Casino Royale...the definitive review!
drummer
Posts: 1MI6 Agent
OK.....where do I start?
Is it a good film?........undoubtedly.
As good as the critics would have you believe.? Probably not.
Casino Royale is a tense, action-packed and well directed thriller. It dispenses with pretty much everything that has gone before.......and therein lies the dilemma.
Is it a Bond film? It`s dark brutality does reflect much of the early novels by Ian Fleming and so it has much to appeal to many of the purists who feel the recent movies have started to lose the plot when it comes to the character and essence of Fleming`s creation. However, the films took the view from the start to add the ingredients of glamour, gadgets, witticism and, most notably, charm in the lead character. And it`s charm that is so sadly lacking in this movie.
Yes, Daniel Craig captures a new level of relentless savagery and brutal efficiency that you can`t even begin to imagine Brosnan or poor old Roger even bothering to attempt.
Yes, the opening standout sequence on the building site is one of the greatest set pieces committed to film. However, you are reminded more of John MacLean`s never - say- die bloodied and battered character from Die Hard than of the suave secret agent 007. Even his sharply written and well delivered witticisms are tinged with a sense of SAS-style "super hardness" (see Torture scene) rather than the dismissive one liners that have reminded us in the past that this is a Bond movie, and no matter how bad the situation, 007 will use his charm, gadgets,humour or initiative to get himself out of a nasty bit of bother.
There is no doubt, that the real villains of the 21st century probably do embrace the thuggish brutality that we see oozing form his counterparts in Casino Royale.
Like Licence To Kill before it (Sanchez) Bond faces adversaries that would be more at home in a Tarantino movie and there are times when you are crying out for a bald head and white cat to make an appearance just to remind you this is escapist fantasy and not an episode of Spooks with a big budget. Thae Character of Le Chiffre does promise a certain villainous familiarity but his rather unsphisticated demise is a disappointment compared to the more creative despatch of previous Bond baddies.
The stunts and set pieces are fantastic; no more dodgy CGi and dubious stunt doubles.....Craig is a much more believable action man than any of his predecessors.
The film also benefits form a classy opening pre-title and, arguably , one of the best main title sequences ever.... an inventive and wildly stylish piece of retro art that pays homage to 60`s cool and is less formulaic than recent offerings....Maurice Binder would have been proud! The theme song, however is on a par with the low benchmark set by recent Bond films. Fortunately this is compensated by a gripping soundtrack that is David Arnold`s finest effort to date.
So what of Daniel Craig? He can act, he can run, he can fight and he can look hard, he can even do romance....but is he believable as Bond?
There are scenes in the Casino when he exudes menace and certainly reflects the dark persona of Fleming`s original character. But unfortunately, for me anyway, it`s the eyebrows and hair that desperately need that dark persona. In certain scenes, Craig`s blondness passes unnoticed due to lighting, grime or action sequences....but there are other times (emerging from the water and staring at a potential female conquest) when he looks like Worzel Gummidge on steroids. He was such a controversial choice in the first place that the producers could have at least compromised and tinted his albino eyebrows and darkened his hair...just as a token gesture! Because he isn`t the tallest Bond
(you struggle in certain fight sequences to pick him out from the crowd) , a darker hue would have at least had doubters more appeased when some subtle tinting could have been combined with his much-hyped physique and brooding persona.
But as a NEW Bond? There is no doubt he has made the character much more realistic and complex than the last two actors to don the tux..........but do I really envisage Craig`s face when I think of Bond? To be honest ...no.
And where do they go from here? This is Bond year Zero, so what comes next? If the producers intend to keep the gritty tone of the novels then perhaps they could do worse than to take the brave step of revisiting each novel in chronological order and updating the storylines to work in the modern era. This would at least achieve some much needed continuity to the series and allow Craig to grow into character as the novels unfold.
Somehow, I doubt they`ll have the courage of their convictions to attempt anything so bold, no matter how logical.
Casino Royale is so far away from the patchwork mess that was Die Another day that it was always going to be a good movie in it`s own right.
Whether it is a great BOND movie with a great BOND.......well....no matter how much the critics enthuse, it is the public who will decide if Bad Ass Bond will be taken to their hearts. As for me..............I am still undecided
I saw this film with someone who doesn`t like Bond films....and they really enjoyed it. Perhaps that says it all.
7.5 out of 10
Is it a good film?........undoubtedly.
As good as the critics would have you believe.? Probably not.
Casino Royale is a tense, action-packed and well directed thriller. It dispenses with pretty much everything that has gone before.......and therein lies the dilemma.
Is it a Bond film? It`s dark brutality does reflect much of the early novels by Ian Fleming and so it has much to appeal to many of the purists who feel the recent movies have started to lose the plot when it comes to the character and essence of Fleming`s creation. However, the films took the view from the start to add the ingredients of glamour, gadgets, witticism and, most notably, charm in the lead character. And it`s charm that is so sadly lacking in this movie.
Yes, Daniel Craig captures a new level of relentless savagery and brutal efficiency that you can`t even begin to imagine Brosnan or poor old Roger even bothering to attempt.
Yes, the opening standout sequence on the building site is one of the greatest set pieces committed to film. However, you are reminded more of John MacLean`s never - say- die bloodied and battered character from Die Hard than of the suave secret agent 007. Even his sharply written and well delivered witticisms are tinged with a sense of SAS-style "super hardness" (see Torture scene) rather than the dismissive one liners that have reminded us in the past that this is a Bond movie, and no matter how bad the situation, 007 will use his charm, gadgets,humour or initiative to get himself out of a nasty bit of bother.
There is no doubt, that the real villains of the 21st century probably do embrace the thuggish brutality that we see oozing form his counterparts in Casino Royale.
Like Licence To Kill before it (Sanchez) Bond faces adversaries that would be more at home in a Tarantino movie and there are times when you are crying out for a bald head and white cat to make an appearance just to remind you this is escapist fantasy and not an episode of Spooks with a big budget. Thae Character of Le Chiffre does promise a certain villainous familiarity but his rather unsphisticated demise is a disappointment compared to the more creative despatch of previous Bond baddies.
The stunts and set pieces are fantastic; no more dodgy CGi and dubious stunt doubles.....Craig is a much more believable action man than any of his predecessors.
The film also benefits form a classy opening pre-title and, arguably , one of the best main title sequences ever.... an inventive and wildly stylish piece of retro art that pays homage to 60`s cool and is less formulaic than recent offerings....Maurice Binder would have been proud! The theme song, however is on a par with the low benchmark set by recent Bond films. Fortunately this is compensated by a gripping soundtrack that is David Arnold`s finest effort to date.
So what of Daniel Craig? He can act, he can run, he can fight and he can look hard, he can even do romance....but is he believable as Bond?
There are scenes in the Casino when he exudes menace and certainly reflects the dark persona of Fleming`s original character. But unfortunately, for me anyway, it`s the eyebrows and hair that desperately need that dark persona. In certain scenes, Craig`s blondness passes unnoticed due to lighting, grime or action sequences....but there are other times (emerging from the water and staring at a potential female conquest) when he looks like Worzel Gummidge on steroids. He was such a controversial choice in the first place that the producers could have at least compromised and tinted his albino eyebrows and darkened his hair...just as a token gesture! Because he isn`t the tallest Bond
(you struggle in certain fight sequences to pick him out from the crowd) , a darker hue would have at least had doubters more appeased when some subtle tinting could have been combined with his much-hyped physique and brooding persona.
But as a NEW Bond? There is no doubt he has made the character much more realistic and complex than the last two actors to don the tux..........but do I really envisage Craig`s face when I think of Bond? To be honest ...no.
And where do they go from here? This is Bond year Zero, so what comes next? If the producers intend to keep the gritty tone of the novels then perhaps they could do worse than to take the brave step of revisiting each novel in chronological order and updating the storylines to work in the modern era. This would at least achieve some much needed continuity to the series and allow Craig to grow into character as the novels unfold.
Somehow, I doubt they`ll have the courage of their convictions to attempt anything so bold, no matter how logical.
Casino Royale is so far away from the patchwork mess that was Die Another day that it was always going to be a good movie in it`s own right.
Whether it is a great BOND movie with a great BOND.......well....no matter how much the critics enthuse, it is the public who will decide if Bad Ass Bond will be taken to their hearts. As for me..............I am still undecided
I saw this film with someone who doesn`t like Bond films....and they really enjoyed it. Perhaps that says it all.
7.5 out of 10
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I imagine this thread will be closed soon but im sorry i just had to say something.
This review is staying but the thread itself is closed--and that's only because we're trying to conserve bandwidth.Anyone else who starts a thread of their own for their personal reviews will find the same thing happening to them.