Casino Royale Review

Overall Rating

A good film - but is it James Bond?

Daniel Craig has taken over the reins as the sixth actor to have a go at battling the James Bond formula. The result is an entertaining action movie but does it follow in the footsteps of other Bond movies? The new Bond is different. When he is asked if he wants his Martini "shaken or stirred" he answers "whatever." Its enough to make Sean Connery roll in his Versace bed.


The Backdrop

Casino Royale was the first of Ian Fleming's Bond books and many critics have said that this film is the most like Fleming's original. Casino Royale follows Bond from the start of his secret agent career; he attempts to achieve his 'OO' status that only a double kill can acquire. The film goes back to basics and shows a character never before seen, a na ve but much darker Bond. This is shown at the start of the film when Bond, having killed two enemies, stares into a mirror and gives fans an emotional insight into the character.

The Character

Casino Royale's Bond is a far cry from the invincible but unrealistic Bonds of the past. This Bond is slightly cockier, slightly more of a rebel and more of a romantic. We see Bond fall in love and almost sacrifice his 007 role because of it. This is perhaps less like Fleming's original Bond than less romantic predecessors. Perhaps the only way that Craig's character is anything like the original is that he is blonde, something that he has been widely criticised for! This Bond seems to be lacking a sense of humour, no longer does he have the snappy one liners or 'cringy' and 'cheesy' comebacks that we have come to love and expect form a Bond film. Take 'The World is not Enough' with Pierce Brosnan for example. Bond is making love to a Bond girl aptly named Miss Christmas and he says "I though Christmas only came once a year." 'Cheesy' but priceless.

The Plot - too real or just too complicated?

The basic plotline focuses on a corrupt and influential group of terrorists who Bond must bankrupt by participating in a high stakes game of poker in the Casino Royale. At times the fast plot can leave viewers behind and I for one spent the drive home from the cinema trying to figure it out. Even if, however, you don't understand the film, the action sequences were both stunning and well-filmed and at several points I jumped out of my seat. The opening scene shows Bond chasing the French jump artist Sebastian Lopez around a construction site, thus giving the audience its first chance to see Bond's 'no nonsense' power against the Frenchman's amazing flying stunts.

Odd looking villains, ridiculously named but beautiful girls and a double crosser or two: this story has all of these in abundance, but there is something missing - it doesn't have the Bond X-factor. The whole story is very believable, in fact too believable (following a similar line to shows like MI5 drama 'Spooks'). The Bond franchise, however, has lost its charm and its ridiculousness. In my opinion as a fan of the James Bond films, if this film had a different title and different characters it would be great but because it is a James Bond film it has to contain several features that are in fact the essence of what makes it Bond.

Misses a trick

No Q, no Moneypenny and no gadgets. This film goes back to the start of the classic Bond era and in doing so misses out on several of the characters and gadgets that have been included in previous Bond films. Why go back? I honestly could not guess at an answer. The one gadget that has been kept intact is the fabulous Aston Martin DBS but even even that is not the same without the character of Q, played by John Cleese, presenting it, tutting as he reminds Bond to "be careful with this one," the once harmonious relationship between Bond and M (played by Dame Judy Dench) falls on rocky grounds and is just not the same without former Bond Pierce Brosnan's snappy comebacks

Rating - 12A or 15

The issue of film certificates has been a hotly debated one, especially with the introduction of the 12A certificate (which this film has). When I viewed this film I sat a row behind a group of 8 or 9 year old boys who had legally entered the film with a parent, they sat horrified as their hero Bond was beaten up and whipped and this film was clearly unsuitable in terms of violence for such a young audience. However this film does appeal to children and I'm sure many more will continue to visit the film. Personally, I think a certificate of 15 would have been more appropriate.

Overall

This film is good entertainment despite its clear differences from previous Bond films. It has a great soundtrack and it is well-acted but somehow I feel it is lacking. Now it's up to you to make your own decision. I just hope that as Bond's story progresses we will see more of the 'real' Bond in Craig's films to come.

Members' Comments onbig elder's Review

• The H on 25th Jan 2007

  This review seems to read more like an English essay..... Hummmmmmmmm

• rudeboymick on 25th Jan 2007

  The film deliberately cuts out all of the cliche rubbish that have made the previous few Bond films pretty mediocre. Unbelievable gadgets have taken over the story, and here we see Bond back to basics. At last James Bond is cool again!
  
  There is a very drawn out soppy sequence relating to the relationship between bond and Vespa, which spoils the film a bit.
  
  As for the young boys horrified by the violence, I have to say that I looked around the cinema in the torture scene, and every man was wincing...old or young. There wasn't much violence in the film at all, and wholly appropriate for 10-year-olds to watch it if their parents hink they are mature enough. After all, most of these kids spend hours shooting zombies and Nazis on computer games, so the image of Daniel Craig sweating (which is all you really see anyway) isn't going to shock them much.