Not the way to reinvent a franchise.

Rating: 6/10 (16 March 2007)

I saw a man Completely unlike any other Bond before him. He acts similarly to Tim Dalton, which isn't good in my book. Dan Craig would be excellent in some parts, but both were way too serious for my money. A bit of humor was always a nice part of the 007 series for me & all I've talked to about Bond. This movies has very little humor, but is deadly serious. And what do we begin with:?" Bond as Batman!! (I mean, not that he's dressed as Batman, but he's jumping around as Batman might.) I didn't care for it.
But really confused me was this: on the documentary (disk), the director explained they "had" to replace Pierce Brosnan with Craig, because this is a prequel & Brosnan would be too old to play a character set in the beginning of the series. If that is so, why is the movie set in 2006?! Also, why do we have Judi Drench playing M again?! The director said, he just "couldn't" replace her. So, that means Brosnan Could be replaced, right? But, as it's set in the present day & we have the Dame Drench, I didn't know what was going on. I wasn't sure, if they was trying to say, they had replaced 007 with another man named James Bond or were they simply being inconsistent with the story?!
The old music was also gone, save for a bit of it on the closing credits nor did I care for the main credit's song, either. And instead of seeing beautiful women exit the ocean, we see Mr. Bond (not my cup of tea, you see?!)
I'm not necessarily against reinventing a franchise, either. However, to see how to Really do it, watch Batman Returns...Now That how to do it!