Technically Polished, Dramatically Bland Prequel

Rating: 6/10 (29 May 2007)

"Casino Royale," the only prequel in the long running James Bond series, introduces the sixth actor to play James Bond on screen (discounting the silly 1967 spy spoof of the same name), is technically polished; all it lacks is suspense, mystery and entertainment value. As a rule, I hate prequels, the exceptions being "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly" and "Batman Begins;" unfortunately, "Casino Royale" is no exception. Sure, it's realistic, in the "Bourne Identity" mold. However, after watching James Bond as "Superman" all these years, how excited can one get watching two hours of him as "Clark Kent"? I keep hearing what an "exceptional" Bond Daniel Craig is, as though my previous misgivings were SO wrong. Well, anyone who had seen Craig in "Layer Cake" or "Lara Croft Tomb Raider" knew Craig has the acting chops and action chops to play James Bond. Unfortunately, Craig lacks the spark that has tied all previous James Bond's together (even the morbid Timothy Dalton), and that's empathy. I don't care what happens to Craig's Bond; and, given the very little action in "Casino Royale," that's murderous to enjoying the movie. Worse, Craig looks older than his predecessor, Pierce Brosnan. Eva Green's cleavage is the best element of her performance as Vesper; she's not bad, just forgettable, and has little chemistry with Craig.
Barbara Brocolli would have better served herself if she'd "kissed and made up" with Pierce Brosnan, and had "Casino Royale" rewritten as his swan song. Maybe have a terrorist attack be blamed on Bond's incompetence, and "M" being forced to retire him after one final "small potatoes" case. "Casino Royale" would then have been a story of redemption. Maybe add one final twist as Brosnan's "Bond" goes off to marry Green's "Vesper". Have "M" reveal that, like "Bourne," both the name "James Bond" and number "007" are assigned (as suggested in the 1967 "Casino Royale"), and that another agent will eventually be assigned the name and number. Now, that might have made an entertaining movie.
"Casino Royale" is certainly one of the better made Bond films; however, without a doubt, it's the least entertaining in the series. I feel I have been vindicated in my previous misgivings about Craig; and despite the explosive notices and box office for "Casino Royale," I predict Craig's next outing as Bond will be a box office failure. I give "Casino Royale" a "6".