Casino Royale is a good Bond film. I was almost tempted to consider it as a film on its own, as I think its makers attempted to do at times, but they eventually, as did I, returned to rely on the conventions of the franchise and the expectations of their audience. Nonetheless, they seem to have at last acknowledged the threat to them, and the excitement for us, of films like The Bourne Identity, and made a much more modern, energetic James Bond film. As I say, it is so good as to almost stand on its own. There was much more sincerity, and a lot less humour and gimmicks, than we’ve seen with Pierce Brosnan. They stretch Bond’s vulnerability a little too much, but then appropriately reel it all back in at the end. Some people may dislike the whole idea of franchises, but then I would say that they have no understanding of cinema, and can not consider themselves ‘cinema lovers’ if they continue to maintain such a position. Franchises are cinema – the ultimate big screen, bag of popcorn, Saturday afternoon entertainment. As such, I was convinced of seeing it in the largest theatre – the Odeon Leicester Square – and don’t regret doing so, or spending so much, for a minute.
Tuesday, 21 November 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The Hateful Eight
Tarantino has said he'll only make ten films, and then retire. I don't know if he still stands by this statement, and if he does we ...
-
The name may seem a bit odd, and perhaps slightly self-pitying. The reasons for it, however, are fourfold: Because I was intending at the ...
-
The third film of Quentin Tarantino is perhaps the least talked about and least appreciated. I don't remember ever seeing it at the cin...
-
Would you watch Memento in order? Perhaps you already have. Some might say the only value in the film is that of solving a complex puzzle. ...
No comments:
Post a Comment