Just got back from "Casino Royale" and I have to say that I really liked it. I thought it was a perfect way to pump some new blood into the franchise and I can't wait to see where they take it from here.

But it's kind of weird. It feels like a reboot, but it also feels very much like an old Sean Connery style Bond movie. I really would like to speak with people who say that it's a complete reboot to see their reasoning.

I mean, many of the old James Bond ticks are there. The music sounded very Johny Barry-esque. There are the disposable Bond "girls." There was more of an emphasis on the rugged side of Bond, which to me, seemed VERY Connery-ish (you have to use the suffix "ish" instead of "esque" when referencing Connery). So yeah, don't go into the movie expecting a complete "Batman Begins" type overhaul.

I like that there seemed to be more of an emphasis on the effects of violence. Bond's actions had a direct effect on everyone around him. Many of the kills seemed a little more heavy thematically than in some of the previous Bonds.

I'm a huge fan of the Bond series. I like the gadget Bond movies and I like the non-gadget Bond movies. This movie fell more heavily into the non-gadget side of the equation, though there were a couple of neat gadgets. The gadgets they did have were grounded a lot more in reality than previous Bond inventions.

I also like that the villain's motives seemed a lot more grounded in reality than a lot of previous villains. Pumping money to terrorist organizations is something real and something that you can imagine Bond fighting against, whereas fighting villains who are going to nuke Fort Knox or who have an underground lair seems very cheesy. Those storylines were good for their time and place, but I'm not so sure that they'd work thematically in the post 9/11 age.

Daniel Craig is the real deal. I don't want to declare him the best Bond, because this is only one movie, but if he makes a few more just like this, I think he may end up giving both Connery and Brosnan a run for their money. Though I do have a fond place in my heart for Roger Moore, since he was my first introduction to the character.

Daniel Craig was really really great though. He made the character seem authentic and real. This may be partly due to the lack of cheesy Bond one-liners which typically plague other Bond movies. I'm so used to the other Bond movies, that I almost missed the one-liners, though I'm glad they're going in a new direction. The one-liners he did have seemed natural and clever. There was little for Mike Meyers to pull from for his next movie Austin Powers movie, which is a good thing.

I'll write more on this later...

Matt