The first page of hits Google returns if you run a search on "casino royale film review" are all basically the same. Everybody agrees that it's the best Bond movie ever made and Daniel Craig is the best Bond ever.
I beg to differ.
I may not be a true 007 fan, I must admit, although I have seen all of them, and some more than once (I do not consider myself a true fan just because I don't remember what many of them were called, and who played Bond in which particular one).
I do, however, have a very clear idea, why I like those movies.
Because they provide the very best brainless entertainment the movie of this genre can provide. Well, they used to. They had an enchantingly evil villain, many bad guys of different calibers, tons of cool gadgets, beautiful girls, world-scale crisis and, of course, indestructible, classy and cool main character. There would be a half an hour of the "character introduction" proving time and again, that 007 is the coolest, classiest and indestructiblest. There would be at least five minutes of the "gadget factory" (my personal favorite), followed by hour and a half of gloriously resolving the main crisis by magnificently blowing up everything that can be blown up, killing everything which could be killed, and saving everybody who deserved it. And then, after everything would have been over, yet another half an hour of going after the miraculously escaped main villain in order to save a kidnapped girl (usually the second, prettiest one; first one usually dies violently before we get a chance to start caring about her, but it makes 007 very angry). Mmm. Good times.
Now, let's see what we got here in Casino Royale. Character introduction: I am not sure. Was it that strange short black-and-white scene, which I failed to pay attention to (I still can't recall what they were talking about), or the chase after the small time bad guy with the back pack? If so, that was a wrong introduction, because the bad guy ran faster, moved cooler, and jumped higher (I still can't understand how Bond eventually caught up with him), and the whole sequence looked like Spiderman being chased by Hulk, who can run through drywall panels. That's not classy, that's borderline goofy.
I agree, Daniel Craig is a good actor, but guess what? Being Bond does not require acting chops. All you need to look the part, have pretty accent, and be able to issue several lines of canned puns. And that's fine. I don't care about character development. I don't need to grow to like him. He is likable by default, for he is a good guy, looks cool, have pretty accent, etc. Connery was cool, Dalton was classy, and Brosnan was both (he is my favorite Bond of all times). Craig isn't. He is short, stumpy, blond(!), and looks—in a tailored dinner jacket—like a thug who robbed a magician. Once again, he acts very well, but I don't care if Bond grew up in an orphanage. I want him to shoot, and blow stuff up, and race exotic cars, and pun in between.
Another thing—where did the main battle go? Neither there is, in fact, a world-class crisis. I know that they went by the book, but hey, if I wanted a book I would just read it, and if you are so darn proud of being true to the book, you should have made him younger and set the movie in the proper time period.
Instead of the main battle there is a fist fight on the rigged to blow up fuel truck, and a missing world-class crisis is resolved by not blowing up the truck and some airplane. The rest of the battle takes place at a card game. How exciting.
And the second (prettiest) girl dies. Whaat? Oh, she was bad, but not really? Thank you. Now I know that there will be no ending, because there is nobody to save. There is, however, another bad guy, but he is dealt with in one minute. Nice.
Total waste of 2.5 hours.
If I wanted to be bored to tears, I'd watch Babel again.
I beg to differ.
I may not be a true 007 fan, I must admit, although I have seen all of them, and some more than once (I do not consider myself a true fan just because I don't remember what many of them were called, and who played Bond in which particular one).
I do, however, have a very clear idea, why I like those movies.
Because they provide the very best brainless entertainment the movie of this genre can provide. Well, they used to. They had an enchantingly evil villain, many bad guys of different calibers, tons of cool gadgets, beautiful girls, world-scale crisis and, of course, indestructible, classy and cool main character. There would be a half an hour of the "character introduction" proving time and again, that 007 is the coolest, classiest and indestructiblest. There would be at least five minutes of the "gadget factory" (my personal favorite), followed by hour and a half of gloriously resolving the main crisis by magnificently blowing up everything that can be blown up, killing everything which could be killed, and saving everybody who deserved it. And then, after everything would have been over, yet another half an hour of going after the miraculously escaped main villain in order to save a kidnapped girl (usually the second, prettiest one; first one usually dies violently before we get a chance to start caring about her, but it makes 007 very angry). Mmm. Good times.
Now, let's see what we got here in Casino Royale. Character introduction: I am not sure. Was it that strange short black-and-white scene, which I failed to pay attention to (I still can't recall what they were talking about), or the chase after the small time bad guy with the back pack? If so, that was a wrong introduction, because the bad guy ran faster, moved cooler, and jumped higher (I still can't understand how Bond eventually caught up with him), and the whole sequence looked like Spiderman being chased by Hulk, who can run through drywall panels. That's not classy, that's borderline goofy.
I agree, Daniel Craig is a good actor, but guess what? Being Bond does not require acting chops. All you need to look the part, have pretty accent, and be able to issue several lines of canned puns. And that's fine. I don't care about character development. I don't need to grow to like him. He is likable by default, for he is a good guy, looks cool, have pretty accent, etc. Connery was cool, Dalton was classy, and Brosnan was both (he is my favorite Bond of all times). Craig isn't. He is short, stumpy, blond(!), and looks—in a tailored dinner jacket—like a thug who robbed a magician. Once again, he acts very well, but I don't care if Bond grew up in an orphanage. I want him to shoot, and blow stuff up, and race exotic cars, and pun in between.
Another thing—where did the main battle go? Neither there is, in fact, a world-class crisis. I know that they went by the book, but hey, if I wanted a book I would just read it, and if you are so darn proud of being true to the book, you should have made him younger and set the movie in the proper time period.
Instead of the main battle there is a fist fight on the rigged to blow up fuel truck, and a missing world-class crisis is resolved by not blowing up the truck and some airplane. The rest of the battle takes place at a card game. How exciting.
And the second (prettiest) girl dies. Whaat? Oh, she was bad, but not really? Thank you. Now I know that there will be no ending, because there is nobody to save. There is, however, another bad guy, but he is dealt with in one minute. Nice.
Total waste of 2.5 hours.
If I wanted to be bored to tears, I'd watch Babel again.