Best Bond film since OHMSS?

Rating: 8/10 (18 November 2006)

"Casino Royale" may very well be the best Bond entry since On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Daniel Craig's performance as Bond has been criticized for being too subdued (like Dalton or Lazenby), but he hits the right notes at the right times. Think Connery on anti-depressants.
The screenplay is smarter and more sophisticated than the Brosnan-era Bond films. The heated exchange between Bond and Vespa on board the train to Montenegro (they verbally analyze each other's personalities) was particularly satisfying. Visually, the Bahamas sequences were very reminiscent of Thunderball, I thought, but certainly more modern. "Casino Royale" works because it doesn't dwell too much on Bond nostalgia. It's totally unique and forward thinking, much the way "Live and Let Die" (not a great Bond film, but a definite break from past Bond films) and OHMSS were, without completely breaking from past traditions. Lamont's set design and David Arnold's Barryesque score should please long-time Bond fans.
Good location selection (Lake Como, Venice, Bahamas) and occasionally dream-like cinematography harken back to the best sequences from "Moonraker," a much maligned Bond film that, save the horribly dated space battle sequence, deserves reassessment. "Casino Royale" borrows all the best elements from previous Bond filmsthe music, the women, architecture, and artsy cinematographywhile being almost entirely new (a lot of jump-cuts and cellphones, but still very original). There's not a lot of cheesy filler in "Casino Royale" (let's be honest about some of the previous Bond films)every scene holds up. If you've ever read one of the Ian Fleming novels, you'll quickly realize how true "Casino Royale" remains to the spirit of the "real" James Bond.