After 20 Films And 5 Bonds…Time For The Last 007!
So much talk about where James Bond goes next – is he reimagined? Do we turn back time? Well, that’s exactly what “Casino Royale” did in 2006!
Meet the “new” Bond – same as the “old” Bond! You see, this is 007’s origin story: it actually begins as we see how he earned his “007” designation – and for the first time, the film is in black and white during this sequence!
So, a new 007 takes over in episode #21 in the series – and some interesting twists are to come…let’s dig into “Casino Royale” by starting with the trailer:
As I said, we see Bond at the beginning in black and white, as he holds a gun on a man while we flashback to a brutal fight in a bathroom – this is one of the roughest fights since Connery v. Shaw in “From Russia With Love”:
And here’s another major change to the film – it is AFTER this opening black and white sequence that we see the iconic gun barrel shot!
Beautifully directed by Martin Campbell, who also introduced Pierce Brosnan to the role in 1995’s “GoldenEye”, this leads to a terrific explainer about what it takes to get the “00” status…and explains why the film doesn’t begin with the iconic “gun barrel” shot!
I was annoyed when I first saw this back in 2006, but in re-watching it makes total sense – because the end of the opening sequence is the moment when Bond becomes an official 007 Agent!
This is the first film since the first Bond film “Dr. No” that does not feature the backlit nude Bond girls in the title sequence.
Here’s another first: Chris Cornell’s title song “You Know My Name” does not mention the name of the film or appear on the film’s soundtrack. This is the first time in the history of the official series that the title song has not been included on the soundtrack.
After earning his “licence to kill”, the film goes to color – and a new assignment is given by M, once again played perfectly by Dame Judi Dench.
Bond must defeat a private banker, played by Mads Mikkelsen with an eye that oozes blood, because he is funding terrorists…Bond’s weapon? A high-stakes game of poker at Casino Royale, in Montenegro.
Bond heads to the jungle to disrupt a drug deal – the scene is big and expansive: this is not an intimate Bond film, the scenery and locations are incredible, as is the parkour chase that ensues in a construction site: incredible energy, stunts, and lots and lots of Craig clearly doing much of the stunt work…
Craig plays 007 as a closed off, cold-blooded killer: he got a taste for killing and has absolutely zero hesitation to terminate his adversary…it is a very cold-blooded Bond, with none of the charm of Roger Moore or the smooth, snarky smugness of Connery…
We see early on that M isn’t a fan of Bond, saying at one point: “Knew it was too early to promote you.”
She feels he is too much of a renegade, uncontrollable…this is the 007 we are now being introduced to – the film virtually does away with any quips, smoothness to Bond or charm.
Oh, and NO Miss Moneypenny either!
What we do get is some “Bond porn”…remember this scene from the last film?
Well, the tables are turned in this film:
OK, whatever. It feels very forced but they quickly move on and to the casino after an incredible sequence involving an airliner and a fuel truck filled with explosives…another action highlight for the entire series – just beautifully done!
The centerpiece of the film is the card game at “Casino Royale” and many of the plot lines converse: involving misdirection, betrayal, with the casino sequences quite a cat and mouse game that honestly goes on a bit too long for me – but that’s one of the only flaws in the film.
The action sequences are incredible, it is beautifully and tightly directed aside from the card sequences, and Craig never breaks the solemn brutalness of his character – but is that part of the problem?
There is a lengthy torture sequence that finds Bond tied naked to a chair – certainly a tense sequence but it foreshadows a 007 that is very very dark. As for the “Bond Girl:”
Eva Green is the very empowered “Vesper Lund” in the film, and her character has many nuances that drive the narrative in unexpected ways.
It leads to a very powerful scene where she sees him kill, and when he finds her in her hotel room she is sitting fully clothed in the shower with the water on, as if trying to wash away what she saw…he comforts her by sitting with her under the running water…it’s a terrific emotional moment – but then Bond quickly closes himself off again. As she says:
“You’re not going to let me back in there are you? You’ve got your armor back on”
From this point on, there are many more twists and turns to come!
