Casino Royale may be in danger of excessive hype, but I’ll weigh in with my thoughts tomorrow. Here’s another rave review, entitled “Jackpot,” from the Boston Globe:

• “In Daniel Craig, the Bond franchise has finally found a 007 whose cruel charisma rivals that of Sean Connery.”
• “The new James Bond is quick and muscular, and there is nothing remotely camp about him.”
• “No slight to Connery, Timothy Dalton, or Pierce Brosnan, but there’s something to be said for casting an actor of depth and creative daring as Bond. Craig hardly overplays the role, but he gives us proof of the young 007’s arrogance and immaturity, shows him tempered by mistakes, and even lets him fall in love with believable reluctance followed by commitment.”

What would it be like to spend decades in captivity by a ruthless enemy? We may get a glimpse tonight, as Battlestar Galactica introduces a character from Admiral Adama’s past: Lt. Novacek (above) was apparently presumed dead following a secret mission, but it turns out that he’s been in the Cylons’ clutches since the original war nearly 40 years earlier.

Gaius Baltar was irrational long before arriving aboard a base ship, and his sabbatical has only made him worse. Who knows if Baltar was reasonably sane prior to encountering Number Six on Caprica prior to the holocaust, but we can safely assume that decades of imprisonment and isolation have left their mark on Lt. Novacek.

It appears that tonight’s episode will explore a common theme on the show, one that Adama mentioned during the show’s miniseries: “The time comes when you can’t run from the things you’ve done.” Did Adama miscalculate in sending Novacek to his fate, or did he err in assuming that Novacek was dead?

The reviews are flowing in now for Casino Royale, and they are very favorable. Here are a few highlights courtesy of Yahoo! Movies:

• “The best Bond since Sean Connery.”
• “Eleven years ago director Campbell made GoldenEye, the first of the Brosnan Bond pictures. Casino Royale trumps it every which way.”
• “…Craig, speckled with facial cuts, plays Bond with an almost bruised virility…”
• “…should help newcomers and older viewers rediscover what made Sean Connery’s early Bond movies the best of the series”
• “Casino Royale doesn¿t play as dirty as the Bourne films, but the whole thing moves far lower to the ground than any of the newer Bond flicks.”
• “There’s one whopper of a reason why Casino Royale is the hippest, highest-octane Bond film in ages, and his name is Daniel Craig.”
• “…flat-out one of the best Bonds ever.”

This is a better reception than I can recall most Bond films getting, but there’s always a danger of hyperbole when it comes to new 007 movies. In my opinion, this is welcome news for a beloved film franchise that had, to say the least, shown its age in recent memory and, at worst, appeared very tired and worn out. Long live 007!

In honor of the release of Casino Royale, I’ve compiled my personal ranking of Bond films from best to worst. How does my list compare with yours?

• From Russia With Love (1963)
• Goldfinger (1964)
• Thunderball (1965)
• For Your Eyes Only (1981)
• Dr. No (1962)
• GoldenEye (1995)
• On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1969)
• You Only Live Twice (1967)
• The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)
• The Living Daylights (1987)
• Octopussy (1983)
• The World is Not Enough (1999)
• Live and Let Die (1973)
• Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)
• The Man with the Golden Gun (1974)
• Die Another Day (2002)
• A View to a Kill (1985)
• Diamonds Are Forever (1971)
• Moonraker (1979)
• Licence to Kill (1989)

Will Daniel Craig be the best Bond since Sean Connery? I think maybe he will, and I’m not alone. Some in the media have even gone as far as saying Craig is the best Bond ever now that the film has opened. I think that’s bold, and I’m not about to make that claim without having even seen Casino Royale myself. I do like what I have seen of the film via previews, but it will take one heck of a performance to eclipse Connery’s long shadow in the franchise.

Can he ever top Connery? That may be the challenge, as this story pointed out:

“[N]o matter how good Craig might prove to be in the role, he may never be able to surpass Connery’s defining performance in many fans’ eyes. ‘From all the reviews, I think [Craig] will be the best Bond since Connery,’ [said one fan.] ‘But Craig is interpreting a character that was formed by Connery. All the others have had to follow that template, and whoever follows Craig will have to as well.”

Nonetheless, I am thrilled that Casino Royale’s debut is finally here. Will anyone dare say it is the “Best Bond Since Goldfinger,” the Bond against which all Bond films are compared? (I personally prefer Thunderball and From Russia With Love.) Some have already said, as expected, that Royale is the best since Goldeneye, but tracing back all the way to 1964 for what many consider the signature 007 movie is a longer distance to travel. We’ll see soon. I’ll post my personal review on Saturday.