Casino Royale (general observations, no spoilers)

[selenak]

So far, highlights of my weekend have included writing about 200 Christmas letters, then being told I'd have to write them again because the mode of address wasn't sufficiently warm-hearted, and watching Casino Royale. You can bet I liked the new Bond movie better.

Churlishness about seasonal tasks aside, I really enjoyed it. Bond movies were never a great passion, but they were by and large fun. I did see them until and including the first Brosnan, Goldeneye, after which I gave up. My father, on the other hand, is a fan and has the Fleming novels at home, which means I read them before seeing any of the movies and thus actually watched my first Connery (From Russian With Love) nitpicking and going "but..." in my earnest 12 years old way. All this being said, I'm not entirely kidding when I claim my favourite Bond is Bashir, Julian Bashir, in the DS9 episode Our Man Bashir which is a strong contender for best Star Trek Episode Using The Holodeck/Holosuite Ever and manages to get the Bond formula better than many of the movies while still making it a character piece for Bashir and Garak.

Casino Royale, based on Fleming's first Bond novel, tackled the difficult task of trying to unite Book Bond and Movie Bond (the two drifted irrevocably apart even in the late Connery years and by the time Roger Moore came along were completely separate; actually the most faithful movie in terms of actually using Fleming's posts and characterisation is probably the intermediary, In Her Majesty's Secret Service, starring the somewhat unfairly maligned George Lazenby and Diana Rigg, and after that, they never tried it again script wise though Dalton tried it via acting), to reboot the franchise in the way Batman Begins did with Batman, and to present something that can compete with all those agents and spies that came after Bond and possessed, dare one say it, a touch of psychological realism. And it manages all that, delivering with aplomb. Daniel Craig actually matches the description Fleming gives which no one post Connery did (too handsome, too smooth, and definitely sans sign of cruelty in the face), and you believe the way this man earns his living. Actually adressing the "how does killing people affect one" question in a Bond movie - a genre which lives from being "safe" fantasy - was risky, and it pays off. So does getting rid of the gadgets and counterpointing the ever more elaborate chase sequences of the later movies which had used everything from cars to trains to space crafts by going back to the basis and making the big chase sequence one on foot, with both parties running. It's no less suspenseful for that, and in tune with the emphasis on the physical (not just in the sense of eye candy, though the film naturally delivers that, too) throughout.

As was the case with Fleming, but not most of the movies, the villains' goals are all about money, not world domination and/or world destruction. Very refreshing. Something unique to this film and not in either the novel "Casino Royale" or previous movies was what you could call the Batman Begins parallel: Bond as a work in progress, not yet in his definite persona, but aquiring it bit by bit throughout the movie. This James Bond isn't above either making major mistakes or learning all the time; he's not yet a static character. (As with the Batman franchise, this makes me wonder how the follow up movie will handle its main figure as the assembling of the iconic persona can't be repeated.)

Judi Dench is great as M (though I stopped watching post Goldeneye, I thought making M female was an inspired contribution to the franchise) and sparks off Craig as Bond in a way I can't recall any M and Bond ever did. (astolat wrote a great story about the two of them, Queen of Spades, which everyone who hasn't yet should read; as for me, for the first time I could see M as living in the same world as Harry of the tv show Spooks and wished for these two to cross swords, especially since Spooks plays up the MI5/MI6 rivalry at every chance it gets.) Eva Green as Vesper accomplishes what imo only Diana Rigg as Tracy really managed, making a "Bond girl" a woman with emotional depth, and makes me wonder what else she's acted in that I could watch. And I really hope they keep the scriptwriter; this one manages witty dialogue without getting into groanworthy puns. So, all in all: kudos, and please, may I have another?

Comments

[mamculuna.livejournal.com]

Great review, and totally agree. Let's hope this is the start of a whole series of Bond as it should have been done.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

*crosses fingers*

[skywaterblue.livejournal.com]

I don't know, but both Eva Green and Daniel Craig are signed up to do His Dark Materials next, and I couldn't be more thrilled.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

So I heard, and I'm looking forward to seeing them there.

[skywaterblue.livejournal.com]

It's really a spot of perfect casting.

[counteragent.livejournal.com]

Gosh---that will be great! Perfect casting indeed.

[astridv.livejournal.com]

All this being said, I'm not entirely kidding when I claim my favourite Bond is Bashir, Julian Bashir,

Damn straight! :)

I dunno, I hear only good things about Casino Royale, but the last Bond I watched about ten years ago - rather, my friends dragged me into it - was so awful that I was just annoyed. I came out of the theater thinking, that's two hours of my life I'm not getting back.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

You won't be sorry about this one, believe me. And yes, I know there are a couple of entirely awful Bond movies. Like I said, I stopped watching about a decade ago as well...

[kathyh]

We went to see Casino Royale this afternoon and I entirely agree with you. You need to believe that Bond could kill and Daniel Craig is the first actor since Connery who's really made me think that.

makes me wonder what else she's acted in that I could watch.

