The black-and-white and intercut nature of the first and second kill feel all very art-house but there is still an undercurrent of humour there (albeit very dark) but more importantly the film sets out one of the big thematic concerns that runs throughout the film: Violence and the repercussions of said violence. The pre-titles are one of my favourites in the series for the simple reason that it sets the tone for the next two hours so well. It’s by far one of the greatest looking Bond movies. I know Roger Deakins won plaudits for his work on 'Skyfall', but Mehuex’s lighting and camerawork here is great and the movie is beautifully glossy, opulent and stylised. It’s almost like the director had a personality bypass – and the style is helped along with a rather remarkable turn by DP Phil Mehuex. I know 'Goldeneye' was an excellent movie but the sheer ambition of telling the story of Bond’s origins immediately outweigh Campbell’s earlier 1995 effort. Its all quite shocking considering the film was directed by the same Martin Campbell who made 'Vertical Limit' and 'Beyond Borders' only a few years previously. The first thing that immediately hits you when watching CR is quite how good-looking and stylish the film is. I've written a few of these essay types for some of the Brosnan Bond films and they provided lively debates before, so I thought I'd share some thoughts of Daniel's first outing, Casino Royale:
