CASINO ROYALE
It's no secret that I'm a big James Bond fan, Connery being my favorite, so what do I think of Daniel Craig and Casino Royale? I'll start by saying that I won't even make mention of how he just doesn't look like James Bond, at all, because he doesn't.
...hmmm, perhaps that was a little too much unmention, but I digress.
I will say, that he makes for a fantastic action star. He delivers the high octane action of Pierce Brosnan with the close quarters brutality of Sean Connery, both qualities I enjoy. However, his delivery was cold, almost robotic. I'm not only talking about his dialog, I'm actually even referring to his fighting, and his running, and his jumping, and even his dramatic pauses. At times, I compared him to Robert Patrick's T-1000 in Terminator 2. I mean, it's impressive that his main mode of transportation in the movie is his legs, but DAMN, he never looks panicked or out of breath or... human, really.
Beyond Daniel Craig's performance, I really liked the movie. It did feel like a Bond film... at times. I'll admit that the majority of it was very suspenseful, like a Connery film, and there was enough over-the-top action to make the entirety mostly like a Brosnan film. That should be enough, right? Take the best parts of the best Bond films and jam them together to make a super Bond film. But there's something missing. I know alot of people are actually happy about this, but it's not Bond without the tongue-in-cheek attitude. Sure there were small quips that made reference to the older Bond films, and there were some rare moments of original humor, but certainly not enough.
Yeah, yeah, this is supposed to be a NEW Bond for the 21st century, and there were enough cellphones and satellites to make Q look like a toymaker, but it ceases to be James Bond if your actor is stone cold and your script is jokeless. By itself, it was a good movie, but it was not completely a Bond movie. Almost, I think. Perhaps Quantum of Solace will make up for it, although I have my doubts as it's supposedly going to be a revenge story (and we really don't need another "Timothy Dalton"), but perhaps he'll be more of a James Bond the second time around as he's had more time to adjust.
Okay, I'm done bashing it. I think. I will give it this: it was more entertaining then the last few Brosnan movies and it was certainly better than some of the Moore ones. Standing alone it was an entertaining action/suspense film with many twists and some great fight scenes. The music was awesome and the opening credits were the best I've seen in a Bond movie (maybe the lack of female silhouettes is actually a good thing?). The character of Vesper Lynd was the real savior of the film for me, as she was classy (which is different for a Bond Girl) and she certainly gave the movie it's humanity, though it was especially painful to see Bond legitimately in love (though not as much as when he was in love in OHMSS! Ugh!).
So to sum it all up, it was a fun watch. It was a great spy movie, lots of action and intrigue. Was it a "Bond film"? Yeah...ish. It doesn't match all of the criteria I would balance against it, but it was very close. Too serious. Daniel Craig = stone cold. Looking forward to QoS, though I don't have high hopes.
7.5/10
Oh, and am I the only one who finds it odd that Judy Dench is still M?
...just sayin'.
...............................................................................................................................
...............................................................................................................................
This is just a list of all the chapters I've done with JoaP so far. Makes reading it a little easier, so you don't have to go hunting for it in my gallery.
...............................................................................................................................
...............................................................................................................................
...............................................................................................................................
...............................................................................................................................
"Arm yourself because no-one else here will save you."
Chris Cornell - You Know My Name








I really enjoyed Casino Royale... however, it did feel less James Bondey as its predecessors. It did make some sense, however.. seeing as this was the first James Bond story written (or one of the early ones), so it would make sense for the gadgets and etc. that we love so much not to have become a realised regular feature.
Some people may complain about the lack of gadgets (in the second movie even more so, but I won't spoil it if you haven't seen it yet)... but, seeing as the prevalence of said technology tended to clutter the film and sometimes act as a gag, ...it wasn't a bad thing, per se.
In any case, be weary when you watch Quantum of Solace.
And.. I loved Timothy Dalton.. License to Kill is sitting next to my tv as I type. :3
~Yel.
I did really enjoy Casino Royale but yeah I totally see where you're coming from. Lately USA has been showing Bond films quite a bit and I usually catch a Brosnan one on. Personally, when I think James Bond I immediately think Pierce Brosnan, I know most people think Connery and maybe I would too if I saw more of his films, but when I was a kid I remember seeing the Brosnan Bond films when they came out on VHS, and then of course the games like Goldeneye, Nightfire, and Everything or Nothing which just further enforced it for me.
Anyway, watching them again now I forgot just how awesome they were, and considering I hadn't seen any of them since I was very young, I was able to enjoy and understand them a lot more.
The way I see it now is since the Daniel Craig Bond is pretty much a reboot, I try not to compare them, much like the two Willa Wonka movies, both are great in their own ways. Then again, I guess you could say it's hard to compare Connery, Moore, and Brosnan (fuck the other two) when they portrayed Bond because each of them brought something different to the table.
I suppose the same could be said of Doctor Who.
Normally, I wouldn't compare them to Daniel Craig considering it's a reboot, but... y'know, scratch that. I would. I have to, it's subconscious. Whether I intend to or not, I do, and I'm sure it's the same for you and everyone else unless they've nothing to compare.
He'll do for now, and I see him being around at least as long as Brosnan was.
But definitely great action, and worth seeing.
BUT (the infamous "but")
watching the new Quantum of Solace made me really want to see ALL of them!!! soooo i highly recomend it! it was a good movie... how many james bond movies are there n e way???
I'd recommend starting with Dr. No, that being the first. Then From Russia With Love, that arguably being the best, followed by Goldfinger. If you watch them in that order, that's the first three. Aside from that, the Pierce Brosnan films are the next best in my opinion, starting with GoldenEye. Though, if QoS was your first movie, perhaps you should see Casino Royale next because the end of that film is, like, 20 minutes before the beginning of Quantum of Solace.
Your best bet it to wait until Christmas or Thanksgiving, there's usually a marathon of James Bond movies around those holidays. Though, I must warn you, there've been five different actors to play James Bond, and they're all different in ways. Also, it's safe to say that the older Bond movies are nothing like Daniel Craig's films, so don't expect too much of the same.