I get out of bed in the morning and watch a bus roll past the window. It has a huge poster for the new James Bond film on the side. I log on to an online newspaper; an advert for the Bond film pops up into the centre of the screen. On the tube to work I see several passengers reading free newspapers, the entire front and back pages of which are devoted to an advert for Bond. As I leave the station, a passenger's mobile rings to the tune of the famous Bond theme. Passing a newsagents, I see one can buy James Bond National Lottery scratch cards. A schoolboy at the bus stop is stuffing his hand into a bag of crisps with a promotion for Bond on the side. I turn on my radio* and hear Cubby Broccoli's (the Bond producer) daughter talking about feminism on Radio 4's Woman's hour. In a café at lunchtime, I browse through a broadsheet newspaper; a double page spread tells me how I can get the James Bond body with a new fitness routine. Later at work, I overhear colleagues discussing the new Aston Martin that Bond drives. On the way home, I am handed a flyer advertising 'Bond's London', a tour of the city's sights as seen in the movie. I call a friend to ask what he's doing tonight, and he is, or course off to see the new Bond film.

The spin surrounding Casino Royale is like nothing I have seen since George Lucas took marketing advice from Bernard Matthews in selling his second trilogy turkey. Such is the pervasiveness of a full-spend marketing campaign, that for the average guy in the street, there really is no avoiding a major 'event' like the release of a blockbuster movie. As I am sure you have guessed, I'm not interested in James Bond. Yet I know that there is a new actor playing the role, that he wears an Omega watch, drives a Ford and an Aston Martin, he uses a Sony Ericsson phone, his femme fatale is called Eva Green, the story is from one of the original Ian Fleming books, the new Bond is more muscular, more gritty and more, er, blonde than before… all this I know, and not once have I made a conscious decision to learn this information. Somehow, I just know.







Now I begin to worry. Am I missing out on something here? If it's in the newspapers the critics must think the film is worth seeing. If my friends are talking about it, it must be worth seeing. Is this film an essential part of the zeitgeist, of which I must keep abreast or risk being labelled a laggard? Now I'm thinking that I should go and see the thing, that I ought to see the thing, even though I find the clichéd one-liners, the macho posturing, the stone age gender politics, the CGI action and the schmaltzy direction more than a little, well, shit. I know deep down that if I do go see the film, that I'll walk out feeling just as unsatisfied as I would eating the £5 bag of M&M's from the kiosk. And yet I'm thinking about going anyway.

I believe this is the modern manufacture of consent. Telling the public what they want, as opposed to providing what they need. How many people would really pay to go see an aging movie franchise like Bond, if it were not supported by an advertising campaign that overwhelms any negative thought about the product? Why would the producers spend the millions on advertising if the audience didn't need pushing into the cinema? Media tie-ins ensure any criticism of the product is edited out, or drowned out by the din of the ads (turn the page of every Bond newspaper feature and you'll see an advert that paid for it). If our homes and our streets and our stores become saturated with the branding of a product, it must be because the product is important in some way, it is a 'must see/ buy event'. Very few people seem to complain that their environment is being flooded with this stuff. Of course, we are free to go watch something else at the cinema and we are free to criticise Casino Royale among each other. But take it from someone who is making a point of avoiding mass marketing; we are not free to look away from the ads.