Bond is Back...And Better than Ever

Rating: 8/10 (11 December 2006)

The James Bond franchise has been needing a good shot in the arm ever since the series began to flag with Tomorrow Never Dies, back in 1997. Suffering from bleak plots, an increasing amount of campiness that defied explanation, boring one-note villains over and over again, it seemed like Bond had breathed his last. Casino Royale could only go two ways: help the Bond franchise or drive the final stake into its heart. Fortunately, Daniel Craig (Bond) and Martin Campbell (the director) have managed to successfully do the former, bravely reworking the Bond formula into something that the public has longed for for such a long time: a movie that does not solely rely on the name for the numbers, but a movie that relies on what audiences crave: quality.
The movie opens with the usual razzle-dazzle display of flashy colors and cleverly put-together graphics, but these defied any previous James Bond film that I have seen. After this we are treated to Daniel Craig inflicting the two kills he must in order to become a 00. We quickly learn that this Bond is not the suave gentleman spy with which we are familiar. This is Bond is real. His bones break. His skin bleeds. He screws up. He gets cocky in situations where it's deadly.
Daniel Craig's portrayal of Bond is the highlight of the film. There's no winking at the camera, no sly "I'm so great because they picked me to play Bond" feeling. This is Bond in the real world. This Bond is flesh, bones, and blood. He's not some untouchable superhero, like all the others. And screw the fact that he's blonde. And the complaining Bonde fanboys can shut their mouths because this is the Bond that will save the franchise and give us something which we have been craving: good acting.
Great action is another thing that sells Casino Royale. There are no ridiculously large explosions, no cheesy special effects that smother the story. Towards the beginning there is a rather large explosion that seems unnecessary, but it's understandable. Aside from that, though, the action is very real, very gritty, and very very well done. A scene at the beginning where Bond is chasing someone through the streets of Madagascar is one of the most breathless chase scenes I've experienced in a long while.
The storyline is nothing spectacular, it's nothing revolutionary. What is revolutionary (at least for the Bond franchise) is the way they completely did away with the campiness, the puns, and the sheer disgusting cheese that was stifling the franchise. It was fine when it first came out, but the installments of late have just been disgusting with how much they excessively rely on this formula. As Casino Royale proves, you don't need these things to make a Bond film. What you need is a good Bond, and Craig delivers this. Action flicks have always been a step ahead of Bond because of how they are not chained to a particular formula - Bonds have been able to rely on a solid fan base for success of their films, but fans can only go so far, and Casino Royale has been able to open up the franchise to a much wider fan base - people I've spoken to who normally hate Bond films absolutely love Casino Royale.
There is one thing that really detracted from the experience, and it was the length of the movie. After the film reached a very satisfying conclusion, it seemed to drag on for another twenty minutes or half an hour, ending with a very predictable collapse of a building that reminded me of the useless explosion at the beginning of the film. Were the filmmakers afraid to end the film without a building collapsing? What came before the building collapsing also seemed artificially lengthened - I kept on expecting the closing credits to roll, but then scene after scene kept on being piled on. To the filmmakers credit, the extra scenes do attempt to add a bit of character to Bond, but I thought it just seemed fake and artificial. I don't want to give anything away, but I thought the scenes didn't fit with the Bond we had seen before.It's too bad the filmmakers felt like these extra twenty minutes were necessary, because if this fat had been trimmed, this would almost have been a perfectly streamlined adventure. As it is, it just bogs down the picture with forced sentimentality that didn't help at all.
Casino Royale is quality film-making in every sense of the word. It is a refreshing departure from the stifling and overbearing Bond formula, Daniel Craig's performance is nearly Oscar-worthy, and it's just so good. This is the shot of the adrenaline we have been waiting for.