Daniel Craig is my James Bond.
Before you tar and feather me, let me explain.
Arguably the most beloved actor to portray 007 is Sean Connery. I can see why as I am a big fan of his work. The Sean Connery films adapting the work of author Ian Fleming are not of my generation, and while that shouldn’t matter given the many films outside of my generation that I appreciate, the truth is I never really watched them. Oh, I’ve seen a few, and parts of others. But I’ve never made a conscious choice to actively seek out and enjoy the Connery 007 films. And while I’ve watched and enjoyed on some level those with Roger Moore, et al, I haven’t really connected with them. The slightly goofy, gadget-filled shows just didn’t click. They weren’t silly enough to appreciate as spoofs nor serious enough to appreciate as a good action thriller. Perhaps I was psychically in tune with Ian Fleming, because his novels are not goofy and gadget-filled either. But back to Craig.
By the time Casino Royale (the newest iteration) was released I was preconditioned for a different kind of spy thriller. Matt Damon had brought the character of Jason Bourne to the big screen and I was hooked. This was the kind of government agent film that flipped my switch. I have no doubt the film makers were influenced by the success of the Bourne franchise and then they made a decision that I will forever praise: they decided to actually adapt a James Bond novel to the big screen. I know what you are thinking, “other early James Bond films are adapted from Ian Fleming novels”. To which I would reply, “loosely based on an Ian Fleming novel is more like it”. I’ve read several of the 007 novels, inspired by the film version of Casino Royale, and they are at times laughably far from a faithful adaptation.
So despite the fact that Craig has the wrong hair color and that he is unforgivably not Sean Connery, he is my James Bond. Okay, you can commence with applying the pitch.
Oh, wait, we’ve got a movie to talk about.
Casino Royale was a fantastic film, I enjoyed every minute of it. And while it was a weaker entry by comparison, I also really liked Quantum of Solace. It is perhaps not surprising then that I entered the theater Friday night to see Skyfall with a mix of anticipation and trepidation. Would it be the next strong entry into the 007 canon or would there be no charm the third time around?
Its no mystery if you’ve been paying attention to the critics, Skyfall is a critical and will (hopefully) be a commercial success and it fits nicely with the previous two Craig films to form a three-film story arc worthy of Ian Fleming’s creation. I would hazard to say this is a more mature film than the previous two having a story with a little more gravity to it while at the same time being the most slyly playful of the three. The film opens with the expected long action sequence and the title song and graphics are nice but they still don’t measure up to that fantastic opening of Casino Royale.
The cast gets a lot of praise for this one and deservedly so. I don’t need to mention how I feel about Daniel Craig again, do I? Actresses Bérénice Marlohe and Naomie Harris do more than just act as eye candy though it would have been nice if Marlohe could have had more screen time. I have long been a fan of Dame Judi Dench and she continues to be a great “M”. Ralph Fiennes was a nice choice as a potentially stuffy government agent but I appreciated that the film makers chose to ease up on the role making him a “character” and not a “characterization”. And Javier Bardem was a good choice for the Bond villain as he is a class actor. I’m not entirely sold on his affectation in this one, it was close to crossing the line for me, a little bit too big. Still, good choice for the actor to fill the role.
The story itself was, in my opinion, not any stronger than the previous two films and Casino Royale remains the best of the three but for one caveat: the nods to previous Bond films. Where Skyfall stands out and shines a little brighter is the subtle and not-so-subtle winks to the audience that there has indeed been 50 years of James Bond and those five decades have left some indelible impressions. By the end I had a HUGE smile on my face because of the ways in which this film pays homage to the previous films and does so in a way that makes me excited for the next one, and there will be a next one. I won’t spoil you even a little bit regarding what these homages are, they are too fun and must be experienced first hand.
Kudos to Sam Mendes for capping this story arc off so well. There are some absolutely brilliantly shot scenes. A particular favorite is a slow sequence in a high rise building. It is all glass and neon lights and reflections off surfaces and it is gorgeous.
I can’t say much more. I am not going to ruin it for you. If you’ve seen it I would love to talk about it. Please use the “spoiler” tag, and when in doubt assume that what you have to say will indeed spoil something for someone. If you are Bond fan, see it on the big screen. It is a worthy addition to a long legacy of 007 films.
____________________________
My reviews for the other two Craig Bond films:
Love the post and totally agree.
Awesome Trisha, glad you are enjoying these films too.
I saw this last night, and it was very good! Love Daniel Craig!!
It is so seldom that I’ll deal with the theater crowd, and the cost, on a Friday night so that tells you how much I was looking forward to seeing this one.
