And now we can all relax.
the blog uses this week’s entry to settle the matter once and for all, aka my own interpretation of the pre-title sequences and whether they relate directly or otherwise to the entire film’s plot.
It took a while to return to Fleming’s 1953 novel Casino Royale. Back in late May when I published a cursory review, I had ideas of re-reading the novel again and possibly writing a supplemental review in the near future. Here we are in early August already. Tempus Fugit.
Everybody on Facebook, Twitter, and elsewhere has already shared their two cents. I myself have engaged in some cordial back and forth episodes with 00 fans on Twitter since Monday. As far as using the blog as a platform to reveal innermost thoughts, I preferred digesting the announcement and let it simmer a few days while my imagination let loose a bit, and here we are.
Brownjohn does not hold the same iconic status as Binder or Kleinman. The latter redefined the title sequences at a time when computer generated enhanced imagery took flight whereas the former produced a steady, quality, and occasionally memorable body of work. Brownjohn, in contrast, only partook in two films, FRWL and GF, yet it can be argued that his input also helped pave the way for how the title sequences are designed to this very day.
I believe it was Cubby Broccoli who was quoted as saying that the role is bigger than the actor playing it. How could he be wrong? The franchise has lasted 6 decades and counting with 6 different actors and counting. If only one actor could truly handle the role, the franchise would have died long ago because audiences would not have responded in kind.
In many cases however, supporters of a property tend to expend a certain amount of liquid in order to possess articles, large or small, related to their obsession. By holding something, or in other cases, showing off a possession, one feels more deeply invested in the hobby, so to speak. Welcome, readers, to the world of collecting, 007 style.