Witty Rapport
I haven't posted a review in months. I'm itching to do one and anyway I want to post something fun so here we go! I could do Pan's Labyrinth (one of the top ten films of the year), Children of Men (a film I desperately want to put into my top ten of the year; it's at points phenomenally good, at others mystifyingly bad. Overall I'd say it's great, 8/10, I just wanted it to be a classic and I can't justify that tag) or I could rant about shite. Stranger Than Fiction for example prompted the latest walk out of the cinema. I've decided to go commercial and opt for that famous name we've been watching since 1962. You know his name, the truly hideous theme song tells us. Not quite as bad as Madonna's entry into the series, the song nonetheless sounds like a Eurovision castoff sung by an X Factor contestant. The man is of course Bond.
Casino Royale is surprisingly enjoyable. The last Bond film, Die Another Day, is simply horrible. We all know the stories of the overhaul. New Bond, old material, less hokey, more gritty. One $150 million "gamble" later and here we are. Is it gritty? Put it this way. It's as gritty as a Bond movie and a 12 rated film will ever be. The pre credits sequence is about as rough as it gets, a fight in a public toilet which depicts Bond's first kill and is admittedly pretty dirty with Bond, after crashing through walls, kneeing and punching his opponent whenever and wherever he can, eventually drowning him in a slowly filling sink. It's a refreshing start, intercut with Bond's second kill. I'm not spoiling that as it's already been thoroughly spoilt in the trailers which, having seen the film, seemed intent on showing every good moment in it. Things come grinding to a halt as that horrific song plays over arguably the worst Bond credits sequence yet, though the camp familiarity of the conceit somehow still manages to raise a smile. Once we're back in the film, things get back on track as we're introduced to the villain Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen) who initially shows some promise. We then get into the film's best action sequence and what is for me one of the best action sequences of the year, the much talked about free running sequence. It really is fantastic. Wonderfully conceived, staged, shot and edited, its only problem is its lack of consequence. We have no idea who Bond is chasing or why. Why does it matter? We have no idea. Had this been the finale, had Bond spent the film trying to initially beat then capture an outstanding villain, this would have been really remarkable. The villain of the sequence, genuine free runner Sebastian Foucan, is chased down by Bond despite the former's superior athleticism. They run around a building site, go up a massive crane, back down again, through lift shafts, under saws and other dangerous equipment and the whole thing culminates in a wonderfully staged gun fight. It's very exciting and sets a high standard for the rest of the film. The next major action set piece occurs at Miami airport as Bond attempts to thwart a terrorist plot and yet again is really quite exciting. That scene was sponsored by Virgin by the way. Other scenes were sponsored by Ford, Omega, and Aston Martin. Not that the product placement is shameless or distracting. Subsequent action moments include a fantastic fight in a stairwell and a great moment when Bond drives his car off the road.
Why I hear you cry am I just talking about the action? Well do we really care about the plot of a Bond film? For those of you that do, briefly it's about Le Chiffre, international banker to the terrorists (that's the sort of job title that only occurs in Bond films) holding a high stakes poker game at Casino Royale in order to win back the terrorists' money he lost when Bond foiled their nefarious scheme at Miami airport. Mikkelsen does his best as the blood weeping Le Chiffre but his villainous potential is seriously hampered by the fact that a) he doesn't really have much of a plan other than to win back money he lost and b) he spends most of the film playing cards. Still, he's a significent improvement on the Brosnan villains, with Sean Bean and Jonathan Pryce slugging it out for worst villain of the lot. His villainy is further undermined two thirds into the film in a manner I won't spoil but for me, rendered much of what went before pretty much pointless. At this stage the film starts to run out of steam and out of ideas and the finale, a gunfight in a sinking building in Venice feels like a Brosnan castoff action moment and is everything the film has, up to that point, worked so hard to avoid. The action scenes for the most part are just over the top enough to be exciting but not so ludicrous so as to be irritating. Indeed a couple are relatively "small" and contained and are much more visceral and all the better for that. The finale is disappointingly over the top, stupid, boring and familiar. Other bum notes include Eva Green as Vesper Lynd who really struggles and spends most of the time grinning smugly and delivering her lines in a peculiar accent, a love story so unconvincing it makes Titanic seem like Gone With The Wind and some ropey dialogue even Paul Haggis can't salavge. Though thankfully the one liners and double entendre are all but absent. However the film has done so well for most of it that I found myself walking out of the cinema happy to relive the highlights and ignore the shortcomings.
