2006, MGM/Columbia Pictures, Dir. Martin Campbell - Starring Daniel Craig, Eva Green, Mads Mikkelsen, Judi Dench, Jeffrey Wright, Giancarlo Giannini, Caterina Murino, Simon Abkarian, Isaach De Bankolé, Jesper Christensen, Ivana Milicevic, Tobias Menzies

Not since 1989 when Licence to Kill premiered has James Bond appeared more human, grittier, and raw than he does in Martin Campbell’s Casino Royale. Here we have one of film’s greatest heroes, a landmark character with such stage presence and reputation, making a comeback bigger than his ego. After Pierce Brosnan departed from the role in the camp-ridden but entertaining Die Another Day, the search for a new Bond garnered more controversy than some daily news, but rest assured that Daniel Craig is not only a worthy choice, he has already made his mark in the franchise. Like Batman Begins, the series deserved a reboot (despite some of my own worries) but the writers and producers have mapped out intricately the double-0’s future with great precision. Casino Royale is not just a good Bond movie, it is one of incredible veneer and passion, fueling itself not only on non-stop thrills but also our favorite spy’s character development. So far it has proved to be the year’s best action movie, and Craig promises an even brighter outlook on his role.

James Bond (Craig) has just been clearance to become a double-0 agent in MI-6, despite protests from his higher-up, M (Dench). After a high-pursuit chase in Madagascar, leaving a suspected terrorist dead and an embassy destroyed, the young spy is on shaky ground with the intelligence agency. M argues that he should stay behind on cases, but Bond has an inkling about a potential terrorist ring growing in parts of the world. As he is shipped from continent to continent, 007 ties these suspicions to a European financier named Le Chiffre (Mikkelsen), who is funding terrorism via airline stocks he continues to shorten. But Le Chiffre is not on steady ground himself with his clients - he’s losing money, which is why he sets up a high-stakes tournament of Texas Hold’Em in Montenegro (at…*gasp*…Casino Royale). Bond is sent by MI-6 as their mole, considering he’s the agency’s best card player. Yet Bond’s reckless attitude and inflating ego seem to cloud his judgement, and it takes a little romance from banker Vesper Lynd (Green) to help straighten him out.

Craig’s performance as Bond is comparable to Sean Connery and Timothy Dalton, combining the former’s droll wit and the latter’s rigid personality. But in essence, his job is so shockingly unique, you’d never imagine that he could be connected to either actor. Perhaps it’s because Casino Royale takes such a jaunting turn on the concept that Craig seems to be so spectacular, but I feel he’s allowing the character to grow onto him in time. He’s not trying to be too different, but he (and the writers, including Crash’s own Paul Haggis) aren’t just aiming to go skin-deep. Eva Green is surprisingly lovely as the tragic figure Vesper Lynd, a woman whose love for James eventually draws a major turning point in the spy’s career, and one that capstones such a vast history. Mads Mikkelsen also drives humanity into his character of Le Chiffre, downplaying former camp in Bond villains and relying on a common terrorist persona. Jeffrey Wright and Judi Dench allow for some quaint comic relief, as CIA agent Felix Leiter and M respectively.

Action fans, look no further. The best scenes of the year are stuffed within the film’s 2 hour and 20 minute frame - choreographed with some grace and tension (quite the combination) that it’ll blow you away. These never feel like the Bond stunts you’ve seen before. There’s a tinge of something funky fresh in every jump, kick, and pull of the trigger that 007 makes. Director Campbell even manages to make watching a poker tournament as thrilling as it possibly can. It is Casino’s dingy, dark undertones that lead to a new dimension of Bond. Le Chiffre has a bit of frightening torture that’ll leave some audience members clenching themselves, and even some heavier violence than earlier films. But moreover, what makes this 21st installment so damned interesting, is how Bond’s vulnerability is tested. For once (maybe since Live and Let Die, or so I really remember), the world’s greatest spy drops his own blood on the job. This is not only a testament from the producers to expose a down-in-the-dirt hero, but one that finally argues that James Bond is only human.

Casino Royale is dark and downright incredible. I was stunned and moved by its ability to rotate a series’ point of view so abruptly, and have such gleaming results. But no matter what year it is, what trouble our world is in, there’s always solace to find within him - who’s last lines Craig repeats with determination - he’s Bond. James Bond.