The film ends with an incredible finale in Venice, an outstanding action sequence inside a sinking building on the canal – these special effect are incredible – and the fight inside is brutal…at one point 007 shoots someone in the eye with a nail gun then pulls a nail out of his own back!
“Casino Royale” is the first Bond film to end with a cliffhanger of sorts, and I am interested in diving into a rewatch of the next film to com, “Quantum Of Solace.”
And the film ends with Craig saying, for the first time in the film:
“The name’s Bond. James Bond.”
At 2 hours and 24 minutes, “Casino Royale” was the longest James Bond film of all time. But not for long: the record will be virtually matched by the next film and surpassed in all of the last three films!
And finally, about that “Vesper”:
The “Vesper” that James Bond orders at Casino Royale is taken from the novel of the same name. It consists of three measures (9 ounces) of gin (Gordon’s was Bond’s choice), one measure (3 ounces) of vodka and half a measure (1.5 ounces) of Kina Lillet. The ingredients are shaken over ice until cold, served in a cocktail glass with a slice of lemon peel for garnish. Kina Lillet has not been made since 1985 and the modern substitute would be Lillet Blanc, made by the same company, Lillet, based in Podensac, France.
And I ordered one last night!
So, now to the Craig vs. all other Bonds: I have read with much interest the passion that Craig fans – and haters – have for his portrayal of the character….was it his idea or did the Producers want to get back to basics?
If so, why did those basics take away virtually all of 007’s charm? Ever since Moore’s run, the films have been increasingly serious and in some cases dour as well…yet the Moore films were hugely popular and the Dalton’s weren’t as much.
As for “Casino Royale”, the film grossed more than $416-million worldwide, the highest grossing Bond film in history to that time!
But wait, wasn’t the previous film the highest grossing to that time? It was!
So the 007 franchise was proving to be more popular with each outing…would that continue? My review of “Quantum Of Solace” is next!
Not all Bond films were as successful.
The 4th Actor to portray Bond only played 007 twice:
Why did the Producers decide to make 007 dour, drab and lifeless? See my review of Dalton’s worst film here:
You can see all of the reviews for every Bond film by going to my front page and searching 007.
Here was Moore’s last outing, which many fans don’t like but I thought it did just fine:
As for the Bond themes: I HATED Madonna’s theme for “Die Another Day”, and here is a look at all of them!
If you like these stories, why not sign up to get emails whenever I post? It’s easy to do, I do NOT collect any information about you at all, there are absolutely NO ads of any kind, just stories about movies, music, food, travel and pop culture…
You can sign up by clicking on my blog here and see the note on the right!
Let me know your thoughts, and if you like this story please share on social media!
Categories: Action Films, Cult Movies, Film Fight Club, Great Films, Movies, Pop Culture, Revenge Movies, Talent/Celebrities
johnrieber 
I haven’t seen this Bond film but I must say you have piqued my interest. And, Daniel Craig is quite a dish. I may look for it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
HA! Robbie, it’s a really good action film – great set pieces. It’s also a bit violent soy need to be ready for it! Not too graphic, just violent!
LikeLike
An intriguing change for Bond. Honesty, violence makes more sense really for this sort of story.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s interesting that Bond became ‘dark’, and I imagine that did not endear him to viewers. Starting the film at Bond’s beginning was clever. I’ll always be a fan of Sean Connery as Bond. Thanks for the review, John!
LikeLike
I did enjoy Casino Royale with Craig, but you’re right it was a transition to a more brutal, cold spy type of character, and less of the charm and ‘humor’ of the past. perhaps that is what was intended all along, based on his portrayal in the books.
