QUOTE(mouthbreather @ May 29 2007, 09:20 AM) [snapback]382641[/snapback]
Possibly the best Bond installment since the 70's Roger Moore era.
It relied much less on gadgets and far-fetched stunts, and much more on the characters and storyline.
Recommended.
This is the common wisdom on this film, but I (mostly) don't buy it. I thought the stunts were equally far-fetched as any Bond film. The opening construction site chase, the airport car chase, and the ending fight in the sinking building were all outlandish. Not as realistic as the Bourne films, which were said to have been the model for the more "realistic" Bond. Although I'll grant your they were a little less silly than the previous Bond film, such as the parasurfing away from the collapsing glacier. More realistic than previous Bonds is faint praise.
The gadgets were a bit toned down. No invisible cars. But you still had the Jack Bauer model miracle cell phone and the medical tracking implant, verified by portable xray scanner.
We were also promised less double entendres, which got out of control and pretty silly with Halle Berry. But I thought some of the dialog in Casino Royale got pretty silly at times, particularly the scene in the train.
I still enjoyed the film tremendously, but just as much as the Pierce Brosnan Bonds. Where I was disappointed was in the realism claims made in marketing the picture, which led me to believe that the film would be more like "From Russia With Love." The film was more like "For Your Eyes Only", the Roger Moore pic that was said at its time to be a return to a more "realistic" Bond.
QUOTE(Tony @ May 29 2007, 08:36 AM) [snapback]382603[/snapback]
George Miller only directed 'Babe: Pig in the City' which has been called his best feature.
Miller produced and wrote Babe and was rumored to have had a hand in the directing, although it was credited to a pal.