The last time I went to the cinema to see a Bond film (as opposed to the ubiquitous TV re-shows) was 40 years ago! But never one to miss culture on my doorstep I went along to see Casino Royale at the Appleby Film Club. We were promised ‘action and character’. I found the long action scenes a bit wearing – less gadgets than usual, but equally implausible escapes against all the odds. But in other respects it was more ‘grown up’ – fewer verbal innuendoes and, most interestingly, a female lead who lasted three-quarters of the film before succumbing to Bond’s charms (and even then with a twist). And things to genuinely care about including a Bond who showed emotions. But what really broke this reviewer’s heart was the sight of a beautiful Venice Palazzo crumbling into the canal!
I agree. I’m not a fan of the Bond franchise in general, but this film I did like. Far superior to the usual predictable shenanigans, it had the unique selling point of requiring its lead character to act – and Daniel Craig didn’t disappoint (in more ways than one). A combination of letting a classy director, Martin Campbell, take the movie in a more original direction, and a cast of superior players (Judi Dench and Daniel Craig played beautifully off each other) set it well above the norm for big budget action movies. They even allowed for character development! There was enough plot complexity to engage the brain without taxing it and spoiling the fun. The chases were less tedious than usual, the tension mounted just as it should, and the jokes were delivered effectively deadpan.
The set pieces avoided too much cliche. The first big chase was filmed to resemble characters in a computer game – corny but it worked. The Venetian finale was exciting and original – nothing like the traditional Bond ending of ‘escape from the bad guy’s underground city racing against time to blow up the missile and rescue the girl’.
I could have done without the ‘idiot’s guide to poker’ exposition during the casino set piece (and I don’t understand poker). I daren’t think about the effect filming the stunts had on the global climate. But otherwise I had a good night out.
Comment by marilynd — 10 November 2007 @ 8:52 pm
Casino Royale was in my view the best Bond film since the very earliest two or three Bonds featuring Sean Connery. I liked it because the direction was tight and pacy, the fight and chase scenes were entertaining and the acting was a cut above that you normally get in Bond films. There was the normal parade of far-flung locations, dispensible uniformed guards and gadgets but most of these did not disturb the main thrust of the film. The only slightly duff note gadget-wise was the way that the Aston Martin seemed to be eqipped with more medical equipment than your average medical centre – quite handy if you need urgent treatment due to imminent death.
Daniel Craig made Bond more three dimensional than most of the previous Bonds – basically he can act. Judi Dench was also perfect as ‘M’. On balance this exceeded expectations and in my view gives a new lease of life to the Bond brand.
Comment by Jon D — 10 November 2007 @ 8:55 pm
Having never seen a Bond film at the cinema (which probably says a lot about my cinematic credentials), any film which is projected larger than TV screen size is already likely to win plaudits from me.
Having said that, I did find the film by far the most enjoyable of any Bond film I’ve seen so far, and for me the chase scene was a major highlight (don’t tell me it was all CGI).
No doubt we could all pick holes in the crediblity of the story and I have to say that it did at times seem to come from the ‘in a single bound’ school of escapism, but nevertheless there were enough twists to enable me to overlook them and enjoy a good yarn well filmed.
Comment by Cliff D — 23 November 2007 @ 2:48 pm