Hubby and I finally saw Casino Royale last night. I have to say that I am now a Daniel Craig fan, and he certainly did a splendid job as the new Bond.It certainly was edgier and darker. Craig certainly was believable as Bond. The whole angle of Bond falling in love was certainly refreshing, that, plus the un-Bond-like mistakes that he makes certainly makes him a little more human.
My beefs about the movie is mainly the script, and probably some of it had to do with the editing of the film.
- The movie didn't need to be 2.5 hours long. They could have either woven the whole Bond-falls-in-love-and-gets-betrayed-by-girl bit a little more tightly in with the other storyline, or they should have cut out a good chunk of the poker game to save time. Or both. The very fact that both hubby and myself sat there thinking "When is this movie going to end?" is not a good sign.
- It was just handy that Bond had a defibrillator in his car. And the other thing that he injected into his neck, whatever it was.
- How many times does MI-6 not screen/check/whatever their employees? They had the same excuse for Rosamond Pike's character in Die Another Day. I know someone who applied for the RCMP, and they did a through background check of him, his family and his closest friends, and that's just the RCMP. I can imagine the real MI-6 screening people they hire a little more throughly than that, so that excuse in the movie was flimsy at best.
I did read that the next Bond movie is suppose to take up where Casino Royale left off. And there is rumour that there may be a "revenge" theme or sub-plot, that is, Bond is revenging the love of his life's death (even though he caused it, stupid man), so this may explain why the end was so bloody long and drawn out. We shall see...
Anyways, it was a good watch. 8 out of 10, I guess.
1 comment:
It was a good spy movie, but as far as being a 007 goes, I have never seem a 007 got his balls sacked so badly.....
Post a Comment