Amazon.com Widgets

{{header}}

 
 
 
 
 

 
Rock 'n' Roll, Politics and Life Since 2006.
Write us! E-mail the Bar & Grill   Subscribe
 
 

L I N K S

Art's VO site


Humor:

The Onion


Blogs:

Bill Maher

Douglas Rushkoff


Twitter:

Art Howard


Humor:

The Onion


Music/Artists
& Recordings:

Flying Oatsmen

The Frustrated Rockstars

Led Zeppelin

Royal Orleans

Zen on YouTube


Music/Gear:

Everything SG

Les Paul Forum

Line 6

Seymour Duncan

Telecasters


Radio:

Radio-Info/Atlanta


Friends:

Balun

Chilton Music


Recent Episodes:


Archives:


 


Subscribe

Google Reader or Homepage
Add to My Yahoo!
Subscribe with Bloglines
Subscribe in NewsGator Online


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.

 
 
 Sunday, September 09, 2007
 

Further A/V: Casino Royale

 

I decided to catch up on contemporary movies again, after renting Clint Eastwood's High Plains Drifter again last weekend (good one, if you haven't seen it), and got the new James Bond movie, Casino Royale. I hadn't seen a James Bond movie since Roger Moore exited the role. In fact...wasn't Octopussy his last one? I haven't seen that, either. Something about that title seemed so in-your-face I became convinced the Bond franchise had lost it's subtle charm and was turned off to future movies.

Casino Royale was the first in the Ian Flemming series, and this new James Bond, whatever his name is, plays the character closer to the original Ian Flemming character, according to Roger Ebert. There are also zero flashy gadgets or villains with Dick Tracy-like physical characteristics (though this villain does drip tears of blood, but that's nothing compared to steel teeth or a circular-saw hat).

In the opening sequence we see Bond drowning an evildoer in a bathroom sink. We don't know what this guy has done to deserve this fate, and this gets the movie off to an uneven start. James Bond looks like a vicious attacker, rather than a hero. Then comes the famous theme song -- or does it? No, they've thrown the traditional James Bond theme song aside for some Adult Contemporary song by Chris Cornell! How non-James Bond!

The rest of the movie was all right. At no point did I get the adrenaline rush I remember from Moonraker or For Your Eyes Only, but it was okay. This new James Bond (the turnover for this role is now approaching the turnover for a cashier at McDonald's) plays the character more like Bruce Willis in Die Hard. Lots of squinting and mean, stubbly-faced looks, not a lot of genteel charm, like a gentleman warrior, the way Connery and Moore played it. Heavy-handed and without mirth. The action sequences often take place in the dark, though, so the action is unclear. Also, there may be a few too many characters, as it was a little tough to keep up with who was on who's team, what their motivations were, and how they fit into the overall picture.

Overall it was a pleasant way to kill two hours, but I think I'm going to see if some of the old Sean Connery movies are available for rent, or maybe even see Live and Let Die or Moonraker again. Those, to me, are the real James Bond.

 
 

Posted by Art | 12:28 PM EST | 0 comments |

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home



Previous Posts >>
 
     
 
 
 
 
 
-------------------------------- VIDEO PLAYER