Daniel Craig carries that Bond baton beautifully but the movie lacks substance

Rating: 3/10 (17 November 2006)

Went to see the special screening of the movie with much anticipation only to be disappointed by it.
To begin with its not your 100% typical bond film. I know the producers and critics have said that this is not your typical Bond, he is tougher grittier and blah blah. My question is,what does Bond stands for? Bond is known for its over the top image, girls and cars with loads of gizmo's. Thats the kind of Bond we have come to know and love. This movie only has flashes of that quintessential bond that we have known so far. I am wondering if this shift away from the traditional bond is a reflection of the success of more grittier and darker heroes of the movies like Bourne series and batman begins.
Thats about the Bond as a character. The film on the other hand lacks substance. There are only about 2 major action sequences which I have to say have been well shot and live up the expectations of the Bond genre. The focal point of the film, the poker game is much too stretched and so is the romance between Bond and Vesper. The highlight of that part of the film is the one liners between them which has been stylishly and cleverly executed. The plot is quite simple and and doesn't leave much to the imagination. I was also quite disappointed with the ending. Now since when have we started having Bond films in sequels.
Overall I think the producers are taking the franchise in the wrong direction. We were never short of darker grittier celluloid heroes. What attracted people to bond was that he was larger than life.