But, still, I guess this is a reality check for those of us expecting a gritfest. I know I'm one of three Bond fans worldwide who'd hoped for a faithful, minimalist adaptation of Fleming's first novel, but, oh, well.
A faithful minimalist version? LOL. Yes, I suppose you must be one of three Bond fans hoping for that. It would be 45 minutes long, for a start!
It's going to be a Bond film. *But* it will have
Far fewer computer-generated images
Hard-hitting fight scenes
Suspenseful and realistic stunts and action
Fewer cheesy one-liners
No Moneypenny or Q
Fewer gadgets
Black and white sequences
A script polished by an Oscar winner
A brilliantly charismatic and raw-steak-eating actor in the lead role
I think it's going to be as gritty as the Dalton era, and possibly more so. If you *seriously* want a faithful minimalist adaptation of the book, complete with a Cold War setting and a chap smoking 70 ciggies a day in a casino in northern France playing cards against a guy who hardly speaks until the second half of the film... well, okay. But it would have been the last Bond film made.
Stop playing devil's advocate and get with the programme, Loomis! This is what you and your ilk* have been baying for since DAD, isn't it?
*Of which I am one.
Must congratulate Eon on casting (arguably) the most unattractive British actor working today as James Bond:
http://img279.images...mtrailer2jh.png
Quite some feat, that.
Wasn't Bond meant to be rather handsome? Guess Babs and Michael forgot that. Casino Royale = flop.
Have you seen the trailer, though?