RUTHERFORD ON FILM: ‘Casino Royale’: A Killing License Bestowed on Daniel Craig
By Tony RutherfordHuntington News Network Critic
Huntington, WV (HNN) – “00’s” may have a short life expectancy, but the one with a “7” who goes by “James Bond” has since his 1962 debut in “Dr. No” kept his cinematic license to kill vibrantly renewed courtesy of “shaken and stirred with a twist” plot maneuvers.
Ian Fleming began Bond in the early 50s during which time the Cold War chilled America with visions of bomb shelters and mushroom clouds. The Soviet Union was the enemy of democracy, Christianity, and capitalism . However, the source material has often inspired “reinvention” from spoofs of itself to allowances for détente and, now, the War on Terror.
After Fleming, both James Gardner and Raymond Benson continued the secret agent’s adventures. The cinematic face behind “James” has changed too from Sean Connery and Roger Moore to Timothy Bottoms , Pierce Brosnan and now Daniel Craig.
Originally, “Casino Royale,” the first of the Bond novels, had been one of the splinter, spoof films; yet, it introducers the character, which the current screen adaptation does nicely. Craig’s Bond evokes an emotional almost “spree” killer image that must be “refined” under the guidance of “M.” Instead of dashing, debonair, he shows aging (Fleming’s Bond “came out of retirement”) which juggles nicely with his cynicism, particularly about women.
“Royale” ignites with the spy running a girder obstacle course that resembles a classic cartoon construction waltz in which the objects manage to arrive by crane to create an acrobatic loop of just in time bridges, ledges and sand fills. This leads to 007 firing one shot killing what newspaper photos show as an unarmed man.
“They don’t care what we do; they care what we get photographed doing,” warns, prompting an “I miss the Cold War” aside.
All of the preparation leads to a $100 million dollar poker game in which Bond must outwit the favored player who would turn the money over to a terrorist organization; one that lost a bundle in the stock market after their broker’s plan to manipulate an aircraft stock failed as Bond prevented the detonation of the prototype.
This demonstrates how the script has been adapted for post 9/11 sensitivities and challenges, perhaps, making a more gritty spy intercepting “secrets” from private villains more credible.
A James Bond movie would not be such an icon without the beautiful Bond gal, who this time spars gender and politically correct issues as the flirtatious man anxious to convince the lady that on the job romance is acceptable. However, Eva Green, a ravishing brunette, knows his “disposable pleasure” women history and tosses retorts to sexist flaunting with ease (“There’s not enough room for me and your ego”) while he counters in a dead-pan fashion that “attractive women without a ring worry about not being taken seriously.”
Director Martin Campbell, who helmed Brosnan’s appearance in “GoldenEye,” has crescendo and climax issues with which to deal. Without adding any “spoilers,” I’ll say that a few twists inserted prior to the end credits have more awkwardness than thrills, particularly after these portions have the feel of padded clumsiness not extra thrills.
“Royale” balances sweaty poker bluffs with kidnappings, explosions and idyllic romance all the while dressing the new “spy” with harsher personality components for an increase in the reality ratio, and less of the trademark off-beat humor and patented gadgetry.
Minor flaws or not, the audience (and myself) still eagerly asks, “What does he return in. I can’t wait.”