No more Pierse Brosnan, the modern face of 007! The mass audience had no idea what to expect for the new persona of James Bond all we knew was that there were big shoes to fill. The truth got out and talk started about Daniel Craige the new M16 agent. Not a very well know or famous actor but after Casino Royale he deserved the double ‘0’ status.
Casino Royale was a very different style of the classic James Bonds, there was more of a concreted plot that kept the viewers attracted compared to relying on the action scenes to keep the audiences entertained. Highlighting my point, previous 007 films involved a traditional character “Q”, head of all the gadgets used to aid 007 on his missions. The unfortunate death of Desmond Llewelyn who played “Q” was another major set back for this new stylistic James Bond, and maybe even a challenge. Although they did bring “Q” (this time played by John Cleese) back in Casino Royale, they decided no to make him a major impact on the plot. Daniel Craige was equipped with very minimal gadgets than we are used to in an M16 agent. This gave the film a sense of realism, a style that hasn’t been portrayed in other Bond films. The modern use of new cinematographic techniques, sound, setting and light all played roles to amplify this adrenalin junkie movie.
Filming in many locations with detailed shots of the surroundings emphasizes Daniel Craige’s importance as an agent as he follows his target. The opening chase scene will put you on the edge of your seat making you want to participate in the chase. The editing and cinematography clearly amplifies my point with boom shots, follow shots, reaction shots/close ups and low and high angle shots all done at a fast pace. The use of setting plays a structural role in this scene as the actors make full use of the construction site.
An unbelievably well revised James Bond. The new style has given audiences a more realistic approach to 007. Daniel Craige has increased the show size.
Nic,
ReplyDeleteThis a more sophisticated review. It incorporates more use of film language which helps bring credibility to your voice. You make the point that the plot is more sophisticated and say it is more realistic as well. I'd agree with you. The question, then, is: how? you don;t explain specifically other than that Q is no longer important. What is the premise of the plot? Why themes come out of it? And most importantly, how is Craig's bond a different character than Brosnan's? Is the overall tone fo the film different? As we practice more writing about story and style, you'll get better at defending your ideas.