www.filmbrats.com

hotline
reviews
shorts
interviews
home

Please select a letter from the list below to see the reviews.

a / b / c / d / e / f / g / h / i / j / k / l / m / n / o / p / q / r / s / t / u / v / w / x / y / z


Behind The Screens

by Jon Waterman
Volume 1, Issue 2
Volume 1, Issue 1
Special Features
D-VHS
Digital Projectction vs. 35mm
Multiple DVD Releases

FILMBRATS - REVIEWS

Casino Royale (2006) (****)
review by Jon Waterman

James Bond embarks on his first mission as an elite “00” spy for the British MI6 intelligence agency. The newly appointed 007 is stationed in Uganda in order to thwart a bomb making terrorist with government connections. Things go awry and too much attention is brought to himself and to the MI6 organization. Bond is forced to take a vacation. However, being the guy he is, he continues his work tracking the link between that terrorist cell and an independent financer who seems to be having some money trouble. Le Chiffre invests millions in dirty money, but he’s hit hard times. So, he arranged for a high-stakes poker game to be played in order to secure the proper return of investment. Bond is assigned the job, but can he possibly beat the mathematical mastermind? Will he stay alive long enough to find out?

Sure, I know the idea of watching a high-stakes game of Texas hold ‘em poker doesn’t sound like a very thrilling way to save the world, and you’d be right to think that. But poker on the big screen has its moments. Just look at “Rounders” or “Maverick.” Lucky for you the film doesn’t rest solely on its poker laurels. You’ll find all kinds of other action (aside from card) that you come to expect from a Bond film – in spades (sorry, I had to do it).

Even luckier for you is that the presentation of the action and the storyline is far superior to what you’ve come to expect from a Bond film. I’ve never been a big fan of the franchise, but I loved this twenty-first installment. It amazes me that someone hasn’t been able to execute a film in this franchise in the same manner before. We still get exciting chases, lustful romps, power struggles, a little bit of political intrigue, witty banter and thrilling fight scenes, but all of the cheese and cartoony-ness has been left out. Some of the things you see are unbelievable not because they’re lame, but because they’re jaw dropping. The opening chase between Bond and Mollaka (played by free-runner Sebastien Foucan, who moves like a freakin’ cheetah) is easily one of the best action sequences I’ve seen in a very long time.

What makes it so good is that the editing is sparse when it matters most. We get to see the action play out in all of its death-defying glory. Director Martin Campbell (who made the last good Bond movie “GoldenEye”), and his frequent cinematographer collaborator Phil Meheux, approaches the series with a fresh perspective. It’s stylish without appearing gimmicky. The canted angles only heighten the suspense and do not detract from the good story unfolding before you. This is a darker, grittier, better Bond.

It’s also a blonder bond. Daniel Craig may have been a controversial choice, but he quickly proves to be the right one. Craig does a lot to further reinforce the qualities and characteristics that made audiences love James Bond while taking out all the campiness. He delivers his lines simultaneously with panache and force. It’s not only believable, but it’s just flat out good acting. The whole cast does a great job of giving depth to these characters we’ve come to know and love. It’s like we’re seeing them in a brand new light. It’s like a class of kids that have all grown up and made something of themselves. After watching this movie (which is an astoundingly short 144 minutes), for the first time ever I’m actually excited for the next one. That’s saying a lot.

respond to jon@filmbrats.com