Now that Casino Royale has been released, the Bond saga has reached a total of twenty-one films. I am sorry to say this is the first one I am reviewing but even more regretful that this probably only the third Bond film I have ever seen. James Bond has been around for an incredibly long time, most likely even longer than most of you readers. He was originally created in 1952 by Ian Flemming and was introduced in the novel “Casino Royale.” The first Casino Royale film was released in 1967, though now not even recognized as one because of its lack of seriousness, Casino Royale featured Peter Sellers as Bond who is much more well-known for his performances as Inspector Jacques Clouseau in The Pink Panther films. The first Bond film, Dr. No was released in 1962, starring Sean Connery, as well as a few other Bond films had been released and the star was a hit. According to Roger Ebert back in 1967, perhaps the filmmakers’ (yes, five people actually directed that film) flaw was purchasing the rights way back in 1953 and then not realizing Bond would become a hit as a suave serious assassin rather than a spoof.

One of the first things I’ve looked into while writing this review (I try to do a bit of research as I write) is exactly why audiences all of the globe have taken to the Bond character why they have. Things actually add up extremely easily. 1. He’s a charming, suave, Britt in a bow-tie. 2. He’s dangerous; this reason in particular comes with an explanation because it works in two ways. A. Guys like him because he’s dangerous, uses gadgets and weapons, etc. B. For the ladies however, Bond has always been that dark gentleman and the fact that he’s dangerous makes him all the more charismatic. 3. He’s the behind-the-scenes hero. Unlike superheroes, Bond works in secret and can still make a huge mess of things and still take down the bad guy and get the girl by the end of the day. The villains he also chase tend to fit the time period, so when it comes to audience support, they’re usually routing for him all the way whether he’s fighting communists or terrorists. 4. And finally, the look. Girls want him, guys want to be him. For the Bond saga, we’ve had a pretty good looking group of gentlemen:

Sean Connery (1962–1967; 1971)
George Lazenby (1969)
Roger Moore (1973–1985)
Timothy Dalton (1987–1989)
Pierce Brosnan (1995–2002)
Daniel Craig (2006–present)

Thanks Wikipedia

James Bond (Daniel Craig) has just taken upon his first mission. In order to reach Double-0 status and obtain a license to kill, two assassinations are necessary, he has been sent to Prague to take out an MI6 section leader named Dryden (Malcolm Sinclair) and his associate. Dryden takes a clean shot. His associate suffers a brutal wrestle in the bathroom that eventually leads to the gun-barrel sequence that initiates the opening credits. Later, Bond must pursue a bomb-maker in Madagascar that eventually leads to an explosion at the embassy, not only exposing Bond to the press, but also frustrating M (Judi Dench), his commander at MI6. Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen), a banker for many terrorist organizations (and also the main villain in this film) is short selling shares in an airline manufacturer for he has anticipated an attack on a new airplane in airport in Miami. Bond of course foils this little plan, but Le Chiffre holds a high-stakes poker tournament at Casino Royale in Montenegro. Bond meets up with Mathis (Giancarlo Giannini), his Montenegro contact, and a Treasury Agent, Vesper Lynd (Eva Greene, the new Bond girl) who has been assigned to look after Bond’s ten million dollar buy in. Everything, including Bond’s career could rest on the outcome of this poker game.

As I have stated before, I have not seen many Bond films. I do however, know the nature of them and have come to be familiar with the Bond character and how the traditional flow of the events in the film can be recognized as a typical Bond plot. Compared to the other Bond films, Martin Campbell’s Casino Royale carries a cruel and taunting darkness. The scenes appear darker (probably involved hours and hours of lighting set-up), the areas more threatening, and there is more blood and grueling torture to go around. Campbell also directed 1995’s Goldeneye with Pierce Brosnan and has also come to be known for the 1998 hit, The Mask of Zorro. Martin Campbell is a very talented director when it comes to reinventing things in a very serious way and captures a more human perspective in his fictitious storylines.

The Bond character, as portrayed by Daniel Craig goes back to basics. Many of the other Bond characters can be described to be sex machines with a license to kill, however Craig’s character relates more to the character described in Flemming’s novel rather than another movie character. Craig plays him as what he was supposed to be. He is nothing more than a killing machine that does his job without an ounce of mercy. Craig, who’s only been acting in films the past ten years, is a rough looking, incredibly young Bond and exhibits what we might expect from the character we have come to know. A very eager agent looking for a mission and hopes he may get lucky in the process.

Eva Green is Vesper Lynd, Bond’s new love interest. Again, it is at this point where I can explain to you how well this Bond films plays out. Green’s character, performed very well, is Bond’s new love interest, and is unlike any Bond girl we have experienced. Previously we have experienced clingy women who mean close to nothing to Bond, except for maybe a good time. Vesper Lynd is mysteriously attractive. It is challenging to explain, but assuming Bond has never had been attracted to someone while in double 0 status, he sees her as if she isn’t a woman at all. There is a much more emotional, yet dangerous, relationship between Bond and Lynd than any other Bond girl it seems. Think of the relationship of a father and his daughter who’s just scraped her knee and the possibility of being tempted by a King Cobra, debating with yourself if it will strike.

Mads Mikkelsen is Le Chiffre, meaning “The Number” in French. It is easily noticeable that Le Chiffre is not your typical Bond villain. He doesn’t use violence in trying to take down Bond or fancy torturing techniques. He uses nonviolent tactics much like fooling your opponent in a poker game (and he literally does). He’s proper in his tactics and the only thing remotely threatening about this man is his pale face and a scar across his eye occasionally making him shed a single tear of blood. The character’s torture tactics are primitive compared to that of other Bond villains. At one point he kidnaps Bond, ties him to a chair with no bottom and swings a ball of rope between Bond’s legs. It appears painful enough to make any guy cross his legs.

The cinematography by Phil Méheux actually adds to the effect that Craig truly is the new Bond. I believe he is most credible for his shots in Bond’s most brutal killing sequences as he is drowning the MI6’s associate in the bathroom sink and he is strangling an assassin after a bloody battle almost bare-knuckle brawl on a concrete stair-case inside Casino Royale. Bond again appears to be a killing machine.

The screenplay by Neal Purvis (Die Another Day), Robert Wade (The World Is Not Enough), and Paul Haggis (Crash) re-invents Bond in a new way. Not only does the film feel different, darker and more brutal, the new Bond, Bond girl, and Bond villain fit the screen together. There are few scenes of just the poker game and I will recommend that if you are not familiar with the game that you should read up on it. You might get bored because you do not understand what is going on and the tactics in that game are important in understand the Le Chiffre character. In considering the film I have realized that this movie does suit the way the characters in the Ian Flemming novel were supposed to be described and in reading and viewing the film one does not route for any character. All of the characters are pretty much guilty of something and a good chunk of them have killed. No one is a hero and you do not find yourself routing for anyone but rather on a trip with a dangerous man on a mission. That’s who Bond was supposed to be, that’s who Bond is now, and hopefully, that’s who Bond will always be.

Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violent action, a scene of torture, sexual content and nudity.

Running time 144 minutes.