The Cold Cut

I couldn't handle a 'hot out of the screening room' review of The Dark Knight. I'm still unsure how the collected press managed to draft up honest reviews of the film mere minutes after walking out of the press screenings. Maybe I was too wrapped up in all the pre-release hype that surrounded this film, but regardless, that hype was not left unjustified.

The Dark Knight, as a cinematic spectacle, is unmatched by any blockbuster of the last ten years (my movie-going period). It is also the most emotionally draining piece of culture that I have ever being exposed to. I felt like a shell of my former self as we walked out of the cinema, physically exhausted by the ever-changing merry-go-round of emotions that the film conjured in me.

The only place to start is the hype. The buzz surrounding this film has been fever-pitch since Commissioner Gordon handed over the Joker card to our caped crusader as the credits rolled for Batman Begins. In that card, Christopher Nolan sent an obvious signal that whilst he wasn't committed to a sequel, Batman was officially reborn, and ready for a franchise if the world was ready for it. And we were.

Cinema is, by the law of averages, a lonely experience. Sure, we go in pairs, threes or more, but ultimately, sitting in a dark room watching a screen is an anti-social experience. So, why do we do it? For the reaction. And if you are looking for a provoking film, look no further. At my birthday dinner I was quite happy to argue with my parents that as a cinematic experience, this is the pinnacle. For two hours.

The Dark Knight is probably not the best movie ever. It would be hard to argue that it is a complete masterpiece, as there are a few limited flaws. And yet, as a complete package, there is nothing out there that even comes close to this as a piece of cinema. The film itself has obviously connected with audiences the world over, and most average people that you speak to would happily place this film in their top 5 of all time. The $300 million in 10 days (amongst a host of other amazing records) alongside a never-ending series of 5 star reviews mean that The Dark Knight will never be forgotten.

Christopher Nolan has a dilemma to deal with. Where do you go from this? Whilst his previous films have all been brilliant, this huge level of commercial success has never factored into his equation, and yet these kind of figures will have changed that. The Prestige was a commercial hit, debuting at #1 in the US and garnering Academy Award nominations. And yet if you mentioned it, most people wouldn't bat an eyelid. The Dark Knight is not that film.

The film is centered around a host of characters who are all totally inhabited by the actors. Christian Bale will no doubt be under-appreciated as Bruce Wayne, although he is the foundation of this film, holding the meandering plot together. Maggie Gyllenhaal reinvents Rachel Dawes, taking over from Katie Holmes and thankfully erasing her annoying turn in Batman Begins from my memory. Then we have the 'white knight' to Batman's 'dark knight'- Harvey Dent. Aaron Eckhart is another success story, using the talent he has to burn and creating an interesting character arc for Harvey. We care about him, and that is the crucial aspect- that whilst Two Face does appear in this film, we are still aware that he and Harvey are the same person, regardless of whats going on underneath that exterior. Commisioner Gordon has an expanded role in this sequel, and Gary Oldman is once again stellar, with the rest of the cast also providing interesting foils for the leads.

And finally I am brought to Heath Ledger. Heath, Heath, Heath. This performance is far bigger than him. It's far bigger than this film. It's bigger than the hype surrounding it. This film has reinvented the concept of a villain. The Joker is a villain for the modern era, killing and creating havoc purely because he wants to. There are no motives- evidence in the fact that his back story continually changes, and the 'wanna know how I got these scars?' question pops up a few times, each time with a different answer. We have all heard the buzz surrounding Ledger's widely supported Oscar nomination, and it is founded. And yet, most of the buzz suggests a nomination for Best Supporting Actor. In actuality, The Joker is the lead role, carrying this film, his presence never absent.

This last fact is down to the fact that Gotham City plays a much bigger role second time around. The shots of Christian Bale standing alone on some of the city's skyscrapers are truly breathtaking, and although I didn't see the film in IMAX, I am almost certain that these visuals would be even more impressive on the larger screens. And through Gotham's presence and destruction, The Joker is effectively never off screen. He orchestrates the destruction which plagues the city- cause and effect.

There are some places where this film experiences slight mis-steps. Whilst the first film felt relatively (and that is a huge 'relatively') grounded in terms of realistic technology, The Dark Knight moves away from this approach. Whilst the Batpod is one of the coolest pieces of automotive technology to ever grace the screen, the circumstances in which this transition is made are a little far-fetched. And in the closing moments of the film, a certain piece of equipment almost burst the bubble of Gotham's believable world which had been built so well. Finally, Christian Bale over does the gruff voice a little bit. And that's it.

So, The Dark Knight. Finally, a film by Christopher Nolan that saw the public realisation of his talent. A film that features many revelations- Heath Ledger's terrible passing, and outstanding performance. A film which may finally unseat Titanic. A viral phenomena. And most importantly, a brilliant film. A film that deserves to be remembered, in our hearts and in the record books. The Dark Knight. Where next?

Above and below- two of the most breathtaking posters you will ever see. Click through for glorified super high-res versions!

Santogold- Starstruck (Diplo Remix) (Link 2)

Discuss: Did you help The Dark Knight break these records? What's your verdict?

The dreams have come true. The Dark Knight has broken a long list of records on it's opening weekend, and I for one am ecstatic. It's great to see a mature, brilliant, non-universally friendly film making a shed load of money, and finally knocking the trash that was Spiderman 3 off the opening weekend record list. Titanic still remains as the highest grossing film ever (and will continue to), but at least TDK has started the clear up job. Maybe Titanic is a job for the next Batman sequel?

The Dark Knight took $155.34 million, beating Spiderman 3's previous record of $151 million by over $4 million dollars, which isn't a lot in relative terms. On the way to this absolutely astounding figure, Batman also set a host of other records, including the following.

1. Film playing on most screens: 4366
2. Opening-night midnight takings: $18.5 million
3. Opening day takings: $67.8 million (biggest one-day total ever)
4. Midnight IMAX screens takings: $640,000
   
5. IMAX weekend takings: $6.2 million

Eat that, credit crunch. Even you cannot stop people going out to see what will now surely be held as one of the greatest movie's ever. I will have to wait to pass judgment, as I am holding out to see The Dark Knight on my birthday (26th July, in case anyone wants to send me a presents- jokes!). The Dark Knight also currently holds the number 1 spot on imdb's top films of all time. There is clearly something about this flick that has really stirred up the public, as The Dark Knight is the first film ever to unseat The Godfather from this hallowed list.

Update- Empire, Joblo and a few other sites have cottoned on to the 'new terminator model'. In the time it took me to write this, it appears loads of people have freeze-framed! View a trailer analysis.

Films, Films, Films.zip (Link 2)

Well- here we are. As requested, welcome to The Cold Cut summer movie extravaganza. It's actually a lot more exciting than it sounds. I'm going to take you on a chronological journey through what will be remembered as one of the biggest summer movie seasons ever. And as this is inherently a music blog, you can take breaks and download some of the great tracks people are feeling at the moment. Enjoy, comment, relax. I may be updating as I go along.

Common ft. Pharrell- Announcement (Dirty)

Before I get started on my summer movie round-up, I would first like to point something out. I'm sure many of you will have seen the Terminator: Salvation trailer by now, and it looks promising. The teaser is hard to take in because of the way it was put together- a gritty live news shooting style-, but if you take a frame by frame of the 1080p trailer (download here) you come across some interesting details. First of all, we get a clear shot of what appears to be a new Terminator... a prototype we haven't seen before (click through for a huge version). Yes, that does appear to be a rather large chaingun. Scary.

The same robot (or a similar one) can be seen again a few seconds later, as a victim climbs upwards, presumably to escape. I guessed from the glowing red eyes.

Anyway, I'm not aware of anyone else pointing this out, and there's a lot riding on this film if a new trilogy is to be spawned from it. The teaser trailer is intriguing, showing off some daylight shots (which have been mostly left out of the franchise, until now) and Christian Bale, who brings guaranteed excellence to a film- he seems to have this innate ability to make any movie completely watchable- Equilibrium anyone? McG might not be the obvious choice for director, but perhaps this is the kind of big-budget vehicle that a failing director needs? He seems to be going for the right vibe, and it looks as if the events of T3 have been wiped from the world's history (now if only we could do the same), perhaps tying in the time-travelling concept of the recent TV series? If anyone with some knowledge could shed some light on this idea I would be appreciative.

Discuss: Terminator: Salvation... Will it be any good?

The Hold Steady- Constructive Summer

As summer movie season's go, 2008 will go down as one of the most intense. The quality of films hasn't been considerably superior (and in some cases- cough*The Love Guru*cough- so painfully sub-par) but the pure volume of films that warrant an 'I want to see that' reaction is greater than ever before.

Perhaps it's down to the industries perfection of cutting a trailer? Hancock came across as a completely different film in the previews, and even films like Meet The Spartans managed to float at the box office by placing all their 'funny' jokes in the trailers. Maybe we are too impressionable? I know the feeling I had when the Iron Man trailer opened: 'No gang signs... just joking, throw it up!'. We were sold!

Immuzikation- Whoa, Yerr A Joke!

The season kicked off much earlier than usual, with Marvel's heavily tipped Iron Man opening on May 2. As origin stories go, Iron Man was uncharacteristically fun, largely due to Robert Downey Jr's complete domination of the film and part of Tony Stark. There are some moments -the pole slowly rising up in the plane, the closing line 'You know what... I am Iron Man'- that you simply won't see anywhere else in any other superhero film.

In a recent interview, he explained his unusual commercial choice of a superhero film because he 'wanted more than five people to see his film'. He really got his wish. I was one of the millions of satisfied people who forked out for admission, and Iron Man was the first summer movie to take over $300 million domestically. Those kind of figures were a huge boost for the newly independent Marvel Studio's, and they followed it up a month later with The Incredible Hulk. Whilst not quite as enjoyable, the casting was still incredibly inspired, and the film went on to $225 million worldwide, the final figures no doubt pulled down by memories of Ang Lee's 2003 version of the Hulk. Regardless, a strong commercial one-two, no?

Coldplay vs Nas- If I Viva La Vida (Starters Remix)

Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull. Enjoyable, and well... that's about it for me. I wasn't really expecting the second coming or anything along those lines, and Indy fulfilled my expectations. So, basically, if you went in with high hopes, you might have been disappointed. The one thing I took from it is that Shia LaBeouf is one of the shining stars of our generation: he will be as big, if not bigger, than Hanks and the Cruiser were in their prime. And that homage at the end, with the hat flying by... he may just have another franchise at his feet. Whilst we're on Shia, watch the trailer for Eagle Eye if you haven't already.

Discuss: Shia LaBeouf... soon to be a real household name?

Then came Wanted. Thus far it's my favourite film of the summer, and this is mostly down to good old Timur Bekambetov. I've watched both Night Watch and Day Watch, and whilst they're a little kooky you cannot deny that the guy has an eye for a perfect shot. Wanted proved that Timur arguably works better in English than Russian, bound by the acceptable laws of Western films, and the box office complied- Wanted 2 and Kick Ass (another Mark Millar series) are already in the works. Even bound by the rules, Timur completely reinterpreted many institutions of modern action- half of the action sequences in Wanted featured stuff that I had never seen before, from bending bullets and guns to catching weapons out of mid-air. It reminded many of watching The Matrix for the first time.

Coldplay- Death Will Never Conquer (more on this one soon)

And finally, Hancock. It was always going to be amazing, or... rubbish. It was the latter, and yet something saved this film. Although it was a convoluted mess, one thing shone through. Will Smith. Or giving credit where it's due, Will Smith and Jason Bateman. Their relationship and character's were just too strong for the script and other character's to match. I get the feeling that Peter Berg was aware of that and adjusted the script around that core premise, as an original screenplay of 'Tonight, He Comes' wouldn't have worked around that genuine joe/alcoholic superhero dynamic. It worked... Berg toned down the violence and sexual aspects of the original storyline to retain a PG-13 rating, and the film has already made over $300 million worldwide.

Fortunately, the future is bright. My two most anticipated releases are still to come- Wall-E and, of course, The Dark Knight. Two 10/10 films, without a shadow of a doubt. First things first, Wall-E. This film is a testament to the ability of the talented guys at Pixar. More so than any other studio, they produce consistently moving films, and Wall-E is no different. The buzz is huge, with statements like 'Stanton and co. can produce emotions from two animated robots than most directors can't coax out of their leading actors'. That sort of praise shouldn't be taken lightly!

And then, The Dark Knight. Everything I can say about this film has already been covered. Never before have I seen this kind of hype, and early reviews say it's justified. As well as being the best comic book film ever, we all hope The Dark Knight will never be forgotten. It deserves to break records, and it has- even before it has opened, The Dark Knight has set a record for the most screens playing... 4366 (see here). That figure lays a very strong foundation for some box-office records- we shall see what the 3 day figures hold after the weekend!

Lily Allen- Guess Who Batman (Fuck You Very Much)

I am so unbelievably excited about this film, and I really hope that it goes down as a classic. In some ways, The Dark Knight was almost destined to be huge- the viral marketing campaign is a work of genius, Christopher Nolan has produced a handful of brilliant films (but no masterpiece- until now) and the production of this film is an amazing story in itself. And Heath, well... it deeply saddens me that he cannot be here to witness the finished product, but I hope it is how he envisaged it. A posthumous Oscar would be a fitting reward for such a performance. R.I.P.

Discuss: Seen The Dark Knight? Is it the film of summer 2008? IMAX or standard cinema- is there a huge difference?

T.I.- No Matter What

So, that wraps up the movie season thus far. Before you leave, I really suggest you watch the new Watchmen trailer a couple of times. It's truly incredible. I haven't read the comics, but after this I'm really considering it; it appears that Zack Snyder has understood what's realistically required of him as the director of such a monument. He just gets the fans. After seeing this, I feel fairly confident predicting a masterpiece of sorts. The trailer is unlike anything I've ever seen- Snyder is able to show random footage and it still sends my jaw to the floor... it's that beautiful and wonderfully realised.



View a high definition version of the trailer over at Apple.com

The Cold Cut was initially started as a cultural experiment, but the general focus was slowly dwindled down until music was crowned king. However, films still hold a place in my heart, and yesterday I saw a film that has provoked such a huge reaction in me that I am considering starting a new section this blog, where I will occasionally write about my theatrical experiences, perhaps with an accompanying song. This is the first of my entries. This is Cloverfield.
Cloverfield is, without a doubt, one of the most innovative films that I have ever seen. Every few years, a film comes along that does something completely fresh in a dead genre. Cloverfield is one of those movies. There have been numerous detractors who claim the 'handy-cam' is a gimmick, and that there is nothing new here. Unfortunately, they are terribly, terribly wrong. Director Matt Reeves and producer JJ Abrams had so much to lose, but this movie is a triumph for the movie industry, especially during such turbulent times. The viral marketing campaign and trailers were great, but they aren't all this movie has going for it (see Snakes On A Plane). So whats different? Well, first off, you have the 85 minute running time, a clever move which keeps exposition to a minimum and also cranks up the intensity. There were numerous points in the film where I found myself turning to my friends and just saying "Holy shit!", quivering with fright and excitement.

Next we have the hand-held camera work, which really does set this monster movie out from everything else that has come before it. For the first five minutes, I was worried about the motion-sickness that many people have brought up in their reviews; after the first shaky moments, however, it really isn't an issue, as your eyes adapt to the motion. Take care, though- I smelt the distinctive scent of vomit on the way out of my screening, and I know that many people suffer nausea and vertigo. For those of you who worry about this, sit at the back so that you have something to focus on if it all gets a little bit much. The final thing that really sets this apart from the creature-feature bracket is that there is very little plot development- you have a monster, you have some characters, and thats it. No back-stories, no explanations, no questions asked. And thats the main reason that this works. It could happen...

The monster itself is the star of this film, and is pretty much indescribable. Introduced without any story or explanation, through teasing glances you progressively see more and more until the big reveal. A tail, a leg, a foot, or one of its parasites, each glimpse has you wondering 'what the hell is that thing?'. Simultaneously disgusting and beautiful, Godzilla looks timid compared to this thing. 'It' is frightening, and after decapitating the Statue Of Liberty, we get Hud's explanation: 'I saw it. It's Alive' and then later on 'What is it?''I don't know, but it's winning'.

NOT THE MONSTER! NOT EVEN CLOSE

The choice to use unknown actors for the protagonists has also paid off immensely, as their is no familiarity. They do their part in the dialog-heavy first 10 minutes, but this is kept to a minimum during the tense scenes, a la 'OH MY GOD'. They aren't there for character development, rather to try an outrun the entity that is destroying New York. Our cameraman, Hud, is reliable in his stupid/hilarious responses to situations, filming so that people 'will know how this went down'. A bit of a klutz, he still manages to hold on to the camera, producing some excellent shots in the most diabolical of situations.

The CGI is perfect, and the seamless interaction between the character and the beast/parasites again holds the tension. There is one truly frightening scene in a tunnel, which I will only hint at: it contains night-vision, and some truly harrowing things. The lack of a soundtrack is a great concept, and it really pays off, emphasizing the serious nature of this situation. This isn't Godzilla meets the Blair Witch Project, this is Cloverfield. This could be real.

Cloverfield's critical reception has been mostly positive, and its no coincidence that most of its detractors lie in the +30 bracket. Perhaps, as well as the motion sickness warning, they should put a warning to the older members of the critique, who have lost their ability to have fun. Simply put, this is a monster movie that is much more than it first seems. It isn't a 5 star film, as the plot has very little development and there isn't enough 'acting' to make this into a film. That, however, is the whole point. You can't compare this to anything else before it, because it is new, fresh and innovative. It will satisfy your needs, whether you just want a fun blockbuster or something much deeper. One of the most enjoyable films I have seen in the last few years, Cloverfield's bravery paid of immensely- now we just have to hope they don't ruin its mystique by making a sequel. Wait to the credits to see... 'Help us! It's still alive!'

Gnarls Barkley- Boogie Monster

On May 5th, the day after its release, I went to see Spiderman 3 at my local cinema. Surprisingly, I only arrived 10 minutes early, and there were plenty of seats free, which was a tad weird, what with Spiderman being one of the biggest movies this summer. Anyway, the film began with the traditional web fanfare, only with a darker twist, which set the tone for the movie. The first 10 minutes highlight the fact that everything seems to be going well for Peter Parker/Spiderman. Peter is doing well in his job and is about to propose to Mary Jane, and Spidey is finally receiving the admiration he thinks he deserves.

*LARGE SPOILERS*

Obviously, it all goes wrong, and all of a sudden, Peter is dealing with 3 different 'villains' and a girlfriend who is jealous of the attention Spiderman garners. Then this weird symbiote thing bonds with him to form the black suit which you have seen on all the posters. And then, through one ridiculous dance scene, the film loses all the momentum and brilliance it had in the first half. It never really recovers from this stupid Saturday Night Fever style scene, other than the epic final battle which involves Spiderman and the 3 villains. The main problem with this film is that there is simply too much going on; the main selling point, Venom, is only developed in the last 30 minutes of the film, and is then ejected from the franchise in a similarly abrupt manner. There is enough material and plot-lines in this film to fill 3 feature length films.

However bad the dance scene was, there were equally excellent positive points in the movie: Thomas Hayden Church excels as the believably motivated Sandman, and his transformation sequence in the particle accelerator is breathtaking. Similarly, the final battle between the 3 villains sees Spidey team up with the Green Goblin Mark 2, played by James Franco. I had never really though about the potential for a superhero team up, but this scene is fantastic, and I am now looking forward to the Justice League film. Topher Grace is good in his short segment as Eddie Brock and Venom, but I would have liked to see more of him... And finally, Bryce Dallas Howard as the blond bombshell that is Gwen Stacy... I didn't quite see her attractiveness in 'The Village', but she holds up well as the object of Peter's desire and Mary Jane's jealousy.

All in all, Spiderman 3 was a disappointment as the supposed end of the trilogy. Its good to know that given the excellent first weekend box office, the producers have said that they will be doing at least 3 more movies, which will give Sam Raimi (if he comes back) a chance to redeem himself for the film that was the low point of the trilogy.

It probably hasn't occurred to many people so far, but the age-old ritual that is going to the cinema is slowly going out of fashion... A few of us have questioned why we go to the cinema with other people when it is essentially a solitary experience (what with not wanting to talk etc.....). Also, with the rapidly advancing technology that most of us own in our TV room, you needn't leave the house to have a cinematic experience: who needs to sit with 200 other people when you can watch Lord Of The Rings on your 108 inch projector with Dolby 6.1 Surround Sound, all in the comfort of your Laz-E-Boy recliner? I have a feeling that people are starting to come around to the fact that the digital age is upon us; films can be downloaded in DVD quality from BitComet just as they are released, and then watched on Media Center PC's....

Its quite disconcerting that this is the case: I think going to the cinema is still a worthwhile way to spend your money, and despite what I have said, it will be some years before staying in can match the overall experience of seeing a film you have been waiting for (insert your preference here) months. My main gripe with the film industry is the price: going to the cinema nowadays can set you back 15 quid, which somewhat lessens the enjoyment you get out of it. This is probably down to the fact that big cinema's such as CineWorld are buying out all the smaller companies. Thats all very well, but lets be honest; when was the last time you saw an indie film being played at your local multiplex? It seems that this aspect is having a negative aspect on the smaller films that are made every year, and on our wallets.

The live action Transformers film comes out on the 27th July this year, and early screening reviews have stated that it is surprisingly good. It obviously has all the elements of a Michael Bay film: guns, explosions and car chases, but the cast are all said to put in good performances, especially Shia LaBeouf. I have been impressed with him in his other performances, in particular 'A Guide To Recognizing Your Saints', and honestly think that he may be on his way to being the best actor of his generation (he has been a big box-office draw so far, with Disturbia at the top of the box office for 3 weeks).

Anyway, all the footage and images I've seen of Transformers prove only one thing: that the robots themselves look fantastic. ILM (Industrial Light and Magic) have done a fantastic job in making the transformers and their transformations look realistic, which in a film that is basically about huge metal robots fighting, was the make or break element (take a look for yourself at the bottom of this page). Despite what all the 'hard-core' fans may think, Michael Bay was the right choice for this movie, especially when he has Steven Spielberg to help him with the lower-key moments of the film. Many have complained that he has changed the look of the Transformers; they wouldn't look anywhere near as cool if he hadn't, as the original transformers were box-like and wouldn't fit in (an old VW beetle? Definitely not the car Sam Witwicky would buy...)

Regardless of what people may have to say about this film in the coming months, I am extremely excited about this film, which may just be the dark-horse of the summer blockbusters; it has a lot of competition from Spider Man 3, Pirates 3 and Shrek 3, but I hope this film does well, so that they can make more in the future: the only complaint so far that I have heard is that people want more as soon as they have seen the film; I am sure this will turn into a summer franchise of sorts. If you are one of the lucky few who have seen the film, we would like to hear your opinions: what were your first impressions: good, bad or excellent? Did you think the CGI was good? etc etc...

I have, of course, seen Trainspotting. I wouldn't be able to call myself a film fan unless I had seen it, and it ranks highly in my favourite films. I'm sure many of you have also seen 28 Days Later, which did for zombie films what Alien did for sci-fi. Another excellent movie I watched recently was The Beach, which had a great twist. And the one thing that connects all these films is that they were directed by the one and only Danny Boyle.

Well, I have been waiting anxiously for his next film, Sunshine, to be released, and the time is finally upon us. Sunshine is set 50 years in the future, when the sun is dying. An international group of astronauts are sent to reignite the sun with a bomb the size of Manhattan. Now, many people have drawn parallels between the concepts of both Sunshine and Armageddon, but the similarities end with the story... As the crew of Icarus II (ironic name, huh?) edge closer to the sun, they become aware of the remains of Icarus I, which was the first attempt to reignite the sun which was disappeared. I'm not going to ruin the story, but there is more to Icarus I than meets the eyes; needless to say, all hells breaks lose and people die.Please check out the sidebar to watch the trailer...


I haven't seen the film yet, but as soon as its on general release, i will. Early reviews have been good, but people say that Boyle drops the ball a bit with the ending. If you have seen the film, I would really like to hear what you think about it: Did you think the ending was good? Do you think Danny Boyle is a great director?

When Daniel Craig was announced as the new James Bond, a load of websites popped up protesting against the fact that someone blond had been cast as the suave agent. Yes, BLOND. A tad petty perhaps? Well, I noticed that all the websites seemed to shut up after the release of Casino Royale. Probably due to the fact that both the film and the acting were excellent... I went to the most popular website today, craignotbond.com, and it has shut down! I suppose the administrator's would rather disappear than eat their words.

I personally thought that the film was excellent, with good set pieces and a believable storyline.
How many people thought that the Bond franchise was beyond redemption after the silly ice surfing sequence in Die Another Day? Pierce Brosnan was a good Bond, but it's important to bear in mind that the last Bond film based on one of Ian Fleming's books was Live and Let Die(?). Therefore its safe to assume that the last few films have had crap screenwriter's; none of them managed to achieve the grit that we saw in Casino Royale (especially the beginning sequence- the first kill). The only recent Bond film which comes anywhere near Casino Royale is Goldeneye, and its not a coincidence that Martin Campbell directed both. Its fallen to him twice to reinvent the Bond name, and he has been succesful both times; in Goldeneye he made the successful transition to the Cold War era, and in Casino Royale we appear to be in the modern day...

My main question is who would allow such a well known franchise to become so ridiculous? It was blisteringly obvious to the public that although the Bond films were entertaining, we were laughing at them, not really with them...