Casino Royale

No soy fan de James Bond, pero después de Casino Royale probablemente me convierta en uno. Si es interpretado por Daniel Craig, quien finalmente ha callado a todos sus críticos y a los creadores de campañas negativas hacia su persona. ¡Bravo! (13.03.2007)

As a man afflicted since childhood with love for the phenomenon of the super agent in Her Majesty's Secret Service (they have been a part of my life since 1984, when I saw the first Moor film), and as someone who has seen all the Bond films, I say: Casino Royale is an old school Bond film that I've missed since the days of Goldfinger. Daniel Craig is Bond in the best Connery tradition, yet he is also new, original, almost popular. He gives back to the legend its gloss and energy. Martin Campbell perfectly combined the thrilling action rides in an old-fashioned coat with a calm (but internally electrifying) game of poker, in which the gentleman's style of Guy Hamilton and Terence Young is reflected. This conservative spy level may not captivate today's viewer, but I was completely fascinated. No doubt the good old days are coming back and Pierce Brosnan's exaggerated CGI action era is waving goodbye. I won't remember it in a bad way, but Daniel Craig is the Bond of my heart, hand in hand with Sir Connery. Bond's humanity, egoism, vulnerability, fragility... Craig does it all with extraordinary credibility and certainty. Hand in hand with this is the fantastic villain Le Chiffre (Auric Goldfinger, you've met your match!), the most magical Bond-girl (forgive me, beautiful Ursula, but Eva Green gave Vesper a soul, not just a body), and the increasingly charming M Judi Dench. Martin Campbell does more than just an action routine - he holds the film wonderfully together and the chemistry of the characters drives like an Aston Martin. Although Casino Royale is far from being problem-free - lapses in logic, naivety, flatter passages, unspokenness and recklessness, just about everything that is inseparable from the series - it is definitely the best bond since the 1960s. (16.11.2006)

It was a terrible blow at the time. After four adventures with the elegant Brosnan, the tough guy Craig came, an uncompromising sharpshooter, a bleeding brawler, a tormented sarcastic, and a rough mountain of secret agent potential. In front of his charisma, out of respect, I almost hid under the seat, but he didn't fit my previous perception of the Bond brand. The dry lines remained, the technical toys gave way to dirty action, and it was only after a long 14 years since the premiere that I finally realized, during a specific "regeneration" revision, how perfectly balanced the Montenegrin card spectacle turned out to be. From the black and white intro to the Italian shot. (05.12.2006)

After a year and a half, I’m changing my review. Maybe it's because I've started to enjoy poker, maybe it's because more bombastic action like the opening in Madagascar would only hurt it, and mostly maybe it's because I’m finally willing to separate the terms "Bond" and "Bourne," whilst also acknowledging that a similar concept doesn't mean plagiarism. Instead, I enjoyed two and a half hours of a thrilling adventure that Daniel Craig is happy to drag you through with him. It’s all done with such vigor that you'll take punches too, and when Eva Green whispers sugarplums in your ear, you'll melt. A couple of hours after watching it, I am unbearably tempted to put the disc in the DVD player again. Could a film have a better calling card? (09.11.2008)

Or: When James walks in Jason’s footsteps... The black-and-white prolog and the first scene after the opening credits sets the bar high, but unfortunately the creators didn’t manage even to come near it for the rest of the movie. The new Bond is not lacking atmosphere, a good technical side and ingenious action. But what it is lacking is a better screenplay to hold everything together better and more balanced pacing. (21.04.2022)