It was the Secrets, Spies & Foreign Affairs panel at Harrogate that reminded me. I watched the new Bond film, "Casino Royale" some time ago and meant to make a post sooner, but life caught up.
It provided the antithesis of what John Fullerton said makes a good spy in that panel, but oh, what a film! Bond, now in the wonderful human form that is Daniel Craig, is very noticeable. No woman with a beating heart would fail to notice this man.
Bond, being human, also has an ego and this leads to an error of judgment on his part in the early minutes of the film, for which he gets a severe reprimand from M (Dame Judy Dench on superb form and again, clearly enjoying herself).
Again, making the fictional character a candidate for the P45 in the real world, Bond fell in love with Vesper, the woman from the Treasury, on hand to authorise his millions as he took part in a more than major poker game.
Production quality was the usual high standard - very glossy, very colourful and easy to watch.
But this was definitely a different Bond movie and I think a good reaction to our ever changing world. It felt real and the characters felt real. Daniel Craig was acting a part, whereas Brosnan's last outings seemed to be a bit tongue in cheek. (Not that I hate Brosnan; I think his remake of "The Thomas Crown Affair" is on a par with the original and the best of the Bond movies.) Eva Green as Vesper was more than credible. Dame Judy Dench looked like she was really enjoying herself, just as Alan Rickman did in "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves", but that severe reprimand brought us into check. No tongue in cheek there at all.
Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen) the baddie was bad. A very nasty piece of work.
There were some brilliant scenes. The opener had an outstanding one set on a crane. Clearly no one suffered from vertigo. The finale involved a building in Venice falling into the water, with someone locked in a lift - some wonderful set work there.
Bond was at risk of becoming dated but the change is good and in the right direction. It's not real of course, but it feels like it. Very definitely worth watching, it's very entertaining and Craig is as good as the hype.
Finally, a pic from the movie, for the ladies reading...
Not at all grey and unnoticeable is he?
Goldfinger is of my favourites. I've seen it more than once and can never remember how Bond escapes in that scene with the laser...
Posted by: cfr | 02 August 2007 at 21:10
Great movie. Best of the Bonds since Goldfinger way back in 1964.
The "humanization" of Sir James is an interesting piece of character development.
--Jack Payne
Posted by: Jack Payne | 02 August 2007 at 04:06
Thanks for comments, both. Personally, I think that there was some humour still there, albeit this was the new and newly serious Bond. I think the level of humour before had got to the stage of "pastiche" if I'm honest.
I liked the new outing as someone of similar age to me had suggested I would.
As for the Martini, it all ends up in the stomach in the same way, making the new Bond's comments more realistic and with humour.
The gloss of the package prevailed. For me, it was Bond as we know him with many appendices, plus some updating. Good stuff!
Posted by: cfr | 01 August 2007 at 20:57
Anne, I wonder if the filmmakers deliberately toned down the humor in order to get away from the jokiness that had crept into Bond movies. In any case, a friend who is more familiar with Bond than I am pointed out an in-joke that I had missed.
When a bartender asks Bond whether he wants his martini skaken or stirred, Craig as Bond replies something like, "Why the hell should I give a damn?" I'm told this is a poke at the Bond who, in previous movies, had specified that he wanted his martinis shaken, not stirred.
===================
Detectives Beyond Borders
"Because Murder Is More Fun Away From Home"
http://detectivesbeyondborders.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Peter | 01 August 2007 at 03:23
Funnily enough, I just watched this for the first time last night, Rhian! I thought it was okay (I love Craig!!! - thanks for the pic!), but way too much action, not enough humour (to my mind, Bond always needs humour ...) and rather too confusing for me. My husband agreed too. The script-writers were obviously overpaid - 3 lines of dialogue and then 10 mins of action/chase scene - hmm, easy life for them, eh!
:))
A
xxx
Posted by: Anne Brooke | 30 July 2007 at 07:30
I didn't really know the previous Bond movies except by reputation, but I think I can understand the talk about this being a new kind of Bond movie (or a "rethink" of Bond, in that nauseating piece of critic-speak). The violent opening sequence, for example, ought to endear itself to crime-fiction fans. And Daniel Craig's craggy, slightly beat-up look gives him credibility with male fans in addition to the heart palpitations he induces in female fans. He looks like a real person.
===================
Detectives Beyond Borders
"Because Murder Is More Fun Away From Home"
http://detectivesbeyondborders.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Peter | 30 July 2007 at 04:27