The forthcoming James Bond movie, Casino Royale, does indeed look more interesting than the last few, but that’s not saying much. It
introduces JAMES BOND before he holds his license to kill. But Bond is no less dangerous, and with two professional assassinations in quick succession, he is elevated to 00 status. Bonds first 007 mission takes him to Madagascar, where he is to spy on a terrorist.
Wouldn’t it have been even more interesting if they had set it in the seventies, or whenever the first James Bond film was set? I think so.
Dr. No. (1962)
I agree that a retro look and feel to this James Bond would have been cool … but it would have forced them to keep all successive Bonds with Daniel Craig in a retro time period.
Not too mention to extra cost of doing a retro ’60s Bond.
At least they’re going back to real stunts and moving away from the CGI claptrap. I guess they got enough complaints about it in Die Another Day that someone at EON said “Hey, let’s return to our roots.”
Anyhow, we’ll see. I’m a big Bond fan … but the last two films were garbage. The trailer for this one looks pretty good … but with Bond you can never tell from the trailer alone. Most Bond teasers look pretty good.
Quentin Tarantino wanted to make Casino Royale on a low budget to focus on character driven action, which Casino Royale, the first Bond book, which
would have been perfect.
Might have revitalized the series.
But, we’ll see where they go, as this was the story that really formed the self destructive, psychopathic Bond of the books that I love so much as a child.