Blonde on Bond

Daniel Craig as 007 (click to enlarge)
Among the few holdovers from the earlier movies, Judi Dench’s spy chief calls him “a blunt instrument,” and she’s right on the moneypenny. Ordering a vodka martini, he’s asked “stirred or shaken?” and replies, “Do I look like I care?” No, he doesn’t. Craig’s Bond is nearly an automaton, cold, arrogant, a little stupid, barely sophisticated, a reactionary with a chip on his shoulder, having no apparent affinity for art, education, culture or refinement—007 for the Bush generation.
He discovers an underworld bank lending money to terrorist groups through high stakes gambling and stock market scams. After picking up leads around the globe and a love affair with a no-nonsense accountant (Eva Green), Bond arrives at the title spot for a round of multimillion dollar poker with an asthmatic bad guy named Le Chiffre, played with suave menace by Danish actor Mads Mikkelsen. All the while fending off machete-wielding crazies and a bout of cardiac arrest…
Cultivated in the 1960s and 70s by producers Albert R. Broccoli and Harry Saltzman and writer Richard Maibaum, the Bonds have never been a director’s milieu, but Martin Campbell mixes action, romance and drama better than most—as he demonstrated eleven years ago in Goldeneye (1995). With Barbara Broccoli taking over as producer for her late father, joined by co-producer Michael G. Wilson, the screenwriting team of Neal Purvis, Robert Wade and Paul Haggis bypass the gadgetry and gizmos of past Bonds and concentrate on the meat of Fleming’s book, down to a gruesome torture scene that was the most graphic thing the author ever wrote.
Although it runs a hefty 144 minutes, the picture never drags. Nearly every moment flies by at fever pitch, from miraculous chases to romantic interludes. Without giving too much away, Bond’s trail leads to the proverbial mansion on the hill. He’s eliminated underlings and kingpins like Le Chiffre for years, but here he goes the distance and collars ‘The Man,’ the guy pulling the strings from an ivory tower. Bravo! It’s high time.
Cultivated in the 1960s and 70s by producers Albert R. Broccoli and Harry Saltzman and writer Richard Maibaum, the Bonds have never been a director’s milieu, but Martin Campbell mixes action, romance and drama better than most—as he demonstrated eleven years ago in Goldeneye (1995). With Barbara Broccoli taking over as producer for her late father, joined by co-producer Michael G. Wilson, the screenwriting team of Neal Purvis, Robert Wade and Paul Haggis bypass the gadgetry and gizmos of past Bonds and concentrate on the meat of Fleming’s book, down to a gruesome torture scene that was the most graphic thing the author ever wrote.
Although it runs a hefty 144 minutes, the picture never drags. Nearly every moment flies by at fever pitch, from miraculous chases to romantic interludes. Without giving too much away, Bond’s trail leads to the proverbial mansion on the hill. He’s eliminated underlings and kingpins like Le Chiffre for years, but here he goes the distance and collars ‘The Man,’ the guy pulling the strings from an ivory tower. Bravo! It’s high time.




5 Comments:
I haven't seen the new Bond yet and I'm a little leary of it, but I may give it a look soon. I really haven't enjoyed a Bond film made in the past 20+ years and prefer the older movies, but this latest Bond film seems to be getting lots of praise from critics I like, so maybe I'll enjoy it too.
At the very least, it's better than any of the Roger Moore films.
Best Bond since "From Russia with Love". I'd even dare to say it's better than "The Last Of The Secret Agents". Hhahahahahah!!! Why he's MAD! Look at his EYES!
I second your enthusiasm about Casino Royale, Flickhead, and I like your thought about "James Bond" being the catch-all name assigned to 007 as well. It would certainly go a long way toward explaining not only the five other actors, but why M is still Dame Judi and not suddenly a younger Bernard Lee. But would it be necessary at some point to explain what happened to the other Bonds? Or should we, like the British government, look on them as disposable? (After all, we as the Bond audience have certainly looked on them as interchangeable.)
Also, I gave a close look at that turkey pinata hanging above the bed in Performance. I don't know what it is, but it's scaring me...
...It would also explain why Blofeld didn't recognize Bond in On Her Majesty's Secret Service!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home