Absent are the over-the-top, gravity-defying stunts that have characterized 007 movies over the years. There's action, but it's surprisingly low-key (at least for Bond). There are no gadgets - in fact, there's no Q. The signature line of 'Bond, James Bond' keeps us waiting. Until its rousing introduction during the end credits, the 'James Bond Theme' is heard sparingly, during brief, subdued passages. It's impossible to say where the filmmakers will take Bond from here, but Casino Royale hints that it may be in a more down-to-earth direction than we're accustomed to. In order to retain a market niche, the Bond franchise had to strike out in a different direction - something less cartoonish and closer to the Ian Fleming source novels. For years now, the Bond formula has been drowning in a sea of rip-offs and pretenders, each more over-the-top than its predecessor. Forget everything you think you know about 007. This is Bond's 'origin' story and the only thin bit of continuity is Judi Dench's return as Madam M. As far as this movie is concerned, nothing in the previous 20 entries has happened. Craig isn't succeeding Brosnan he's re-inventing the role. The purpose of Casino Royale is to 're-boot' the franchise. Welcome to the new world of MI6's most storied agent. This is no longer the James Bond we know from the '60s, '70s, '80s, and '90s. With the ascension of Daniel Craig to the gun, tux, martini, and license to kill, seismic changes have occurred.

Brosnan's 007 was easily connected to the character previously played by Sean Connery, George Lazenby, Roger Moore, and Timothy Dalton.

When Pierce Brosnan took over the role of James Bond for Goldeneye, much was made about how the franchise was being 'modernized.' In reality, the only apparent changes were cosmetic.

Casino royale plot development