John Huston
Casino Royale

"James Bond 007 Casino Royale", the original.

I'm talking about the 1967 film that saw several directors behind the camera. In the credits, the main one appears as John Huston, but upon further examination, the names of Val Guest, Ken Hughes, Joseph McGrath, and Robert Parrisch emerge. The result? It's easily summarized by the title itself: a mess, or as Woody Allen, one of the actors involved in this lively film, said, "a real shambles."

This is the typical Hollywood production film that employed endless resources, in terms of actors, settings, and special effects, to impress the viewer who, after all, in the '60s, would come out of the theater certainly confused by the plot but satisfied with the great bombardment of outrageous events, great actors, beautiful women, explosions, action, and impactful music that the film offered.

With certainly exorbitant costs, due to the cast composed of first-rate stars, among which stand out David Niven as Sir James Bond, the historical father of all future Bonds, Peter Sellers as the bespectacled Evelyn Tremble, a novice yet slightly awkward James Bond, Woody Allen as the villain Dr. Noah, who, due to manifest inferiority to Sir Bond, sets up an absurd array of clones and chemicals. Joanna Pettet as Mata Bond, the beautiful daughter of Sir Bond, John Huston himself, the sensual Ursula Andress on the side of good, the great Orson Welles as the skillful but unfortunate villain Le Chiffre. Also worth mentioning are Daliah Lavi, Deborah Kerr, William Holden, Charles Boyer, George Raft, Jean-Paul Belmondo, Terence Cooper, Barbara Bouchet, Jacqueline Bisset, Derek Nimmo, Ronnie Corbett, Duncan MacRae, Anna Quale.

The film is a chain of fragmented and piled events seasoned with super special effects, secret locations, explosions, dozens of characters, and very sensual beautiful women, thousands of extras, and a grand finale with a brawl involving cavalry, legionaries, Indians, police, and anyone else in a demented "everyone against everyone else." In essence, it's a kind of parodic farce, with an absurd and semi-uplifting ending. In short, nothing to do with all the James Bond films that followed.

Difficult to follow and grasp a true logic. They seem like self-contained microstories, or rather, poorly mixed stories that rely on the actors. At the time, it was enough for entertainment: the great mass of things seen, among stars and technical innovations, filled and satisfied the "animal" cinema-goer. Thus, a perfect film for the cinema of sensation, the cinema of the past, not the home video kind.

 Not to forget the wonderful music of Burt Bacharach, another luxurious addition to this circus of a film, which, through swing, jazz, and ballads, skillfully supports the entire soundtrack. The pieces written for this film have gone down in history and are still today performed by modern artists or used in television services, such as in advertising. Just remember "The Look Of Love", a true classic.