AICN
September 9, 2006 - 3:56pm
Ain’t it cool.com news ruined Craig’s fanboys spoiler virginity.
Possibly out of concern EON is conducting super secret audience previews.
The reality may be that Craig is tracking very badly with likely audiences.
This particular reviewer is positive about the movie and Craig. However if
you read what he has to say, you will find we were right. Daniel Craig is not
Bond. He is 'some dude on a mission'
From the flaws he found in this unfinished version, both the fans and critics
alike will tear the mistaken premise of this movie apart opening day.
We decided to offer the abbreviated version of the first review.
Click here to read the full review.
“intimate screening of about forty people, and real cool too because there was full
breakfast, lunch and champagne served where they grouped everyone off after the
showing whilst Martin Campbell and Barbara Broccoli spent a good 25 minutes with
every table taking notes and honestly taking feedback as to what to change.
their [Craig & Green’s] interplay is too overemphasised throughout the movie and
suffers from being too long at times. They are definitely going to trim it because the
film comes in at 2 and a half hours. It could easily be 2:10.
Here's a quibble and bear with me... in films, the girl is supposed to have and
immaculate air to her unless she's supposed to be intentionally rough around the
edges. But every time you see this woman's feet, they're pitch black. I honestly hope
they fix this in post. When Vespa Lynd rolls over one time, she immediately steps out
of character and becomes Eva-Dirtyfoot-Green. I'm not playing man, clean up the
soles Barbara. I'm meant to fancy this woman.
.... no fancy gadget scene in this joint. No Q, no phone-car controller.
..from the black and white beginning of the film (just like in the trailer) to the time Eva
Green hands Bond his tailor made suit. Which is the turning point for the audience.
The film runs too long at it's current length and where I absolutely know they are
going to trim is the multiple scenes between Bond & Vespa. It's emotional and
believable but man is it overstated.
When Bond says that he loves her, I was laughing my head off, because we know
what that means. Then he gives her the kiss of kisses... and I was just counting the
seconds to her demise.
THEY HUMANISE BOND TOO MUCH! Although they make this Bond more 'realistic'
then the rest, there are certain things that they do with him, that simply don't work,
and if you read this Martin Campbell, change it please. I woulda told you but you
already looked at me like I was a knowitall. I am actually, and Bond eating crunchy
burnt toast does not work. It throws us out of the film and even my girlfriend said
after that when she saw him put the toast in his mouth, she thought "How is he
going to talk and eat?"/ Low and behold, it looks funny. I'm not saying cut it out, I'm
saying trim it and just enter the shot a little later. Bond crunching is not Bond.
Another qualm is that he explains himself too much. Everytime he makes a move on
the Casino table (coz this is Casino Royale, and there is a great deal of Casino in it...
and Royale, which is great) Vespa complains and then he starts telling her/us what
he's doing, and it really isn't Bond-like, considering at the top of the movie he is so
arrogant he breaks into M's house unapolagetically and goes through her shit like
Jeff Goldblum in Jurassic Park.
By having him blonde, I swear guys, you immediately dispell any comparisons at the
gate. You simply just accept Daniel Craig as 'some dude on a mission' and you
believe in this mission more and more as the film progresses. By the end of it...
mission accomplished. Daniel's natural presence carries him and us through this
movie and when he doesn't speak, he is as intense as Russell Crowe. I have to admit
though he loses this intensity when he goes into long explanations. But IS HE
BOND?
My answer is no. But he doesn't have to be, because in this movie, Bond isn't Bond
yet, he just gets his 007 Stripes. He's reckless, and careless but even so, it's about
his transformational process into the character he will eventually become. And
Daniel Craig plays it so bad-ass, we want him to become it and we want to go there
with him.
You'll see, this is strange... Everytime someone calls him Bond, I kind of believe it,
but when he is referred to as James, I don't buy it. Yet I did with Sean, Pierce and
Roger, I didn't with George or Timothy....
|