And what of the man himself? The pre release vitriol leveled at Daniel Craig could not have been higher if Satan himself or maybe even Renee Zellewegger had been cast as 007. I have never been hugely convinced by Daniel Craig, even when he appears in good films, but he does very well in the coveted role. Suave but devoid of Brosnan's grease, charming without Roger's campness and totally believeable in the action stuff. You really feel that this guy would kill you or shag you depending on what was required. And if both were required then that would be okay too. This is a great depiction of the famous spy, possibly the best since Connery. The shots of him emerging from the sea in his skimpy trunks, muscles bulging from pretty much everywhere muscles can bulge from, raised a giggle from me. Dan the sex symbol by way of Dan the Mr Universe? I don't think so. Though I'd be lying if I said the loving closeups of those pearly blue eyes didn't cause a little flutter once or twice. Surely they were photoshopped?
In the end Bond is Bond. Big, loud, silly and fun. The writers and producers have gone to great lengths to trim back the silliness and for the most part succeed. There isn't even room for Q. Apart from a handy defibrulator in his car there isn't a laser pen, spiked boot or killer bowler hat to be seen. After the invisible car of the last film, that's such a relief. The thing is that this raises an interesting point. Is this "new direction" one the makers are willing to pursue? Or is it a one off and sooner or later Bond will be back in space, in the depths of Mount Etna or travelling back in time? Lets face it, every few years Bond is overhauled and brought in a "new direction" and sooner or later the new direction takes a u-turn and heads back to Roger Moore territory. I really hope the producers have more sense than that. Box office wise it has paid off. After 4 weeks on release the film has taken more than the first three Brosnan films took individually in their entire run. Audiences are happy with "serious" Bond and happy with old Danny Boy in the role. It's a good start lads. Just have the balls and the sense to keep it up.
Witty Rapport would make a great name for a Bond girl don't you think?
Casino Royale is surprisingly enjoyable. The last Bond film, Die Another Day, is simply horrible. We all know the stories of the overhaul. New Bond, old material, less hokey, more gritty. One $150 million "gamble" later and here we are. Is it gritty? Put it this way. It's as gritty as a Bond movie and a 12 rated film will ever be. The pre credits sequence is about as rough as it gets, a fight in a public toilet which depicts Bond's first kill and is admittedly pretty dirty with Bond, after crashing through walls, kneeing and punching his opponent whenever and wherever he can, eventually drowning him in a slowly filling sink. It's a refreshing start, intercut with Bond's second kill. I'm not spoiling that as it's already been thoroughly spoilt in the trailers which, having seen the film, seemed intent on showing every good moment in it. Things come grinding to a halt as that horrific song plays over arguably the worst Bond credits sequence yet, though the camp familiarity of the conceit somehow still manages to raise a smile. Once we're back in the film, things get back on track as we're introduced to the villain Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen) who initially shows some promise. We then get into the film's best action sequence and what is for me one of the best action sequences of the year, the much talked about free running sequence. It really is fantastic. Wonderfully conceived, staged, shot and edited, its only problem is its lack of consequence. We have no idea who Bond is chasing or why. Why does it matter? We have no idea. Had this been the finale, had Bond spent the film trying to initially beat then capture an outstanding villain, this would have been really remarkable. The villain of the sequence, genuine free runner Sebastian Foucan, is chased down by Bond despite the former's superior athleticism. They run around a building site, go up a massive crane, back down again, through lift shafts, under saws and other dangerous equipment and the whole thing culminates in a wonderfully staged gun fight. It's very exciting and sets a high standard for the rest of the film. The next major action set piece occurs at Miami airport as Bond attempts to thwart a terrorist plot and yet again is really quite exciting. That scene was sponsored by Virgin by the way. Other scenes were sponsored by Ford, Omega, and Aston Martin. Not that the product placement is shameless or distracting. Subsequent action moments include a fantastic fight in a stairwell and a great moment when Bond drives his car off the road.
Why I hear you cry am I just talking about the action? Well do we really care about the plot of a Bond film? For those of you that do, briefly it's about Le Chiffre, international banker to the terrorists (that's the sort of job title that only occurs in Bond films) holding a high stakes poker game at Casino Royale in order to win back the terrorists' money he lost when Bond foiled their nefarious scheme at Miami airport. Mikkelsen does his best as the blood weeping Le Chiffre but his villainous potential is seriously hampered by the fact that a) he doesn't really have much of a plan other than to win back money he lost and b) he spends most of the film playing cards. Still, he's a significent improvement on the Brosnan villains, with Sean Bean and Jonathan Pryce slugging it out for worst villain of the lot. His villainy is further undermined two thirds into the film in a manner I won't spoil but for me, rendered much of what went before pretty much pointless. At this stage the film starts to run out of steam and out of ideas and the finale, a gunfight in a sinking building in Venice feels like a Brosnan castoff action moment and is everything the film has, up to that point, worked so hard to avoid. The action scenes for the most part are just over the top enough to be exciting but not so ludicrous so as to be irritating. Indeed a couple are relatively "small" and contained and are much more visceral and all the better for that. The finale is disappointingly over the top, stupid, boring and familiar. Other bum notes include Eva Green as Vesper Lynd who really struggles and spends most of the time grinning smugly and delivering her lines in a peculiar accent, a love story so unconvincing it makes Titanic seem like Gone With The Wind and some ropey dialogue even Paul Haggis can't salavge. Though thankfully the one liners and double entendre are all but absent. However the film has done so well for most of it that I found myself walking out of the cinema happy to relive the highlights and ignore the shortcomings.
And what of the man himself? The pre release vitriol leveled at Daniel Craig could not have been higher if Satan himself or maybe even Renee Zellewegger had been cast as 007. I have never been hugely convinced by Daniel Craig, even when he appears in good films, but he does very well in the coveted role. Suave but devoid of Brosnan's grease, charming without Roger's campness and totally believeable in the action stuff. You really feel that this guy would kill you or shag you depending on what was required. And if both were required then that would be okay too. This is a great depiction of the famous spy, possibly the best since Connery. The shots of him emerging from the sea in his skimpy trunks, muscles bulging from pretty much everywhere muscles can bulge from, raised a giggle from me. Dan the sex symbol by way of Dan the Mr Universe? I don't think so. Though I'd be lying if I said the loving closeups of those pearly blue eyes didn't cause a little flutter once or twice. Surely they were photoshopped?
In the end Bond is Bond. Big, loud, silly and fun. The writers and producers have gone to great lengths to trim back the silliness and for the most part succeed. There isn't even room for Q. Apart from a handy defibrulator in his car there isn't a laser pen, spiked boot or killer bowler hat to be seen. After the invisible car of the last film, that's such a relief. The thing is that this raises an interesting point. Is this "new direction" one the makers are willing to pursue? Or is it a one off and sooner or later Bond will be back in space, in the depths of Mount Etna or travelling back in time? Lets face it, every few years Bond is overhauled and brought in a "new direction" and sooner or later the new direction takes a u-turn and heads back to Roger Moore territory. I really hope the producers have more sense than that. Box office wise it has paid off. After 4 weeks on release the film has taken more than the first three Brosnan films took individually in their entire run. Audiences are happy with "serious" Bond and happy with old Danny Boy in the role. It's a good start lads. Just have the balls and the sense to keep it up.
Witty Rapport would make a great name for a Bond girl don't you think?
posted by Garreth at 1:58 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home