Craig is pretty good, but the movie itself does not fare as well.

Rating: 6/10 (5 December 2006)

I grew up on Roger Moore as Bond, then went back and saw the Connery flicks when I was a bit older. That said, Casino Royale is sorely lacking on a number of fronts.
First of all, the plot is way too convoluted. Bond movies are always a bit hard to follow at times, but this had so many bad guys and so many plot ramifications that I didn't feel like there was much focus at all, and very little build up. The romance blew a big hole in the movie, as it was tired and cliché'd and a bit rickety, right in the middle of a film with otherwise great dialog and a good script. When the end scene FINALLY rolled around, I didn't feel any joy in the fact that Bond had killed a bad guy who almost comes out of nowhere. This is atypical of Bond films, which usually (especially in the Connery/Moore years) had great buildup and a great enemy to sink your teeth into. The enemy that SHOULD have taken that role on dies way too early, and then there a number of false endings that seem to go on and on.
However, Craig is fantastic, and it has some of the greatest action scenes of any Bond film ever. Thank GOD CGI did not make itself very present, because when a movie is largely live action (with a little CGI thrown in), it has SO much more impact...there was a preview for Spider Man 3, and you can clearly see how the massive CGI just kills the raw intense feel, that the Bond film has in spades.
OK, but definitely did not live up to the hype. Great action, great acting, sub-par plot and content. And almost no gadgets! COME ON, PEOPLE, WE NEED BOND GADGETS!!!!