First, the caveats. I was personally not convinced by the selection of Craig as the next Bond and I did not like Casino Royale as a James Bond film, but liked it enough as an action film. I therefore promised myself that I would view this next Bond installment as a purely action film. I left the theater more convinced that Craig is not the right actor to portray Bond.
The fact is, there are already too many action films where the hero defies the standard classification of a hero; where the hero could very well be an antihero: gritty, cold, tough and merciless. Only James Bond seemed to have all the qualities of a classical hero: suave yet tough, charming yet unfaltering, elegant yet determined. In other words, someone you could really cheer for. This was the formula and, as a James Bond fan, I loved it. This, on the other hand, is not the James Bond I know.
I realize that the owners of the Bond franchise wanted to take him to a new direction. In fact, much has been said about Craig's portrayal of Bond as being the closest to the Ian Fleming Bond. My answer is, who cares? I mean, really? I have no doubt that those who've watched Bond portrayed by Connery, Moore, Dalton and Brosnan know Bond to be what he is: a wry, womanizing, gadget-using, alcohol-chugging, no-strand-of-hair-out-of-place-even-after-a-tough-fight super secret agent. That's how he was portrayed and I was happy that way. Every Bond movie was like clockwork: beautiful lady, nasty villain, mostly confusing story lines, sexy theme song, naked lady silhouettes, etc., etc.
This Bond is different, though. Different to the point of being unsettling, like running out of coffee so that you'd have to take tea with your breakfast, or vice-versa for our British friends. I'm really sorry, but Craig is not Bond and when his fourth Bond movie is completed, I'll be as happy as a clam.
The fact is, there are already too many action films where the hero defies the standard classification of a hero; where the hero could very well be an antihero: gritty, cold, tough and merciless. Only James Bond seemed to have all the qualities of a classical hero: suave yet tough, charming yet unfaltering, elegant yet determined. In other words, someone you could really cheer for. This was the formula and, as a James Bond fan, I loved it. This, on the other hand, is not the James Bond I know.
I realize that the owners of the Bond franchise wanted to take him to a new direction. In fact, much has been said about Craig's portrayal of Bond as being the closest to the Ian Fleming Bond. My answer is, who cares? I mean, really? I have no doubt that those who've watched Bond portrayed by Connery, Moore, Dalton and Brosnan know Bond to be what he is: a wry, womanizing, gadget-using, alcohol-chugging, no-strand-of-hair-out-of-place-even-after-a-tough-fight super secret agent. That's how he was portrayed and I was happy that way. Every Bond movie was like clockwork: beautiful lady, nasty villain, mostly confusing story lines, sexy theme song, naked lady silhouettes, etc., etc.
This Bond is different, though. Different to the point of being unsettling, like running out of coffee so that you'd have to take tea with your breakfast, or vice-versa for our British friends. I'm really sorry, but Craig is not Bond and when his fourth Bond movie is completed, I'll be as happy as a clam.