If you tired of James Bond films during the reign of Pierce Brosnan, you're not alone. However, if you were to line up Pierce Brosnan, Timothy Dalton, Roger Moore, George Lazenby, Sean Connery, and the new James Bond, Daniel Craig, asking who does not look like James Bond, I might answer the new guy. This probably has more to do with his hair color, though one friend commented that Craig looked more like a boxer than the sophisticated spy. Not being overly polished and squeaky clean is part of what makes this the greatest James Bond film since Connery played Britain’s best.
The movie begins even before James Bond has been awarded 007 status providing a less accomplished, less proven Bond than the one we have encountered in the bloated and sagging Bond films of recent memory. There's something rough around the edges in Craig's Bond from which the film benefits. Craig has said, "I think there has to be an element of cruelty. Certain things he does should be questionable. I thing you should go, 'Fuck, that's not nice.' He is an assassin." Assassin may not capture all that is involved in espionage, but killing is part of it. This less buttoned down Bond adds a level of unpredictability and a realistic texture to the film. For example, Bond nearly misses some of his jumps during the opening chase, he is caught on tape blowing up an embassy, and the final car chase ends with James flipping his vehicle, not driving away in style. Things don't necessarily come easily for Daniel Craig's Bond. This works for, not against, the film. Further, one does not miss a character that plays a noticeably smaller roll this time around: gadgets. Bond has the Aston Martin, of course, but he doesn't have or need an erasure that explodes when you look at it cross-eyed. Again, this makes being a spy just a little less aerodynamic, but more believable as well.
The film also succeeds in reviving a franchise utilizing an approach that worked well in 2005 with Batman Begins. Being a prequel of sorts, the film both relies on what the audience already knows and provides the psychological background to that knowledge. The audience knows Bond is a rigorously unattached womanizer. Here we see the same cagey and resistant Bond, but one that ultimately falls in love and is hurt. It is satisfying to see legitimate emotion in Bond's character and know that the womanizer was once in love. In short, it adds depth and provides a character to care about in addition to the question: how's he going to get out of this one? That being said, this is an action film, but an action film worth seeing and one that restores some virility to what was an aging James Bond.
2 comments:
That's a very solid review. You may have convinced me to see my first Bond film in about ten years...
I have never been a fan of James Bond films, that is until I saw casino royal! I cant believe how different it is to the rest, I prefer to think of James Bond as rough and ready.
Post a Comment