"Casino Royale" and "Stranger Than Fiction"

I recently saw "Casino Royale" (the new James Bond) and "Stranger Than Fiction". I really enjoyed both.

Stranger Than Fiction is a nice movie which despite being a one-trick pony plot-wise is actually very entertaining. The premise (a relatively staid man hears his life narrated by an unseen omniscient voice), while original doesn't really provide for much of a drive. Fortunately the cast is so strong that you don't notice that there's really no movie there. Will Farrel has followed Jim Carry's path from course funny-man to Leading Actor.

Casino Royale takes the Bond film back to the future. Based on Ian Flemming's first Bond book, this film takes the liberty to completely break with tradition. Of course, it is still Bond, so the standards (sex, pistols, gadgets, cards) are still present. It's just that the man in the middle is finally portrayed as a human. With frailties, desires, and (the thing that makes him most endearing) an almost indomitable will.

The stakes are not quite End-Of-The-World, but the script is so tight (except for a pointless and bizarre torture scene) that you don't notice the only thing in danger is the stock-market.

Bond pictures are always PG-13 and this one is no exception. They seem to have worked very hard to remove the sexuality. Bizarrely, there's a lot of violence, more than you would expect from a PG-13 movie. I don't really understand why they bother working on the lower rating (or why the rating system allows it). Especially since this may be the most mature Bond film ever, why not just take the R-rating... I guess what I am saying is that there wasn't enough nudity.