"Nobody Does It Better..."

I had the great pleasure of watching CASINO ROYALE earlier today. I'm a devoted fan of James Bond, especially the original novels by Ian Fleming. While I have always liked the movies, they pale in comparison to the books. Absolutely nobody has ever gotten the portrayal of Bond correct in the movies, until now. Daniel Craig nails the part, and portrays Bond more like what Ian Fleming had imagined.

Fleming's Bond was a cold-blooded, ruthless killer who had a soft spot for the ladies. Fleming described Bond as a cruel man, resembling Hoagie Carmichael. Fleming's Bond used very few gadgets, prevailing by his wits, his gun, and absolute ruthless determination. The realism in the Fleming novels is palpable. They fairly well sum up the menace of the Cold War. Fleming had no small part in the intelligence game. He served in WWII, as well as having a hand in the Cold War spy game after WWII. When the guy wrote about spies and assassins, he was very believable. That's because Fleming's character was based on men he knew and worked with.

Daniel Craig brings Fleming's gritty realism back to Bond. In the movie, we see Bond on his first assignment as a 00 agent, an elite killer for Britain's MI-6. This Bond is not so smooth or polished as what we've come to expect from Bond. He's arrogant, cold, and calculating. Instead of using some fancy piece of science fiction to dispatch the bad guys, Bond has to get physical in the worst possible ways. There's very few gadgets in this movie. The ones that are there actually exist. Well, almost. There are no watch-lasers. No Lotus Espirits that turn into submarines.

The villain isn't some comic-book character with an island superfortress. Instead, he's an arms dealer who finances terrorists.

Much as Fleming portrayed him, Bond is actually human. He bleeds. He feels pain. He exercises bad judgment. The classic Bond that we've come to know in the movies is suave, debonair, and perfect. This Bond is actually a person. There has been some grief given to the humanization of Bond. I think it's perfect. For one, this is how Fleming portrayed him. Also, I've always found it more exciting for a normal person to overcome extraordinary circumstances through guts and determination. An action movie isn't all that fun unless one actually thinks the character could really be killed. When Bond is tortured in this movie, it's almost too real. The superman isn't nearly as interesting as the normal man doing extraordinary things at risk of life and limb. Bond actually has to spend time in a hospital. Again, this is much closer to what Fleming had in mind with the character. In the novels, Bond goes to the brink of death and insanity many times, and doesn't bounce back all the time.

The first Bond movie was DR. NO, which was made several years after the first novel was written. Though the first movie, the original Bond novel was CASINO ROYALE. Made during the height of the Cold War, the spy craze caught on big time as a result of this movie. Sean Connery shot to stardom portraying Agent 007, and a film icon was born.

Having seen all the Bond flicks several times, I think I can now rate the various Bonds. My criteria is simply this: how close does the movie Bond match up with the character as created by Ian Fleming? My favorite Bonds in order:

1. Daniel Craig. The guy nails it, pure and simple. Bond is a gritty killer, with no frills attached. He likes the finer things in life, sure. But he's not afraid to get physical. He's the embodiment of Fleming's Bond. Nobody has done it better. However, he doesn't look like Bond. Bond was black-haired, Craig's a blonde. But this really is a nitpick. The action sequences are pretty realistic, and Bond takes a beating.

2. Sean Connery. Connery pulls off the ruthless, cruel killer very well, balanced with a guy who likes the finer things in life. FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE is my favorite Connery Bond

3. Pierce Brosnan. A very good Bond, Brosnan had the cold killer thing down pretty well, along with the supreme arrogance that Bond needs. The movies still got a bit cartoonish with the gadgets and action. But the scene in THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH where Bond drops his ex-lover with a close-range shot is exactly what Fleming's Bond would have done. GOLDENEYE is probably the best flick Brosnan did.

4. Timothy Dalton. A good Bond as well, just too suave and debonair. Too many gadgets and cartoonish action sequences. Even in LICENSE TO KILL. THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS is one of my favorite Bond movies.

5. George Lazenby. The Bond nobody remembers, but an excellent portrayal nonetheless. A one-shot Bond, ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE is a pretty good take on the character. Not much gadgetry, and Telly Savalis is one of the best Bond villains ever.

6. Roger Moore. The worst Bond of the bunch, but I think it was the scripts as opposed to the actor. He's a great actor, and he's the first Bond that I remember. I saw MOONRAKER in the theater as a kid. Moore's movies were WAY too cartoonish with the gadgets, villains, and action sequences. There was very little believable about Moore's Bond. However, he did come closer in some movies than in others. Notably THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN and FOR YOUR EYES ONLY. A VIEW TO A KILL is the second worst Bond movie of all time, surpassed only by MOONRAKER. THE SPY WHO LOVED ME is right up there in the awful department. All starring Roger Moore.

To summarize; I'd say that Daniel Craig is the best Bond ever. He's tough, gritty, realistic, and cruel. No metrosexual spies here. This is what Fleming had in mind with the character, and this is a great re-set of the Bond movies. Let's hope this continues.