May contain spoilers - Ever watch Poker for 2 1/2 hours?

Rating: 4/10 (13 December 2006)

So what are the commonalities between CR 2006 and CR 1967...well the comparisons are easy to see. In each there was "no one" playing Bond, neither one was funny and each was a meandering, spoof of a Classic iconic movie formula. The James Bond themes and prototypical characters and plot lines are so heavily ingrained in our culture that many people who have never seen a Bond film "know" the Bond elements. The girls, the gadgets, the fast cars, the uber-villains, the self effacing humor and none too subtle sexual (and blatantly sexist) innuendo manifest in the names of many of the female characters.
So why would someone want to "kill the goose that laid the golden egg"?.
One can only wonder what committee was formed to create, cast, write, market and produce this generally very unsatisfying, overly complex and essentially boring storyline.
As a life long Bond fan I can easily put this movie pretty near the bottom of Bond movies that didn't work out. Not counting the disappointment from the anticipation of seeing "how Bond became Bond" - punctuated with the pathetic and melodramatic movie's last line, "Bond...James Bond" - I found myself confused by the thematic, visual and plot elements which seemed to be telling the "Bond Story" forward and backward at the same time. The whole notion, set up in the beginning of the film when we see Bond earning his 007 status with his 2nd kill, that this is the beginning of what we now know as the Bond legend is contradicted with all sorts of contemporary visual, metaphorical and technical elements ( a shot of the recently built Atlantis hotel in the Bahamas, the EXTENSIVE use of MODERN cell phone (which are entirely critical to the storyline), the "wink, wink - nudge, nudge" allusion to female sexist names - when he tells Eva Green's character "Vesper Lynd" that her cover name on assignment is 'Stephanie Broadchest') all add to the backdrop of the big showdown between Bond and his nemesis Le Chiffre ("The Figure") in their "spine tingling" Texas hold 'em high stakes card game. Are you kidding? Bond playing Texas hold 'em poker. Until this film I never knew I could watch a game of Poker for two and a half hours - (yawn) how exciting.
Presumably, this was because of the huge appeal of this game to today's modern audience and the obvious conclusion that Bond would have preferred it to every other damn games of chance he played in ALL the other Bond films.
I'm hoping in the next one that Bond has a big adventure with Le Figure in anticipation of the big deadly lawn mowing competition...then I can watch grass grow for two hours (unless the producers decide to set another running time record).
On the positive side (yes there were positives), I was please to see the restrained and graphically creative retro-styling of the opening titles. Giving the opening a very 60's Peter Maxish (sort of) feel and loved the flashbacks in the beginning of Bond's first kill shot in somewhat grainy black and white and inter-cut with the dark, somber and foreboding lead up to his 2nd kill (which earned him his 007 status).
It was also intriguing to see a young Bond go "off the map" and reek havoc in a guerrilla base with some fantastic low tech chases and high wire stunts and fighting. It was a refreshing and yet perfectly logical "opening fight/escape" that Bond became known for. It was also great to see the female characters being more substantial and real and not simply the "same old" stereotypes (since his legend was far from established at this point). It also made sense that a young Bond would stumble and not necessarily be able to smoothly get around every situation. And finally, the locales and cinematography was great...not too slick and shiny and just a bit "old school".
"M" / Judi Densch was, of course, fantastic as usual but were it not for her it would have seemed like: "hey who the hell stole James Bond and replaced it with all these unknown actors". No Moneypenny, No Q, and a Felix Leiter whose lines made him seem more like: "if I say I work for the CIA then you need to believe me, please" and Daniel Craig showed the acting range of a cardboard cutout, I would have been happier if they just put up a 8x10 glossy of Pierce Brosnan whenever it was time to see Craig.
In short, set your expectations low and be ready to spend a lot of time watching Poker