Looks Like Bonds 1 - 20 Were Just Practice Runs

Rating: 10/10 (19 November 2006)

I always had a vague feeling of disappointment while watching Bond films. True, I love them but at the back of my head there was always something wrong. Now I know what it is.
I was desperate for the makers to take what they were doing seriously. Well, now they have. In Casino Royale we are presented with a Bond who not only bleeds, not only gets genuinely hurt but at times is in serious danger of getting killed. Actually death probably looked pretty attractive to him at one point, considering what the villain was doing to him at the time. But aside from that, the big question is, "is Daniel Craig any good?". Well, here I have to be very, very cautious indeed as we are dealing with a Retcon (Reboot is rather inaccurate) and therefore the character is altered to fit Fleming's vision rather than anything we have seen before. In other words, I far prefer this version of Bond to the previous cinematic incarnation, collectively embodied by Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton and Brosnan. Rather than "Bond 21" this is more "Bond 1b" and it almost makes me wish I didn't have to put up up with the last 20. Yes; it is that good.
In essence, the anti-Craigs were probably more anti-ditch-everything-out-the-window-and-start-again than anything else but were could the series have gone after Die Another Day? The bin probably. Thank God we don't have to suspend our disbelief anymore and in a world were terrorists really are slamming planes into international landmarks, Bond has finally caught up. The violence, pain and suffering is real and dirty (one MI6 agent is seen restraining himself from vomiting on seeing a dead body at one point). No room have we for the frivolities of Moore or Brosnan; we just do not live in a frivolous world anymore.