Craig is TOTALLY wrong as Bond. Wrong size, wrong hair color, wrong accent, you name it. They should have just given him his own spy series of films, maybe based on Edward S. Aarons’ Sam Durell CIA “Assignment — ” series. Pretty much the only spoof filled, silly Bond movies were the Roger Moore ones. Yes, they put some humor into the Connery films, but they are pretty much accurate to the books. I have read each of the novels several times and same with the films, except the Moore films, which I cold not bear to watch a second time. I’m glad you like Craig in the films, but they could be any character, just change the name…
I of course can’t disagree with you more. I don’t care about the hair color but as far as Craig’s acting and the direction of the films they’ve been spot on with the spirit of the books, especially the first one. Bond in the books is a very gritty character as well as a suave one and Craig pulls that off beautifully. The Moore films are atrocious compared to the books…gotta wonder if Fleming was cool with it or if it drove him crazy. I’m sure he enjoyed the checks at any rate, lol!
While disagreeing, I do understand your position Richard and would feel the same way had I taken to James Bond prior to the Craig era. If someone were to argue that the newer Star Trek actors (playing Kirk, McCoy, Spock, etc) were better than their originals I wouldn’t agree. I loved the JJ Abrams movie and thought the actor choices couldn’t have been better. But it is a different Star Trek, not the definitive one. And for most the definitive Bond is Connery. I get it. It just isn’t definitive *for me*, the same way that my original Star Trek cast isn’t the definitive original cast for those who are now fans solely because of Abrams’ movie.
We’ll agree to disagree on this one, Carl Have you read any of the Aarons books?
No, but as one of the hazards of blogging is an ever-growing list of books to check out (oh, what a sad problem ;p ), I will be adding ’em to the list. I’m assuming this is a ‘begin at the beginning’ thing with the novels or are they not interrelated in any way?
I’ve been trying to see this all week and things have conspired against me. I’m looking forward to going to see it and especially now I know somebody else who has seen it and I can discuss with.
Lynn 😀
Yes, you’ve had the film out there for a while now. You have no excuse!!! 😉
Just kidding, but get out and see it! And then let’s talk!!!!
I know, I’ve been trying to see this for ages!! Tomorrow or maybe the day after!!!!
Tee hee. The funny thing is I really do want to see this.
Lynn 😀
I know what you mean. I’ve meant to see twice as many films this year as I have seen and things just didn’t work out to get to the theater.
I love Daniel Craig as James Bond, and I am a fan of the franchise and LOVE Sean Connery etc, but as soon Craig donned his tuxedo, I felt like the franchise had finally gotten it right.
To all the other actors’ defense, I think the film makers who did Casino Royale were the ones who did the very best at saying “lets adapt a novel and keep it as close as humanly possible to the story”. Some of the Connery ones are probably close too but Casino Royale is SOOOO close, largely it is just the modernization of the story that is different. Craig benefits largely from that…and thankfully we benefit too!!!
I am so looking forward to where they go from here with some of these new players. I hope Craig makes at least 2 more Bond films, if not another three film set with a small connecting arc the way this one had with his relationship with M.
While I did enjoy watching Skyfall, my James Bond is Pierce Brosnan. There is a certain smoothness to the actor, a polished quality if you like, that I haven’t seen in Daniel Craig. Craig is good but Brosnan was perfect for the role.
I loved the opening, that song was beautiful.
I can see that. I like Brosnan a lot as an actor, but the problem is that once I started reading Fleming’s novels I don’t see Bond in that way. Sure, he is smooth and suave in the books but he is also brutally effective and I don’t think Moore or Brosnan reflected that enough for me.
Brosnan is the character of Bond though in one of my favorite video games ever, Goldeneye. I loved that game and when I saw the movie I was disappointed because I thought the game version was better, lol! I think they’ve released an updated version of this game for XBox. I need to snag it and play it again.
I’ve been hearing that this is good, no you have me really looking forward to seeing it. At first I thought Craig was going to be a terrible Bond, he doesn’t have the smooth suave look I’ve come to expect, but now I think he might be my favorite.
He has done an amazing job, that is for sure.
The James Bond movie franchise has lasted 50 years for a reason: change. Once the actors playing Bond aged out of the role, they were replaced with younger actors. And the movies also changed. The gadget Bond movies have morphed into the Danie Craig gritty action spectaculars. The fact that SKYFALL had the biggest opening weekend ever–nearly $88 million–shows there’s a big audience for this kind film.
