The 007 Files: Part 11

2006-2008: The Final Chapter (Until the Next One)

In hindsight, the Pierce Brosnan era never was able to exceed mediocrity. This is not because Brosnan himself was a weak Bond. On the contrary, he was quite good. The problem was that he was stuck in films that adhered so strictly to the established formula that often it felt as if the audience could sing along to every note. His stint ended with Die Another Day, a Bond film that made enough bad decisions to last the series for a long, long time. It was overblown, obnoxious, and the series the world had long been in love with had become unrecognizable.

Luckily for us all, the filmmakers realized the error of their ways before we were forced to endure a film in which Bond rode into battle on a unicorn. Not to mention the near-invincible Bond they had created began to feel a little passé at the beginning of the 21^st century. People no longer enjoyed perfect protagonists like James Bond, as their affections were now being directed toward heroes with issues. The Bourne franchise gave us a man searching for his true identity. The sudden popularity of superhero movies such as Spider-Man gave us people who became superheroes not merely because it’d be the “cool” thing to do. They studied their characters rather than merely placing them in the midst of overblown action sequences.

As a result the James Bond franchise, a series of films which has long prided itself on staying “hip,”was beginning to look rather quaint. The only way to catch up would be to make Bond a full-fledged human being rather than an indomitable superspy going through the motions, and there’s nothing like a good old-fashioned origin story to get the wheels spinning. Wisely, instead of creating their own origin story, producers Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli hired screenwriters Neal Purvis, Robert Wade and Crash writer Paul Haggis to adapt the novel Casino Royale, the first Bond novel Ian Fleming ever wrote.

Once the script was written, director Marin Campbell was hired to bring the tale to the screen. Campbell had previously directed GoldenEye, undoubtedly the grittiest of the Brosnan films, so on the surface this decision seemed to make a great deal of sense. He had reinvented the series before; it seemed quite plausible he could do it again.

The most important ingredient in a Bond reboot would be the actor playing the key role. This actor would not only have to look good in the part, but he’d have to be one of the best actors to ever don the tuxedo. Ultimately, the lucky man was Daniel Craig, an actor who had already made a name for himself in films such as Munich, Layer Cake, and (to a lesser extent) Lara Croft: Tomb Raider. Despite the initial (and idiotic) protests of “he’s blond,” it became clear that the filmmakers had made the best possible choice.

The opening sequences of Casino Royale depict Bond first achieving “00” status, followed by an insanely exciting chase through the streets of Madagascar. I don’t know if an actor has ever sold himself to audiences as James Bond so quickly. Bond has always been an interesting character, but too often the writers chose to ignore it. How did James Bond grow to become such a cold, calculating man? Casino Royale attempts to answer these questions.

There’s very little doubt in my mind that Casino Royale is one of the better Bond movies ever made. It takes the character we’ve known for nearly 50 years and not only re-creates him but explores who he is. It explains just about everything we know about the character and addresses all complaints people may have had about the series in the past. It gives him a memorable villain (Mads Mikkelsen’s Le Chiffre) and an interesting, intelligent love interest (Eva Green’s Vesper Lynd). Of course, if a female Bond character is better than Mary Goodnight, she’ll look brilliant by comparison.

As great as Casino Royale may be, the risk the filmmakers took here cannot be overstated. They took a beloved pop culture icon and completely tore him down so they could start from scratch. It was a necessary step that could have been devastating had audiences rejected it. Fortunately, critics and audiences embraced the changes, and a new series of great Bond films was undoubtedly about to begin!

Well, almost. Quantum of Solace, the closest you’ll ever see to a direct sequel in the Bond films, can only be described as a disappointment. Everything about it feels rushed, right down to the shorter-than-usual running time. While Casino Royale felt like a complete, fully-realized idea, Quantum of Solace feels lacking from start to finish. The action scenes are good, as is Craig, but  truly memorable characters and/or moments are scarce.

It’s made all the more painful because Quantum of Solace does some impressive things with Craig’s Bond, but it isn’t really all that drastic. It feels more like an extended epilogue to Casino Royale than it does its own movie. Here is a prime example of a character being more interesting than the movie he’s in. Watching Quantum of Solace is frustrating because you feel as if there’s a great movie to be found here, but the filmmakers do all they can to avoid it. Even Mathieu Amalric is wasted as the villain.

Well, it appears that we have finally reached the end of the line for “The 007 Files.” I do hope you’ve enjoyed the last 11 posts, as I know I’ve had a great deal of fun combing through the history of my adolescent hero. Despite the fact that this last film left us on a bit of a sour note, I can only predict great things for the James Bond series in the near future. The next film, currently untitled, will once again star Daniel Craig in the lead, with American Beauty/Road to Perdition/Jarhead director Sam Mendes at the helm. Also, key roles have allegedly been offered to both Javier Bardem and Ralph Fiennes.

Yeah. I’d say things are looking up.