CR: Best Movie of the Year

blueman

Somebody had to say it, looks like Entertainment Weekly did:


http://www.ew.com/ew/report/0,6115,1572278_1_0_,00.html

1. Casino Royale
It's admittedly a little jarring: Could the best movie of the year actually be the most entertaining movie of the year? Scandalous! How old-fashioned and obvious and déclassé! The beauty of Casino Royale is that it does more than just restore the lustrous excitement of the James Bond series. By reimagining 007 as a volatile human being who confronts every new pleasure and danger - high-flying chases and high-stakes card games; dry-ice flirtation and deadly torture; hell, even ordering a martini - as if it were happening to him for the first time, the film reconnected audiences to the very soul of movie escapism, reviving the primal enjoyment of what action, suspense, and romance feel like when there is something at stake. As 007, Daniel Craig floods the screen with personality the way the old stars did, using his saturnine sexiness, his implosive intelligence, and the silent lone-wolf hunger at his core to turn James Bond into a superagent for our time, a man who's still discovering what his license can win him. Many have asked: Is Casino Royale the greatest Bond film ever? Let's put it this way: It will never be quite as quintessential as, say, Dr. No, the first and (to me) still the finest moment of Bond's Connery/Cold War/Playboy heyday. Yet if Casino Royale isn't a greater Bond film than that, it's a greater movie, period.

Klaus Hergescheimer

Sounds about right to me.

highhopes

It was for me. Of course, it's the only film I've seen among this year's crop (I think -- that I remember, anyway). I had high hopes (there they are again) for "The Good Shepherd," but it's getting very mixed reviews. If anyone is interested, it's based in part on the life of James Jesus Angleton, the head of CIA counterespionnage for many decades, who was a close friend of Kim Philby. After Philby defected to the Soviets, Angleton, an already suspicious kind of guy given the kind of work he did, became totally paranoid and nearly destroyed the CIA with witch hunts seeking moles. Lot of careers destroyed. There's a good bio of him called "Cold Warrior."

blueman

And made the Sunday Herald's Top Ten list:


http://www.sundayherald.com/culture/film/d...1089923.0.0.php

Casino Royale: I would never have imagined a Bond film making my top 10 list. But Casino Royale deserves a spot, for the sheer courage behind its franchise revamp - and the success of its delivery. It was also head and shoulders above the year's other blockbuster efforts - Mission: Impossible 3, The Da Vinci Code and Pirates Of The Caribbean 2. This was a back-to-basics Bond, doing away with the gadgets and ludicrous scenarios, and introducing Daniel Craig as a younger, more rough-edged agent. "Blond Bond" Craig proved to be the best since Connery - cruel, cocky, sexy, funny and totally buffed up. The bone-crunchingly realistic action scenes were accompanied by a pleasing fidelity to the card games and testicle-bashing of Fleming's novel. Casino Royale ensured that, for the first time anyone can remember, at the end of a Bond film we're actually looking forward to the next.

Gassy Man

Movies have been crap -- starring such crappy actors/personalities -- for so long, even a half-hearted attempt at quality would by comparison seem stellar. And "Casino Royale" was significantly more than half-hearted. It wasn't the best movie I saw last year, but it was the best of the tiny portion I actually saw in the theater. And I am looking forward to the next one, assuming they keep moving in this direction. Too bad it's in 2008.

darenhat

I can only think of a few movies I saw in 2006:
CR, Pirates 2, Superman Returns, and the Da Vinci Code -- if I saw anything else last year, it apparently didn't make an impression. So considering the competition, I would definitely classify CR as the 'Best Film of the Year."

A7ce

Fish1941 wrote:

In fact, I think that it is better than any of Connery's films.

Nurse, can we get some medication here... Fish is delrious again.... LOL

highhopes

A7ce wrote:

Fish1941 wrote:

In fact, I think that it is better than any of Connery's films.

Nurse, can we get some medication here... Fish is delrious again.... LOL

I don't think Fish is crazy at all. I don't know if CR is "better" than the first four Connery films, but it certainly fills out the ticket, in no particular order, for the must-see Bond films of all time.

Lazenby880

highhopes wrote:

A7ce wrote:

Fish1941 wrote:

In fact, I think that it is better than any of Connery's films.

Nurse, can we get some medication here... Fish is delrious again.... LOL

I don't think Fish is crazy at all. I don't know if CR is "better" than the first four Connery films, but it certainly fills out the ticket, in no particular order, for the must-see Bond films of all time.

I'm with Fish. Connery was excellent and defined the role for all of his successors until Craig, who has re-defined the role with his own frame of reference. I happen to think Craig is better than Connery (or anyone else, for that matter): he has a similar animal magnetism and sophistication yet he brings so much more to the table. There is a greater depth of menace and more clearly defined cruelty beneath the surface, and we see a side to Bond that we didn't see in Connery at all: the emotional consequences of Bond's actions. I know, I know, Craig is one of Britain's best actors but he did much more than simply play Bond: he set a whole new template for the character bringing to the fore an incredibly rounded and believable portrayal of the original character.

Without doubt the best picture of 2006, as well as being the best picture featuring Bond. In my opinion, of course.