LikeLike
You are absolutely right on all points – and what makes the debate so interesting is that many Bond fans love going back to a harder edge, while many miss the more escapist Bond – there is a Facebook fans site that never stops the passionate discussion! Thanks for the comment!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was very excited about Craig as Bond. Of course I saw CASINO ROYALE at the theater. It was so awesome. And even though I didn’t enjoy Quantum of Solace as much, I loved SKYFALL so much. Just an amazing time to be following Bond. I still love Connery more than any other, but they all gave their moments. My first Bond was Dalton in THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS. Still one of my favorites!
LikeLike
What you wrote is exactly what I fear about re-watching and reviewing all of the films: I ahve very unsatisfying memories of 3 of the final 4 Bond films, with only “Skyfall” loved…we will see if a re-watch changes that – it did for a number of the previous 21! Thanks for your comment, always great to hear from you!
LikeLike
Thank you for this ‘look and read’! Well, I go all the way back to the beginning and Sean Connery – my husband and I would be at the cinema on opening nights 🙂 ! None of the following ‘Bond’s were ‘real’ to our way of thinking and I began to appreciate Connery in films like ‘The Hill’. Daniel Craig methinks is rather a perfect ‘fit’, but of a totally different ‘Bond’. Times have changed and our way of looking at things. Have been too busy to follow but you are making me curious!!! But Dame Judi Dench – oh, that gal has never been able to do anything I didn’t like 🙂 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for the note! The films have certainly evolved, and while I am also a Connery fan, they all brought different things to the role…thank you for your thoughts, great to hear from you!
LikeLiked by 1 person
They’ll never be another Sean Connery.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m in that camp as well but trying to see how each one was unique and why certain ones are so popular now…modern audiences seek out one of their own it seems with Craig,
LikeLiked by 1 person
Different generational preferences, eh?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, absolutely. Literally people love the Bond they grew up with, so there are passionate fans of each one…I love them all just in different ways and the problems with the films are never 007’s fault, it’s a shoddy or convoluted script, bad direction or woeful casting…still, fun to debate1 Thanks for the comment!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I liked Craig as Bond….gave a new meaning to the role….chuq
LikeLiked by 1 person
What’s interesting about this review series is I am getting a lot of “pro v. con” on Craig – on many 007 fan pages the debate is surprisingly passionate….I love them all, even the ones I dont review highly! Thanks for the comment!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I like Craig as an actor but have never bothered to watch any Bond film he has been in because I find Bond films silly. Based on reading the books, I think Matthew Goode would have been perfect for Bond. Best wishes, Pete. https://www.reddit.com/r/thegoodwife/comments/198jc38/i_think_matthew_goode_finn_polmar_is_a_total_babe/?rdt=40637
LikeLiked by 1 person
Intersting about the silly comment Pete as this was a very controversial new direction for the character: he is brutal, charm free – a renegade and a thug in many ways…nothing silly about this one – which is why the 007 fans on social media debate whether it was good or bad for the series…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good point. Perhaps I should have watched the films starring Craig then? I stopped watching in the Roger Moore era because he was too ‘jokey’ for my taste.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, the Craig Bond is brutal…if you find it for free somewhere, just watch the opening scene from “Casino Royale”, if it appeals to you you might like the film
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, I love the review John! I tend to like Daniel Craig’s portrayal a lot. However, like you write, I’ve always wanted something more, smoothness, snark, less darkness, something? The thing that comes out the most to me in all the recent Bonds: how much I love Judi Dench’s performances! And oh yea, gotta ask: how was the vesper? Might have to try that!
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Vesper was better than I was warned…kind of a Martini with both Gin and Vodka and a twist of Lemon…I’d have another but I won’t rush out for it! On a Bond Facebook fan page, there is a nonstop debate about Craig vs. the other Bonds…I have 4 more to re-watch and review and I am very uncertain about them – I remember hating 3 of them! Thanks for your comment, much appreciated!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I find I like his portrayals better when I view them as spy thrillers and not from the lens of James Bond (if that makes any sense). I do have to give him credit though for bringing me back to the bond series. Thanks for the info on the vesper!
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s a great point and that’s one reason I wanted to re-watch and review them all in order to see how they evolved for better and worse
LikeLiked by 1 person