2006, Columbia Pictures, Dir. Marc Forster - Starring Will Ferrell, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Dustin Hoffman, Emma Thompson, Queen Latifah, Tony Hale, Tom Hulce, Linda Hunt, Denise Hughes, Andrew Rothenberg, Kristen Chenoweth, Keith Kupferer, Rengin Altay

After Talladega Nights, I was worried whether Will Ferrell’s audience appeal would continue to wane. But then a project came his way, which allowed the comedian to reconfigure his shtick, develop a new character, and find new ground in the drama department. Director Mark Forster, whose credits range from the haunting Monster’s Ball to the splendidly magical Finding Neverland, combines elements from both tragedies and comedies to create the whimsical and spontaneous Stranger than Fiction. Sketching a defined line between the two genres, the film takes hold of a genuine idea and makes it interesting from beginning to end. You’ll find much to laugh about, but don’t be shocked if you end up with a box of tissues in your lap. It gives us neither an existential yarn (like I Heart Huckabees) nor a Farrelly Brothers rendition. Like life - whose twists and turns are narrated with great precision - Forster’s film is unpredictable and a fantastic voyage of sorts.

Harold Crick (Ferrell) is a plain vanilla gentleman whose life lacks tremendous spice. He wears the same suits every morning, brushes his teeth in the same pattern, and makes the same commute to his job at the IRS each day - counting footsteps included. Harold doesn’t want to have “fun”, but through some unfortunate events, his wristwatch is going to have some. Crick wakes up one morning only to find his life being oddly narrated by a refined English woman. As he attempts to audit a vociferous yet attractive baker Ana Pascal (Gyllenhaal), the voice mocks his stiff nature and prevents him from doing his job. The voice is that of Kay Eiffel (Thompson), a depressed author who unknowingly used Harold as the main character to her new masterpiece. But Eiffel is stuck with writer’s block, because she doesn’t know how to kill Harold. But when our poor protagonist learns this, he consults literary professor Jules Hebert (Hoffman) for help to find this woman. Just as Crick is learning to enjoy life to its fullest, Eiffel has him marked for his impending death. He learns he must find her before it’s too late.

Ferrell subdues his tangential brand of humor for a low-key role, and the turn is greatly appreciated. This is, to date, the comedian’s deepest emotional work to his record, and enough of an apology for his lame summer spectacle. Despite his character’s obvious differences with the entire cast, Ferrell exhibits a unique chemistry with everyone, ranging from his feeble attempts at romance with Gyllenhaal, and thought sessions with Hoffman. Herein lays the potential for another comedian who can successfully exhibit skills in dramatic pieces. Gyllenhaal is a sweet yet spicy companion for Ferrell’s Crick, exposing feistiness throughout the runtime. Moreover, she is a strong and developed love interest, which is lacking in so many films today. Dustin Hoffman returns to his lovable quirky psyche for the role of Dr. Jules Hibbert, a wise-cracking yet somewhat oblivious professor who wouldn’t seem like the right catalyst for Ferrell. Emma Thompson is underused yet effective as the depressed Eiffel, and Queen Latifah’s role as her assistant seems completely misplaced.

Director Marc Forster constructs his movie much like Harold Crick’s life - adding acute mental visuals into the final cut, as to further explain something much simpler. Every locale, city street, or crowd is cut and trimmed to minimalist perfection, to the degree that is everything is detailed in a very thoughtful fashion. As Harold makes his way to the bus stop, Thompson’s omniscient voice carefully notes the way he ties his necktie, leaving the audience to actually ponder about our own little habits. It’s Forster’s tiring scène work that leaves the final product to be a simplistic blank canvas for us to study. It argues the choices given by life, its drive, and the need to break new ground. Moreover, Stranger than Fiction is a cross between comedy and tragedy, an argument that the story itself tries to understand. After the credits roll, you’ll smile - you’ll get your happy ending. What it is, I won’t say, but it will surprise. Best of all, Fiction’s happy ending not only satisfies, but justifies itself. That, quite simply, justified the purpose of me even seeing the film.

Stranger than Fiction is a short artistic work that never becomes pretentious or too bland, never loses a comedic opportunity, and can hit some heartstrings if you’re willing to open up. Ferrell and the cast please, and I strongly suggest you take a wide open mind into the theater with you.

