I think the highest praise I can give this movie is that it is the first Bond flick I've seen (and I've seen 'em all many times) that actively reminded me of the early Sean Connery era. For the first time in EONs (and yes, that is a pun for you fans out there), a James Bond movie concentrated on the man himself instead of the every increasing slew of silly gadgets and OTT computer graphics. This is probably due to the fact that it based on an original Ian Fleming story - at last!
The comparison with the Connery era was no accident. Looking at the locations (and the beautiful use of the DB5), you were eerily transported back to those early adventures...Nassau (Thunderball), Venice (From Russia With Love) and even the use of the Casino Royale itself (anyone remember the first few scenes in Dr No at the Casino?) - gave over the message that Bond was back - and Daniel Craig was no flash in the pan (a la George Lazenby)
My only complaints:
a) The worryingly excessive use of product placement - how many times do I need to be reminded that 007 only uses Sony Vaio laptops and Sony Erricson phones - which is all the more suspect, granted that Sony Pictures was one of the studios behind the movie.
b) Bond's propensity to heal ever-so quickly after near-death inducing escapades.
That aside, Daniel Craig is a fabulous 007. He has certainly made his mark and juicily placed the vocal army of naysayers in their sorry place. He was absolutely terrific and, to my surprise, even managed to replace Pierce Brosnan as the best Bond since Connery.
No, let me rephrase that.
He's the best Bond alongside Connery - yes, he's that good.
Teacher's Rating
**** ½
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment