I went to see the new Bond flick yesterday. I left with very mixed impressions.
As some of the reviewers noted, this Bond was more real than previous renditions, more physical, yet more vulnerable. And on the whole, there was a lot less silliness in this picture than in any of the franchise's last 20 years or so.
But it felt too long; there were a number of loose ends; like most Bond movies the main woman is beautiful but painfully thin; and the plot--if Bond movies can be noted for them at all--was less than compelling. There's no diabolical mastermind in this movie plotting to take over or destroy the world. Of course, in one reviewer's analysis, it was this lack of grandiosity that made the movie more believable (and was perhaps why this movie lacked the silliness of other Bond movies cited above).
But I did like the Daniel Craig version of Bond a lot. So, I guess I'll cast my vote with the consensus view that Casino Royale is a much-needed jump-start to the 007 series (the heart-starting defibrillator Bond reaches for from the glove compartment of his Aston Martin perhaps an intential point of symbolicism meant to invoke Casino Royale's James Bond resuscitation).