2006, 20th Century Fox, Dir. Larry Charles - Starring Sacha Baron Cohen, Ken Davitian

Where to start with this one….hmmm. If you haven’t turned on your TV recently, or just don’t know enough about the comedian himself, chances are you’ve never heard of Borat. He’s a middle-aged journalist from the country of Kazakhstan, has a thick bushy mustache, and knows nothing about American culture. He is, to Americans, your average oblivious foreigner. But there’s more to a movie like Borat than just mangling the English language and watching him stumble across New York City like an idiot. Here is a satire - so simple, yet so remarkably sharp - that blows away the comedies of today. The gangly character is the brainchild of British-Jewish comedian Sacha Baron Cohen, better known for the moronic hip-hopster Ali G. Cohen flounders across the country in disguise, with Ken Davitian portraying fellow Kazakh producer Azamat Bagotov, interviewing real American folk and throwing in as much offensive and awkward conversation as possible. But Borat brings out the worst of people - exposing skin-deep bigotry and ignorance - through the miracle of comedy. But you can’t help laughing - in fact, you’re bound to be in tears by the end. Borat is genius at its best.

The plot aforementioned doesn’t really need to be described anymore, and I’d prefer to save as much for you to find out for yourselves. Borat Sagdiyev (Cohen) has been recruited by his government with Azamat (Davitian) to learn more about American culture as to benefit their own country. Trekking out to New York City, the reporter meets several people before learning the miracles of cable television. It is there that he watches a show of such veneer - known to us as Baywatch - and our hero is lovestruck by blonde bombshell Pamela Anderson. But even though Borat is married, he still wants to meet this Pam woman. So in one fell swoop, Borat packs his bags anyway and persuades Azamat to travel cross-country. In their trip, they encounter and interview a great variety of people, all ending in wild consequences. Again, I refuse to tell anymore - the laughs come a mile a minute, and to delve on one could ruin the domino effect. Let’s just leave it at that.

Cohen has created such an elaborate, bizarre world all around Borat. Laced with anti-Semitism and bigotry, it’s no wonder why the Kazakh government has been up in flames over the portrayal of their country. Borat brings up every category of offensive humor possible, jabbing at every race, creed, and language - and whipping out gags involving bestiality, incest, and other scatological tidbits. Sure, you may squint at some the film’s filthy humor, but it’s hard to not laugh. Borat is too lovable - he means no harm to anyone he meets, he’s just not like them. He tries to be as hospitable as possible, even though Americans aren’t used to being kissed as a greeting. It’s hard to really critique Cohen as his character, as he has become a wholly different person in the making. Ken Davitian is in the same boat, as he has become Azamat Bagotov in essence. The two as a comic duo are inseparable, and watching the two communicate is hilarious.

Example: Our suited protagonist enters a gun shop, and asks politely what kind of gun would be best “to shoot a Jew.” The storeowner looks at Borat, and without a pause, suggests a particular handgun. It’s Borat’s un-edited vignettes along his road trip that fire up the social satire, letting the character narrate his stops with sly political commentary trickling underneath. One minute, he will throw a joke about the nature of American government, next minute he’s making a joke involving STDs. The variety of director Larry Charles’ final picture shows surprisingly depth for such situational comedy, and exhibits Cohen’s talent for improvisational humor. Every person we meet is stunned or shocked by his behavior, and most of all, it’s always going to surprise us. Is there good reasoning for some people becoming infuriated with Borat’s casual racism, or is it for the better? I vote for the latter, otherwise the opportunity for good satire is missed. Cohen stresses the uselessness of political correctness through his own humorous displays of rancor.

If you are easily offended by jokes involving race, sex, and other crude acts, then this is simply not your type of movie. But for those who appreciate laugh-out-loud acts of silliness and dirty jokes, as well as poignant satire, Borat has your name written all over it. It is, in essence, the funniest movie of 2006.

2006, Lionsgate/Twisted Pictures, Dir. Darren Lynn Bousman - Starring Tobin Bell, Shawnee Smith, Angus MacFadyen, Bahar Soomekh, Dina Meyer, J. LaRose, Debra Lynne McCabe, Kim Roberts, Dylan Trowbridge, Alan Van Sprang, Stefan Georgiou, Barry Flatman, Tim Burd

While the horror genre has declined rapidly in the past ten years, there has been one particular franchise that still seems to gather my attention - and that is the Saw series. The works have been a massive success - both critically (well, that all depends) and especially commercially. The trilogy has proved to be Lionsgate’s centerpiece - three films made on the small buck, which pull out cash cow B.O. returns. But there’s more to Saw than its gratuitous exploration of blood and human entrails, and that’s makes Saw 3 such a pleasure to watch. There’s always the sneaking suspicion the audience gets watching the stories and games unfold, but before you know it, we’ve had any earlier thoughts erased by an explosive finish. Saw 3 goes beyond the games, and examines relationships between characters - with Jigsaw, his twisted accomplice Amanda, and their subjects. The viewer is brought on a vicious trip that changes the series as we know it, and any horror fan will find something to enjoy about the film.

Where we last left off, Jigsaw’s (better known as John Kramer, played by Bell) health is declining rapidly, and he has chosen the young Amanda (Smith), a sole survivor of his traps, to further his cruel legacy upon the world. Saw 3 focuses on two of their subjects - a young divorcee doctor named Lynn (Soomekh), and Jeff (MacFadyen), a grieving father whose son was lost after being hit by a car. Lynn’s “game” is simple - hospitalize Jigsaw and keep his heart rate going, but if it drops completely, a custom-designed neck bomb will detonate on Lynn. Jeff’s game revolves around the death of his son - he has the opportunity to confront the newly-released criminal who killed his son. But in doing so, he must either forgive or forget those responsible involved in the case. Will Jeff forgive the judge who gave the criminal a mere five months in jails, or the sole witness who fled the scene? Meanwhile, as Lynn moves frantically to keep Jigsaw alive, Amanda wonders if she is being ignored by her master - and begins to ponder her life without him. As relationships are made and broken, Jigsaw has a larger design planned for everyone…

For any horror movie to work, an audience must constantly fear its villain. Jason Voorhees’ steadfast hatred for promiscuous teenagers led to screams in the aisles, Freddy Krueger caused insomnia, and Michael Myers puts fear in parents’ hearts during the Halloween weekend. Jigsaw heralds a new generation of bad guys - he is a full-bodied character, and Tobin Bell’s flawless portrayal is pitch perfect for such campy fare. Jigsaw isn’t your ordinary guy, but he thinks he is. Hell, he thinks he’s doing the world a favor gracing us with his presence. Bell’s smooth pronunciation and slow drawl doesn’t strike fear in the hearts immediately, but the audience realizes he must be feared. With this, Bell succeeds wholly - he is a gem for Saw. Shawnee Smith is a little too aggressive, almost stereotypically aggressive, but as an accomplice, she works. Her natural acting style contradicts with Bell, but there is good reason for such. Our two subjects - Soomekh and MacFadyen - do as much the supporting characters are supposed to do. Alone, they’re not very engaging or convincing, but they play along with everything anyway.

Saw 2 was made on a $4 million budget, which then grossed 36 times said budget. Saw 3 will be a follow-up success - but even with an $11 million budget, there’s not much to be said with creative differences. Director Bousman, who was picked up after Saw 2’s gross, replicates the same shaky, grimy camerawork and visual effects. But here, the director is given the daunting task of reworking several flashbacks he never directed - and these surprisingly succeed. Since one of Saw’s strongest attributes is its continuity, one must recognize Bousman’s persistence in vividly reconstructing the original bathroom cell, even summoning old faces back to the crime scene. Moreover, the third installment’s bloodletting returns to form, but let it be known that the faint of heart will not be able to handle this. Saw 3 begins with some pedestrian violence, but takes a turn for the twisted when Doctor Lynn performs some surgery on Jigsaw. If you couldn’t handle Hannibal, you won’t be able to withstand this.

Saw 3 is a solid, entertaining, and shocking conclusion to the first three films. I refuse to say anything about the finale, and for die-hard fans, they’ll be left speechless. I’m no Fangoria nut, but this proves to be good Halloween fare. Might want to skip on dinner beforehand, too.

