15 replies to this topic

[dwu]

Here's something I wrote about Casino Royale; rather than a review it's more an attempt to parse out the appeal of that amazing Madagascar footchase. Love to hear what you think:

I think that Casino Royale may be the first Bond film that I am not the least bit embarrassed to say that I enjoyed, possibly even loved. It could have been disastrous to abandon the Bond series' self-conscious wink-wink camp in favor of a more serious, somber tone, yet somehow Casino Royale manages to pull off a somber, not at all tongue-in-cheek James Bond without straining credulity. I like Casino Royale so much that I think I'm going to write two posts on it.


In this first post I want to examine one of the most exhilarating chase sequences in recent memory, when Bond chases bomb-maker Mollaka through the streets of Madagascar and into a construction site full of conveniently placed obstacles. Mollaka is played by Frenchman Sebastian Foucan, who co-founded the modern sport of "free-running," which is also known as "parkour" or "l'art du deplac

Edited by dwu, 05 September 2007 - 07:42 AM.

[sharpshooter]

Brilliant first post dwu.

Welcome to the party my dear.

[united1878]

That was a cool read.
Well done

[JWM Tanner]

Pooeff, impressive!

[Vauxhall]

Certainly impressive for a first post, and a very detailed analysis of some interesting aspects of CASINO ROYALE. Welcome to CBn

[MkB]

Hello, and welcome, dwu!

Interesting views, indeed... So, do you think that, in this respect, Craig's Bond is "less British" (and therefore more American) as a blunt instrument? It has long been argued that the success of Bond was linked with the decline of the British Empire: he was a British hero, the one-and-only man capable of saving the World, the not-so-capable America included (cf. Goldfinger, for instance).
But IMO, Casino Royale was a history of the beginnings, this is why Bond is that "blunt", and he'll certainly become more polished, skilled and ingenuous in future outings.

[RazorBlade]

I don't want to id with a lumbering brute unless it's the Frankenstein monster. Other than that, no way.

[LadySylvia]

What gives this inversion a particular frisson, though, is that the Western audience - particularly the American audience - desperately wants to identify with the lumbering brutes, the blunt instruments of the world.

Why would you believe that ALL or even MOST Americans would want this?

Interesting views, indeed... So, do you think that, in this respect, Craig's Bond is "less British" (and therefore more American) as a blunt instrument?

Why would nationality matter? The British can be just as blunt as Americans or any other nationality. Personally, I think that human beings are basically blunt, anyway.

Edited by LadySylvia, 05 September 2007 - 10:37 PM.

[Judo chop]

Interesting thought, dwu. I don't know if the general American psyche is bent in such a way. I wouldn't be surprised to find most Americans would still think of the enemy as the more brutish with military technology lost in their calculations, but interesting thought nonetheless.

What gives this inversion a particular frisson, though, is that the Western audience - particularly the American audience - desperately wants to identify with the lumbering brutes, the blunt instruments of the world.

Why would you believe that ALL or even MOST Americans would want this?

His theory is explained in the original post. You don't have to agree with it, but the answer to 'WHY' is right there in black and white.

Interesting views, indeed... So, do you think that, in this respect, Craig's Bond is "less British" (and therefore more American) as a blunt instrument?

Why would nationality matter? The British can be just as blunt as Americans or any other nationality. Personally, I think that human beings are basically blunt, anyway.

At this point I think we're talking symbolism, Sylvia. Not literalism.

[DaveBond21]

Good post, and welcome to CBn!


I also think that Daniel Craig's 007 is a lot more like British spies today, than spies of the past. He is a more up-to-date version of an M15 agent or British soldier today. They don't have airs and graces anymore, they are blunt instruments, possibly more like American soldiers than ever before.

[Professor Dent]

Interesting read, dwu. Welcome to CBn.

[LadySylvia]

Interesting thought, dwu. I don't know if the general American psyche is bent in such a way. I wouldn't be surprised to find most Americans would still think of the enemy as the more brutish with military technology lost in their calculations, but interesting thought nonetheless.

What gives this inversion a particular frisson, though, is that the Western audience - particularly the American audience - desperately wants to identify with the lumbering brutes, the blunt instruments of the world.

Why would you believe that ALL or even MOST Americans would want this?

His theory is explained in the original post. You don't have to agree with it, but the answer to 'WHY' is right there in black and white.

Interesting views, indeed... So, do you think that, in this respect, Craig's Bond is "less British" (and therefore more American) as a blunt instrument?

Why would nationality matter? The British can be just as blunt as Americans or any other nationality. Personally, I think that human beings are basically blunt, anyway.

At this point I think we're talking symbolism, Sylvia. Not literalism.

And Americans symbolizes bluntness or lumbering brutes?

I also think that Daniel Craig's 007 is a lot more like British spies today, than spies of the past. He is a more up-to-date version of an M15 agent or British soldier today. They don't have airs and graces anymore, they are blunt instruments, possibly more like American soldiers than ever before.

Again, this association of Americans with bluntness. Why are Americans categorized in this manner? Do Europeans actually believe they are more subtle than Americans?

Edited by LadySylvia, 06 September 2007 - 02:51 AM.

[DaveBond21]

Do Europeans actually believe they are more subtle than Americans?

Yes. Just don't hurt them!

[MkB]

Do Europeans actually believe they are more subtle than Americans?

Yes. Definitely. ;-)

Interesting views, indeed... So, do you think that, in this respect, Craig's Bond is "less British" (and therefore more American) as a blunt instrument?

Why would nationality matter? The British can be just as blunt as Americans or any other nationality. Personally, I think that human beings are basically blunt, anyway.

At this point I think we're talking symbolism, Sylvia. Not literalism.

And Americans symbolizes bluntness or lumbering brutes?

Well, LadySylvia, maybe I should explain my use of "nationalities" here: I'm simply refering to some theories about the success of Bond, who was seen by sociologists as a way to "cheer up" British people (and maybe, more generally, European people), a way to convince them that, even if world domination was no longer their lot, they still had THE man capable of saving this world (AND the big brother America), thanks to their cleverness.
So, nothing personal, literally or symbolically :-)

[DamnCoffee]

Welcome to the forums. A brilliant read dwu i have to say I agree with your points.

[RazorBlade]

I've been around some pretty blunt Europeans. Lady S is sharp.

Now that was symbolic.