A better Bond.

Rating: 7/10 (20 November 2006)

It is often in the superhero genre in comics that decades of hokeyness precedes reinvention of a classic character by a writer that refuses to write by 'what is' but rather 'what could be.' Such was what Miller did for Batman, and what Moore did for the Swamp Thing.
With James Bond, however, it starts with a book that already had greater character depth, followed by movies which took mere sound bites of the character and created a formulaic Bond which remained largely unchanged for decades. Casino Royale, however, marks a return to its roots.
This Bond is still suave and smooth but not ridiculously so - there are still obvious chinks in his armor. He plays the role of secret agent inasmuch the same way as Newman played Fast Eddie in the Hustler against Gleason's Minnesota Fats - insecure, needing to prove something to himself - but the kind of insecurity that's often mistaken for overconfidence.
While it's a much better Bond, it's far from being a perfect movie. There are love interest scenes that could've been cut in half, or cut out completely. The film attempts to rationalize the purpose of the love interest as relating to the plot, but it feels tacked on - it would have better served the film if it retained a high level of sexual tension, but without succumbing to the lovey-doveyness of it.
All in all, Craig is a good Bond. I enjoyed his work in Road to Perdition as Connor. It's nice to see a Bond that is far more 'real,' than his predecessors.