Enjoyed it as an action film, not so much as a 'Bond' film....

Rating: 8/10 (13 October 2007)

I enjoyed myself watching Casino Royale. But obvious problems just couldn't prevent it from being a true Bond film. The very logic of some things just stood out. For instance, this film takes place before all of the others, like a prequel to the other Bond films. Yet I see cellphones and people text messaging throughout the film, and mentions of 9-11! I understand people saying that they have to cater to today's market, but with a source material so rich and with so much history; I personally have a problem when movie makers feel the need to and essentially FORCE a "modernized updated, today version" on an audience when the very story is supposed to take place before the countless other Bond films, the first one made in 1962 based on a book written in 1952.
Aside from that, I can honestly say that Daniel Craig has indeed breathed life into the Bond character itself, as Pierce Brosnan's version was horrible. I liked the look back into the character's history and how he came up; showing that he was indeed not the silky-smooth, 'perfect' spy that we've come to know him as. This Bond film is a more subdued version compared to the other; its more straight-up, which I really liked. A good action/spy film? Yes. As good as a Bond film? Not particularly.
8/10