Better late than never: Casino Royale

Everyone and their sister has probably seen and reviewed blogged about this film, so I’ll just offer up some food for thought. Casino Royale’s success is partly based on the fact that the filmmakers were able to “reinvent” bond. Daniel Craig is neither as stylish, debonair, or manipulative as the older James Bonds, but that’s because we’re watching a man in transformation.

Casino Royale was the first Bond novel, so it’s safe to assume that as the follow up will show us a Bond that’s morphing into the one we know and love recognize. How much of the success of this film is based on the fact that it’s much more grittier than earlier Bond films? Will it be as exciting once the whole “reinvention” cycle is complete? Lastly, how many more Bond films starring Daniel Craig can we expect to see?

My prediction is that the next one will be just as good, and ideally they should let it go at that, but studio execs will want to milk it a little further, giving Craig a total of 3-4 Bond films under his belt. You heard it here first.

Advertisements

5 Comments to “Better late than never: Casino Royale”

  1. I haven’t seen it! I’ve never seen any of the Bond films, actually. My friend pointed out that that was strange considering a) they’re chock full of guys with accents, b) they’re always set in some exotic (read: Russia) locale and c) it involves espionage. Those three alone should make me want to see them, but no.

    Eva Green is in a Bertolucci film called “The Dreamers”. I’m surprised it’s not popular here. You might want to check it out.

  2. ooh ooh I saw that. well, kinda. I skimmmed through it. I’ll check it out again when i have more time.

  3. Casino Royale is perhaps one of the best Bond films I ever watched. Considering that I dislike majority of the previous Bond films (save for the Connery ones), that’s a good compliment.

    Why is it good?

    It’s not Daniel Craig, methinks. Not to take anything away from his good performance, but Craig only did what he was told. What was terrific about Casino Royale was the writing, the pacing, the directing, the overall look and feel. Bottom line: the creators broke from the cookie cutter Bond film and made something different.

    Fair enough, there were gadgets. There were (an automatic Aston Martin?!) sports cars, insane stunts, and one gorgeous Bond girl. What was different was what the makers did with those pieces. They were gritter. You get to see a more human James Bond in this latest iteration.

    If MGM makes Casino Royale the new cookie cutter in Bond films, then heaven help us. Yes, that might be good for a couple more sequels, but that’s not what made Casino Royale good. What made Casino Royale a good Bond film was that it was different.

    I want the next Bond film to surprise me like this one. I want the next Bond film to not follow the Casino Royale mold, or any of the other Bond film molds. The creators should always challenge themselves and take a different spin each time.

  4. But you knomw they won’t do that. They’ll look at Casino Royale and say hey, it works! Let’s turn it up a notch! So, more political intrigue (expect Bond to go to Afghanistan or Iraq ), a stronger female lead, and more “hardcore” gritty action scenes.

  5. Loved the movie. Saw it in Bohol with Mon & Francis. I first saw him in the movie Layer Cake (A must see If you have not already). He was great in the movie. I like him as the new Bond.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: