Casino Royale is far from being a run-of-the-mill Bond movie. In an attempt to revitalize an ailing franchise, James Bond has been given a makeover – fewer gadgets, more realistic violence, and a screenplay based on the first novel he ever appeared in. And, of course, a new actor: Daniel Craig has stepped in to replace Pierce Brosnan as the face of Bond in this new era.
New Territory for 007
Both the look and the feel of this new Bond are a break with the route the series had been taking. Instead of one shot and a clever quip, the first death in the movie is an unpleasantly protracted bare-knuckle fight in a bathroom. When Bond is captured, the villain eschews laser-beams and timed detonators in favour of tying him to a wooden chair and lashing his groin with a knotted rope as the hero bellows in pain. Gadgets won’t get Bond out of trouble in this movie, and we even see him making mistakes whilst tailing a suspect. Most heretically of all, James Bond has to come to terms with the idea that a woman may have betrayed him, but still loved him.
Controversy Amongst the Fans
This makeover was, arguably, necessary to save the series. The last installment, Die Another Day, was absolutely woeful, featuring Pierce Brosnan’s increasing arsenal of leers, a giant space laser, and an invisible car. But however much Bond needs rejuvenating, Casino Royale will raise howls of protest from many long-time fans of the series. Complaints that “That’s not the Bond I know”, or simply “That’s not Bond” have been frequently heard outside cinemas, and accusations leveled that the producers are diluting the character, or selling out in an attempt to attract a larger female audience.
This is, nonetheless, an excellent thriller, and at the risk of enraging traditionalists, this reviewer considers it to be much better than any previous Bond film. It has some exhilarating action sequences, including one best described as “post-colonial parkour chic”, and less of the tedious machismo which slows up previous films in the series. The fact that the violence seems more realistic paradoxically makes Casino Royale a more moral film in one sense: it does not attempt to gloss over the consequences of physical violence, even if it seems to glamorize them.
Casino Royale risks falling between two stools, by being insufficiently “Bond” for Bond enthusiasts, and insufficiently subtle for those who want more than simple action in their films. In the end, it’s still a Bond film (whatever that means to its various audiences), but one which suggests that there may be a future for 007 in the 21st century.