2006, Columbia Pictures, Dir. Sofia Coppola - Starring Kirsten Dunst, Jason Schwartzman, Marianne Faithfull, Steve Coogan, Judy Davis, Asia Argento, Rip Torn, Molly Shannon, Rose Byrne, Shirley Henderson, Jean-Christophe Bouvet, Al Weaver, James Lance

Early critical reaction to Sofia Coppola’s latest work Marie Antoinette has led to some rather harsh arguments against it. Basing her film upon historian Antonia Fraser’s informal biography of the famed - and executed - French queen, the director takes more creative control than her father received during Apocalypse Now. Sure, what audiences predict is a simple-minded historical yarn, rather than the New Age alternative product it actually became. Critics raised eyebrows when 80s band Bow Wow Wow plays over a montage rather than the traditional classical score, but this felt appropriate. Unlike Brian Helgeland’s Knight’s Tale, Coppola is not bridging the time gap for nostalgic measures, but rather visualizing Marie Antoinette as a royal version of Molly Ringwald. People may find the final cut to be a hit or miss, but there is enough style and hinted substance throughout this project for me to be entertained. Since when do historical figures have to be portrayed in such immense detail that it loses its inner touch? I appreciated the director’s casting choices, her minimalist yet resplendent camerawork, and its lack of pedantic dialogue that could have made this film stuffier than Marie’s wardrobe. This is not your average film, but that’s its specialty.

Marie Antoinette (Dunst) is forced away from her home of Austria, only to become the new Dauphine of France. Moving into the elaborate kingdom of Versailles, the young woman is then matched with the naive Louis XVI (Schwartzman), the heir to the throne and avid key maker. Her life begins to change radically, beginning with her morning activities straight to the minute she is led to her bedroom and tucked to sleep. Soon, the wealth and power begins to drain straight to her head, spending extravagant amounts of money on shoes, hair-dos, and enough food to leave any Cheesecake Factory franchise in shame. Versailles virtually becomes a John Hughes inspired high school, allowing every rich jocks and sluts to stroll around looking for job opportunities. Marie has become despised in several social circles, mainly due to her naiveté around enemies Madame du Barry (Argento) and others. Coppola details the future queen’s reign till her fateful demise that sparked the French Revolution, ranging from Louis’ fear of having intimate relations with Marie to their eventual childbirths.

Forget about accents for once; lose the concept that Marie Antoinette is going to be portrayed as a generic queen character with antique humor and no mutual emotional connection between her and the audience. Kirsten Dunst’s Marie is your average girl who has found herself in a larger-than-life scenario. She loses all her friends and belongings to live a life of reputation and wealth, having little understanding of basic government functionings. In this respect, Dunst’s role as the lost woman seems to echo a familiar theme in Coppola’s works (Dunst in Virgin Suicides, Scarlett Johansson in Lost in Translation). The actress seems to just go along with everything, handling her daily affairs like an eternal party. Dunst is a charismatic and charming leading lady, and has fantastic chemistry with the deadpan Jason Schwartzman. Jason’s performance leads to the film’s central humor, as his persistent fear of “loving” Marie gives some wonderful comic relief when needed. Yet still, the audience cares for Louis XVI, even if he does clash with Marie’s wild behavior. Steve Coogan’s role as the queen’s messenger and Asia Argento as her foremost enemy are solid supporting characters to add to the mixture.

Filmed entirely on location in Versailles, the director has an eye for the palace’s distinct Rococo style and appreciates the widescreen shots of landscapes and decadent hallways. And if there hasn’t been a more appetizing montage dealing with food, than Marie Antoinette truly takes the cake - no pun intended. All and all, I feel Coppola succeeded in her mission: to transform the legendary figure into an informal character, stuck in a monumental tragedy that is handled like an alternate ending to Pretty in Pink. Gone is the Marie of the history books, but a re-imagining of the woman as the 80s archetypal diva, leaving her extravagant behavior to only be a side note in the story. Hell, I appreciated the quirky soundtrack, as it provides an upbeat change from the hideously boring classical score during ballroom scenes. The director never tries to aggravate elitist critics and audience members with her change in music; she just prefers something people can associate with, sans the immediate hackneyed attribute.

To cut to the chase, Marie Antoinette is a bizarre but enjoyable piece that reworks history into passing entertainment with artistic flair. Some audience members should not expect a meaty story with extensive detail to the queen’s life - director Sofia has something in mind already, and she’s only going to let them eat cake.