Bond meets Bourne...and loses (Casino Royale [2006] (DVD))

Member Name: Jake Speed

Product:	Casino Royale [2006] (DVD)
Date:	29/07/07 (86 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: Good action sequences

Disadvantages: ull leads, pretentious

Eon productions, the studio behind the indestructible James Bond franchise, made a big decision when they parted company with Pierce Brosnan sometime in the wake of 2002's Die Another Day. Although into his fifties, Brosnan still looked relatively good and seemed to deserve one more adventure. Die Another Day was very successful but hardly classic Bond and Brosnan deserved at least a better picture to sign off on. Why did they put the Brozza in the ejector seat anyway? Rumours aside, the principle reason was Eon finally aquiring the rights to Ian Fleming's first Bond novel Casino Royale. Bond producer Michael G Wilson had floated a 'young Bond' film in 1986 and been vetoed by Cubby Broccoli who promptly hired fortysomething Timothy Dalton. Broccoli felt that Bond should always be an established agent with a bit of maturity. Anyway, Eon looked to tie in Casino Royale to Wilson's long held 'Bond begins' idea and soon everyone from Martin Campbell to Paul Haggis were talking about how the new James Bond picture would be very radical and feature a 28 year-old 007. Sounded good to me.

Problem one for Casino Royale for me was the casting of 38 year-old Daniel Craig as the 'young Bond'. Craig doesn't even look 38 let alone 28! This contradiction was something that bugged me. The film still holds very much to the idea that Bond is fresh into the 00-section. He has much to learn, makes mistakes, hasn't discovered his favourite alcoholic tipple and is altogether more stroppy and thuggish than previous cinematic Bonds. Interesting angle with a twentysomething. With Daniel Craig it just didn't work for me. Why is a man who looks like he's in his forties acting in such an immature fashion? At one point Vesper Lynd gives him a new tuxedo (his Bond needs a woman to pick clothes for him!) and Craig puts it on and gazes in the mirror looking like any old Joe Average pretending to be James Bond. Rest assured that your reaction to Casino Royale depends very much on your reaction to Daniel Craig. For the first time Bond is not especially good-looking, tall or bright. He's a plain, blue-collar everyman. If Bond is a fantasy figure to you and you love the gadgets and humour you may be disappointed. If you are ready for a new take on Bond (and one that seems to have been copied lock, stock and barrel from the Jason Bourne pictures) then Eon have certainly provided that.

Casino Royale attempts to reposition 007 as a tougher, more realistic and less flippant character. They do that for much of the film but only after a ludicrous parkour foot chase where 007 jumps from cranes and crashes bulldozers. He shoots up an Embassy and somehow dodges millions of bullets. If Brosnan had done that people would still be talking about how silly it was. Why does Craig get away with it? Is it because he is a serious character actor? Is it because he has one facial expression?

Fleming's cold war espionage novel accounts for about half of the film. It is of course updated and tweaked and the script had a lot of potential. The double-entrendres and innuendo that has plagued recent entries are mercifully trimmed this time out and while the script is ambitious Paul Haggis overeggs the pudding with some leaden attempts at worthy dialogue. The first meeting between Bond and Vesper is atrocious. A cack-handed scene on a train where they try to analyze each other in a game of one-upmanship. Craig looks like a waxwork dummy. He is much better at the action than scenes where he has to display a lightness of touch.

The poker scenes have been criticised for being too long but they didn't bother me that much. It was a wise decision to update to Hold'em. It's the only poker I've ever played so at least I knew what was going on! Jeffrey wright as Felix Leiter bails out 007 and he cleans out (the bland villain) Le Chiffre. Le Chiffre then kidnapps Vesper and after the world's shortest car chase he captures Bond and tortures him. The torture scene was played for laughs and Craig overacts terribly. He recovers, decides he loves Vesper and then discovers she was working for Le Chiffre before she drowns herself in Venice despite Bond's best efforts. I should add that the details of Lynd's betrayal and the mysterious Mr White and his organisation are vague. Elements are left in the air for a continuation film; a rarity in the Bond series.

People have raved about Casino Royale but I found it a very average action film with some ponderous dialogue and dull leads. Eva Green is very beautiful as Vesper but isn't given much to do and the villain was very bland. I liked the photography and the look of some of the film but Martin Campbell isn't my favourite director. Great at action, not so great with the static scenes. Oh and Jeffery Wright was good as Felix and I wish he'd had a few more scenes.

For me personally, the whole charm of the James Bond series was in the sophisticated handsome devil hero, a unique counter-point to the blue-collar heroes in vests and dirty shirts. Here Bond has joined the pack and become like everyone else. It'll be interesting to see what happens next but I'm afraid I miss the old Bond already. Let's hope Bond actor number 7 is more to my tastes.

Extras:

I suspect Sony are going to try and put several versions out to entice Bond fan completists to part with their money. I would wait for an 'Ultimate Edition' of Casino Royale if you want to buy it. I'd seen most of the extras on ITV and Chris Cornell's terrible 'You Know My Name' video hardly makes up for it!

Summary: Wait for the Ultimate Edition