She was Sybilla in Kingdom of Heaven which is worth watching for a brief appearance by the very gorgeous Alexander Siddig.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Yes. He is dangerous, which none of the others post-Connery were.

Kingdom of Heaven: alack. Alas. I did watch that. And Siddig - plus Edward Norton as King Balduin - were about the only inducements (Ridley,Ridley, what were you thinking?) I call poor Sybilla as severely underwritten...

KoH

[shezan.livejournal.com]

Shurely Orlando Blmoom was nice to look at in that?

(but the history, alack indeed, the history...)

Re: KoH

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Well, you see, the particular appeal of Orlando Bloom has always escaped me. I mean, he's pretty, no denying that, but Lord of the Rings and Pirates aside, I never managed to feel anything for any character of his (and even in those films I was more interested in other characters). I don't hate him, he's just.... room decoration, you know?

Now the artist formerly known as Siddig el Fadil, mmmmmmmm.... but he was there far too short a time.

[gentilhomme.livejournal.com]

The first place I saw Eva Green was in The Dreamers which is... worth watching for yourself, unless Bertolucci or perverse French people squick you. She was also in Kingdom of Heaven, IIRC, which I didn't watch.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Vive la France! And Bertolucci doesn't squick me, either.

Now I did watch Kingdom of Heaven, and alas, you don't need to. Some good bits, but by and large one wonders what Ridley Scott was thinking when doing that one...

[shezan.livejournal.com]

Well, the point about Dreamers is that it did not look or feel one bit like France in May 68. And, er, see, I remember that. It was goergeously Italian to its fingertips...

[selenak.livejournal.com]

That is not a problem, either, as long as the film is good. *g*

[gentilhomme.livejournal.com]

It's really not bad; just don't watch it with your parents or your priest, &c. *L*

[shezan.livejournal.com]

, I thought making M female was an inspired contribution to the franchise

Well, after Stella Rimington became head of the Secret Intelligence Service (yes, yes, MI6), they sort of had to follow the hint...

[ponygirl2000.livejournal.com]

I loved the relationship between Bond and M. Since this was the first time in the movies I can recall there being a mention of Bond being an orphan there's the parental aspect to it. And then Bond being Bond and Judi Dench being sexy as all get out their conversations were wonderfully charged. He not only found out where she lived, he knows her name. I had to giggle when I noted that there was definitely someone in the bed next M when she was called in the middle of the night - only a couple scenes after Bond had made a point of saying he only gets involved with married women.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

*g* There's that. Re: orphan, yes. Back in my teenage years when I read the novels, I remember the obituary M wrote in You Only Die Twice including this (and the Scot/Swiss combination), but the movies never did. It makes sense that they would now that they tried (successfully) to make Bond into more of a human being than an icon....

[likeadeuce.livejournal.com]

I just got back from this and liked it a lot. . .I'm finding it ironic that Craig is, as you say, "not too handsome," but he's the only Bond I've seen who actually sells the character's sex appeal. Oddly enough, the last thing I saw Craig in was playing Werner Heisenberg in a TV adaptaion of "Copenhagen," and I see that he played Perry Smith in the OTHER recent Capote movie. That's quite a range to make it to Bond. Then, I've always thought casting against type yields generally more interesting results.

One interesting thing is that the director and the two top credited writers are back from previous less-than-stellar bond movies. So either Paul Haggis made the difference (which is certainly possible) or it's more an issue of studio style and big budget dumbness trumping everything else in the previous movies. And three special cheers, as you say, for giving Judi Dench's M something to do.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

I'm finding it ironic that Craig is, as you say, "not too handsome," but he's the only Bond I've seen who actually sells the character's sex appeal.

I wouldn't say the only one - *is loyal to Sean Connery* - but he certainly sells it best.

Then, I've always thought casting against type yields generally more interesting results.

Definitely, and I agree about the range. If you find the time and it's available in the US, check out the English tv production "Our Friends in the North". He's excellent in that as well (and again utterly different).

[greenpear.livejournal.com]

This too was one of my favorite Bond films. I quit watching some time in the Roger Moore era. I was brought up reading the Bond books way before I saw my first Bond movie. The first few of the Connery films did pretty well but as time went on they succumed to the Hollywood stigma.

Good analysis of the movie and the character.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Thank you.

[jamalov29]

actually the most faithful movie in terms of actually using Fleming's posts and characterisation is probably the intermediary, In Her Majesty's Secret Service Nods. This is one of the reasons why I was so happy with the Casino Royale version of Bond , he looked like the man Flemming was talking about and it is an interesting, multi-layered character , this work in progress that Craig portrayed beautifully.

I'm currently eager for a third movie and slightly weary , hoping that they will keep up with the good stuff. Anyway I'm already satisfied with Casino and Quantum that forms a great story.

And I need a D.Craig icon now. ;)