Anyone see it? Is it any good? Any tamperings with the gunbarrel, opening credits, pre-title sequence, etc? Is the formula intact? Faithfulness to the novel?
Yes, me, as of five hours ago.
Is it any good?
Yes, it's excellent. Easily the most emotionally involving Bond since 1969's OHMSS, and I must say very stylishly directed considering the man at the helm is Martin Campbell, whom most of us had written off as a workmanlike director at best. And with the exception of a bit player or two, everyone does a great job with the acting.
Any tamperings with the gunbarrel, opening credits, pre-title sequence, etc?
Yes, all of them, but all in respectful and cool ways. Go see it before someone spoils them for you.
The best part of the above, for me, is Danny Kleinman's credits, which are imaginative, striking and nostalgic despite looking like none in the series before. He's managed a look that's somehow "retro" and futuristic all at once...sort of a mesh of 60s pop art, vintage private eye show credits (especially the Saint) and nice homages to the cover art of Casino Royale's first edition hardback (appropriately created, back then, from sketches by Fleming himself). After years of aping Maurice Binder, Kleinman's gone off his own way and boy does it work.
The only downside is the song stinks like a dead skunk family on a hot stretch of highway.
Is the formula intact?
Well, more the Fleming formula than the EON formula. It certainly doesn't hit all the usual marks like clockwork as the last few have ("Let's see, 45 minutes in, time for the second-stringer Bond girl to die....there she goes...and now the speech from the villain...). This one's structured differently and you'll be kept guessing as to what's coming next. It's all in there (well, no giant hidden fortresses) but in new configurations.
Faithfulness to the novel?[/
Oh boy, if you're a fan of Fleming are you going to like this one. If you're old enough to have seen OHMSS in the theater (I'm not!), this is probably what it felt like. Or if you were around to see the first part of The Living Daylights, where the whole "sniper was a girl" routine is lifted from the short story, then you know how fun it is to see Fleming, real Fleming on screen, even for a few minutes. That's the whole second half of this film. There are modifications and updates to the novel, because it has been fifty years after all...and besides you don't want to know everything before it happens. But all the important moments from the book are here, not to mention some of the original dialog, and it all unfolds in the right sequence. CR reminds me of the Grenada Sherlock Holmes series or the more recent "Hornblower" TV films...there are alterations because it's film and not prose, but where it counts its very faithful indeed. And it really makes you appreciate what a great thriller writer Fleming was, that a very much "of the moment" film could follow his story outline so closely and work as well today as it did in 1954.
One caveat: if your total exposure to Bond comes from the films, and you want more of the same, you may be disappointed with this movie, disoriented and yes, even bored. But if you're a fan of the novels, you'll love it. If you like "Bourne," you'll love it. And, it must be said, if you hate James Bond movies, you'll love it. My wife went with me only after making it clear I would owe her big time for sitting through yet another Bond movie (and one with an "ugly" 007, at that), but when the lights came up, she was singing its praises.
Pay your money, enjoy your popcorn and pretend you've never seen a James Bond movie before. Officially you haven't, as this is a reboot. We may have been born to late to see "Dr No" first time out, but this is a rare second chance to get in on the ground floor of something amazing. Don't pass it up.
P.S. - saw the Spider-Man 3 trailer. I am so over that series.
Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM