Restores faith in the Bond franchise and earns back its dignity

Rating: 9/10 (20 November 2006)

It seemed like they couldn't get any worse. After 1996's Goldeneye the downhill string of "Tomorrow Never Dies," "The World is Not Enough," and "Die Another Day" kept bringing Bond to new levels of repetitive gadget-loaded mediocrity, spared only by the suave of Pierce Brosnan . Then comes "Casino Royale," a film which producers claimed would be the rebirth of the franchise. After casting Daniel Craig as the 6th James Bond, the speculation grew as to what direction Bond was actually headed. Now that the film has hit the silver screen, we now have our answer: up, way up.
"Casino Royale" is so well done, that years from now past, present and future Bond fans will wonder how in the world 2002's "Die Another Day" was the film that preceded it. This film is smarter, faster, cooler, funnier, more engaging and in almost every way better than "DAD" and the Brosnan films that came before it. Just when you thought that Barbara Broccoli and crew had no idea what they were doing or which direction to take the franchise in, they completely turn around and in impressive fashion. While Bond was still a financial success with DAD grossing over 400 M world wide, they decided regardless that what they were doing was harmful to the franchise and did something about it, which is most applaudable.
The first wise choice was not only to pick an already existent Bond novel to adapt, but to choose an origin story, going with the very successful Hollywood trend that made films like "Batman Begins" more successful than additionally harmful to their franchise names. They stuck to the origin story and they followed through with it, not simply saying that "this is how Bond came to be a double-O" but showing Bond's first lesson of "trust no one" in a way that brings humanity to a character that has for so long been a distant icon of manliness, coolness and suave and nothing more.
Now on to Daniel Craig. The Bond fanatics were in uproar over the blue-eyed blonde's casting, but they were incredibly off. I don't like to say that I called it, but one merely has to watch Craig's performance in "Layer Cake" to see that Craig is 100% Bond material. His qualities bring Bond to a new level yet also restore some of the classic Sean Connery style. He is far more muscular and imposing than any previous Bond, yet his face is much softer and his expressions and humor more subtle, building on the finesse that has made Bond so successful in the past. Craig's performance makes Brosnan look like a clown in the past 4 movies because he is much more rugged and not overbearingly witty. It also helped Craig's case that the plot and characters were more well-developed in this film, making the humor less punchy and more natural.
The surrounding cast was also very strong. Keeping Judi Dench as M was a wise choice and digging up the talent of Bond girl Eva Green and villain Mads Mikkelsen was also impressive. Green is very fitting for the smart and sophisticated Vesper Lynd. Her unique beauty and wit make her a much stronger bond girl than any of recent--she comes off much more as a leading lady than a sex symbol and her character is much more valued. Mikkelsen also adds to the successful subtleties of the film's characters with the portrayal of villain Le Chiffre.
The bottom line is that Bond is back, and he's bigger and better while still doing what he does best. "Casino Royale" keeps all the elements that are essential Bond and does them well while vastly improving upon the franchise. The action is grittier and more realistic, the romance is more believable than whimsical and the humor is explicit yet more comfortable. The only concerns lie slightly in the film's length and in some of the serious, emotional moments. Those moments, however, are entirely excusable given this film is the first ever to tackle them, and will hopefully then allow for improvement in the next Bond installment which will find itself having a hard time topping its predecessor.