, gritty new Batman Begins, with a darker, more intense Christian Bale donning the cape and cowl. The latest, and plotwise earliest offering of the Bond francise follows in the Batman Begins vein of recreating the protagonist as a leaner, meaner, and much darker vision of himself.
When one thinks of James Bond, a young Sean Connery immediately comes to mind. Described as a two-legged panther with the morals of an alley cat, dressed in an immaculate tuxedo, Connery was the prototypical alpha male. Bond newcomer Daniel Craig follows in the footsteps of Connery, and arguably portrays a better Bond. Anyway, a complete review:
Plot: In keeping with the theme of reinventing the Bond franchise with an eye towards the new world view, Casino Royale has a plot centered around terrorism, media manipulation, and manipulation of the public at large for the gains of evildoers. I'll avoid spoiling the plot here, but suffice to say that the days of supervillains with solar deathrays are gone, replaced with labyrinthine financial transactions driven by terrorist manipulation of public opinion. There were several areas that were obviously engineered to play to current audiences, but by and large the plot served quite well. Overall, plot scores a 8 out of 10 for being realistic enough to avoid total cornyness, but with enough supervillainy for Bond to shine.
Cast: The burning question on everybody's mind is how does the New Bond fit in? There have been good Bonds, bad Bonds, and those that have floated in between. The latest heir to the 007 crown, Daniel Craig, proves himself quite well in Casino Royale. In keeping with the reinvention of the Bond franchise, Craig plays a darker, deeper character than any of his predecessors. I've alluded heavily to Christian Bale's portrayal of Bruce Wayne/Batman in Batman Begins earlier in this review, and that comparison rings quite true. Much like Bale brought a dark, gritty edge to Wayne, Craig reinvents Bond as a more realistic, dark character. Craig lacks the sheer force that Connery brought to the role. He also shows none of the impeccable charm that Pierce Brosnan showed during his tenure as 007. While this sounds like a condemnation of Craig's performance, it really isn't. Where Brosnan and Connery's masculinity oozed through the cracks of their crisp exteriors, Craig plays a bond that is uncompromisingly in-your-face, gritty, and dangerous from the get-go.
Judi Dench once again reprises her role as the new M, and does so quite well. Dench's M is a character that is definitely a product of the current political and social environments, and she plays the role to the hilt. Q branch is unfortunately quite absent from the film, but this is not a bad thing. After the demise of Desmond Llewelyn, I don't think that anybody will come along to play a satisfactory Q for quite some time.
So, we have a top notch Bond, a decent M, we're only missing two ingredients from the Bond recipe: Villains and Bond Girls.
Villains are handled quite well. Mads Mikkelsen and Alex Dimitrios play the major and minor villains in the film. Both comport themselves quite well, playing their roles extremely well without going over the top. Realism is the name of the game in Casino Royale, and Mikkelsen and Dimitros both make the grade quite well.
Next on the list are the ubiquitious Bond girls. Halle Berry's performance in Die Another Day was the sole saving grace of an otherwise weak Bond flick, as well as Michelle Yeoh and Famke Janssen giving solid performance in earlier Brosnan-era Bond films. Casino Royale's girls had their work cut out for them to be sure. However, Caterina Murano and Eva Green both bring their A game. Murano is little more than standard issue Bond girl T&A, but Green actually becomes an integral part of the plot and the development of the James Bond character. Overall, I felt the 'Bond Girls' comported themselves quite well. I'll give cast a 10 out of 10. This is the new Bond, with a dark, gritty, conflicted, and sometimes downright psychotic worldview, and the cast is well chosen to play to this.
Overall: I'll skip straight to the final wrap up. There are too many little nuances to discuss in detail about this film, espescially with the complete overhaul that the James Bond universe has been given. Gone are the over the top antics of the post-Goldeneye bond world. Instead, they've been replaced with a darker, more uncompromising vision. The new Bond is a dark, dangerous, often uncaring person, and the casting, cinematography, and plot all reflect these things. Casino Royale showcases the new James Bond, with a lust for married women and Texas Hold 'em in place of baccarat and disposable sex kittens. I'd give Casino Royale in particluar, and this strange 'New Bond' world a solid 9 out of 10. The series needed an injection of reality and fresh blood, and everything in this film does exactly that.
Recommended:
Yes
Movie Mood: Action Movie Viewing Method: Other Film Completeness: Looked complete to me. Worst Part of this Film: Ending
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID: Action_Snark
|
|
Location: Right behind you
Reviews written: 118
Trusted by: 39 members
About Me: Forget about Freeman!
|
|
|