A pattern emerges when you take a look at the villains of the James Bond movies in order. It’s something that even Casino Royale director Martin Campbell noticed, which is part of why there’s such a gap in installments helmed by his steady hand. The character of Le Chiffre certainly differs from previous Bond villains, and actor Mads Mikkelsen recently shared some good reasons why that’s true, even with a classic touch that Campbell insisted on with his sinister gambler.
During a GQ video interview, the Danish actor, who can currently be seen in Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny, made a strong case for why the main antagonist in the 21st 007 adventure isn’t on the same wavelength as Auric Goldfinger or even Raoul Silva. The key to being so different from his baddie brethren is in the stakes, as Mikklesen described Le Chiffre as follows:
He’s a normal person. He’s not taking over the world, he’s not one of those guys. He’s in it for the money, and if Bond didn’t bumped into his way, they would never have met. It’s not that he’s after anyone. So obviously he’s vulnerable. There’s people above him, people used to violence in a different way than he is. He’s a different kind of villain, that’s for sure.
Casino Royale sets this perception up perfectly, as when Le Chiffre is asked if he believes in God, he substitutes that deity for another power he holds near and dear: “a reasonable rate of return.” This financial terrorist doesn't want to rule the world, and he's not totally focused on shaking up the order of power either. So long as he makes a killing on his investments, he's happy to leave the rough stuff to other, more interested parties.
Mads Mikklesen sets the character up so perfectly with his delivery, and as we see throughout the first of Daniel Craig’s James Bond movies, his actions are mostly dictated by his financial motivations. It’s only when Commander Bond start to interfere that the Quantum/SPECTRE agent literally wants to bust his balls.
Even that enterprise led to Mikkelsen and Daniel Craig dreaming up brutal tortures that director Martin Campbell had to walk his leads back on. Still, as Mads revealed in this interview, Campbell was all about pushing the boundaries of what Bond films could do. It’s the attitude that led the Goldeneye director to turn down several 007 films before Casino Royale came around with a fresh take on hero and villain alike.
That didn’t stop Martin Campbell from wanting to add a touch of classic Bond villainy to Le Chiffre’s character. That's where the weeping of blood from an eye disfigurement came into play. As Mads Mikkelsen revealed earlier in this interview, that decision came from this franchise tradition that his director was looking to uphold:
That was one of the things that [Martin Campbell] insisted on, because real Bond villains has ‘something.’ Golden teeth, or an extra nipple, or something. So he went for the eye thing.
Blending the traditional with the unconventional, Casino Royale’s villain was still very much a part of revitalizing the James Bond formula for the modern era. While the tradition Martin Campbell chose to include with Le Chiffre is one of the more controversial aspects of the series at large, Mads Mikkelsen’s performance definitely made him a figure to remember.
Those of you looking to be dealt into Casino Royale are in luck, as a Max subscription is all you’ll need to live on the edge of the card table with James Bond himself. Otherwise, Mads Mikkelsen fans can see him playing the villain in Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny, which is currently showing in theaters.