I couldn’t agree more, George. They have done a lot of adaptation with the franchise, refusing to just stick with what they were doing and I give them kudos for that.
Hey Carl, finally got round to seeing this last night. I really enjoyed it. The end was a surprise that I hadn’t seen coming.
I’m not going to put any spoilers in here so don’t worry! Personally, I thought it started off really well, then, to be honest, it sagged a little but then it really picked up. I really liked all the shout outs which were really entertaining. I felt like it got a bit of it’s ‘cheesiness’ back (which I know sounds a strange thing to say but it is part and parcel of the Bond movies, for me anyway). I thought Javier Bardem was brilliant as was Albert Finney. Not to mention SMALL SPOILER ALERT – Miss Moneypenny – come on!
Lynn 😀
It did have a bit of a lull but I still enjoyed it. I liked seeing Albert Finney in the movie, he is one I always enjoy. So glad you liked it.
For me Daniel Craig is my James Bond as well.
I can’t wait to see this movie and talk about it with you. I need to just break down and start reading some Bond books again now because I know I’m going to be dying too once I’ve seen Skyfall.
Yes, you need to see it (I type as I already know you have…lol!!!)
Wanna hear something funny? My husband said something almost exactly just the other day. It was like a pronouncement, “Daniel Craig is the best James Bond.” and then he added, “at least for me.” Crazy, huh?!
🙂
Not crazy at all, he is just a kindred spirit!
I just saw the movie on Friday night and I really enjoyed it. I’ve seen almost all the Bond movies (my first husband is a huge Bond fan),so it is with an honest view of having seen most of them, that I can say Craig is Bond for me, too. Because I see him as a younger Bond, early Bond (which especially the first movies in the three movies so far he’s made) made clear, this Bond comes before Moore, Connery etc, even though the movie is shot now, so I like the rough edge to his character, which time and being in the field slowly changes to the smoothness of the later Bonds.
It was clever and good through most of it, though I agree that I did find it a little slow in the middle, on the island, although the reveal of what happened to Bardem’s character was nicely done. Clever in dialogue, the speed of the plot, the emotional undercurrents, plus the layering of the story. All in all, very satisfying, and it didn’t need gimmicks to do it. I really enjoyed
this one. I’m glad you did too, Carl! and so many of the commentators here too.
You make a really good point, Susan, in that this is supposed to be a much earlier Bond and that he would not be as polished in these earlier days of his role as a spy.
Glad that the gimmicks haven’t made their way in here, and that there was a nod to the gimmick thing in the film. That was fun. Very fun.
Great comments Susan. I’m so glad you enjoyed the film and it was great to get this perspective on the series as a whole.
I’ve seen quite a few of the Bond films, including most (if not all) of the Connery, but I have to agree that Craig is my favorite Bond–but then again, his Bond is also the only one I’ve seen in the theaters, so I may have a bit of a bias! My brother and I went to see this last week, and while I think I still slightly prefer Casino Royale, this was really quite excellent. That slow sequence in the high rise building you mention? Loved it. Now I’m finding myself already anticipating the next one…
I still prefer Casino Royale myself, but I’ve really liked both of these other two films. I too can’t wait for another one. I hope the delay between films is much shorter this time.
I finally was able to catch Skyfall in the theater today and I have to say I loved it. Daniel Craig reaffirmed to me how much I think he gets the character from the books right.
I want to say I enjoyed the opeing scene a lot. Maybe not quite as good as Casino Royale but not far from it. I will say that the opneing credits and title sequence where excellent.
While the story in this third Craig film I think is weaker than Casino Royale I would have to say the acting this time around is the best of all of the three Craig films.
I hope we don’t have to wait four years again this time for a new Bond film but only two years. So hear’s me looking ahead to 2014 already.
I have been reading Moonraker leading up to watching Skyfall to put me in the correct Bond mood. That worked perfectly as I’ve been digging the book and was in just the right state of mind for the flick.
Spoiler Alert….
I LOVED the introduction of our new Miss Moneypenny. Wonderful actress for the part. I also was suprised by who happened with M. I hadn’t been spoiled with the outcome for that storyline which I was glad to just see unfold in the theater.
Glad you got to see it.
Yes, the opening sequence and credits was very good. I liked Adele’s song and liked the graphics.
I don’t disagree with you at all about the acting or about Casino Royale.
I commented above that I too hope the wait is much shorter this time. Hopefully there won’t be any economic issues with the studio that delay the next film. I’d like to see one in 2014. That would be a nice 46th birthday present.
That actress was a perfect choice in my opinion. I thought she did a great job and I really enjoyed their chemistry in the movie.