So Can Anyone Explain the Plot to Casino Royale (1967)???

rennervision

So once every 10 years or so I forget everything that happens in 1967's CR, which is possibly a self-defense mechanism that my brain performs to protect me. I then convince myself it can't be as bad as I remember (although I always retain the foggy memory of a clapping seal with a "007" collar around his neck) - and then, yep, I subject myself once again to the torture.

I've experienced the pain on TV, then VHS, then DVD, and now most recently in Blu-ray. So here I am - about halfway through - trying to comprehend what's going on.

First - what's up with that PTS? Did they decide to start the movie with a scene they accidentally found lying on the cutting room floor? Is the rest of the picture a flashback?

Then the Burt Bacharach score starts, which is the only thing I really like in this movie. Which leads into the actual start of the film...

Bond (David Niven) is retired, and all the espionage leaders of the world have come to ask him to return to service. (Why is the Soviet Union one of the countries asking him to return? And what's with Bond's stutter?) And then Bond refuses so M sends an order to blow up his house. (Huh?) Only in addition to the house blowing up, M's toupee flies off his head (Ha! It's funny because he's bald! Get it??? Er... no. I don't either.) And apparently a flying toupee was fatal back then because M is suddenly dead.

So now Bond is staying at M's house with his 11 hot daughters. (Why?) I really have NO IDEA what's going on in this sequence. And then Bond is back working as the new M at MI6. (By the way, with all the different characters using the code name "James Bond" I honestly never caught before that Niven actually refers to the 1960s "Sean Connery" Bond as the man now impersonating him and even refers to him as a "sex maniac." Guess that lends some credibility to the "Code Name Theory" used to explain all the official Bond actors.)

So short of getting high and trying to rewatch this part again, can anybody explain to me what the heck is going on??? I'm sure it's only going to get worse - and then I'm going to see that damn seal again.

Barbel

A guess at the reason for the PTS-
Peter Sellers was very popular at the time, and is top-billed in this movie. Since his character doesn't turn up for some time, perhaps someone (Val Guest?) thought it would be a good idea to move this short scene from where it belongs to the start of the film, reassuring audiences that Sellers was in the film, using the name "James Bond", and would be onscreen in time.

The castle sequence-
With M being killed during the attack on Bond's house which he himself ordered, Bond takes all that's left of him, his toupee (it can only be regarded as a.... heirloom), to his widow Lady McTarry at their Scottish castle. She has been replaced, however, by SMERSH's Agent Mimi who falls in love with 007 and doesn't kill him as planned.

11 hot daughters-
Fairly normal for a Bond movie to have a gaggle of lovely ladies onscreen, casting lustful eyes on our hero!

BIG TAM

The film doesn't have one! )

Okay, I'm being facetious but whilst there may have been good intentions to start with it appears all involved just gave up the ghost as events spiralled out of control. The film seems meant as a star vehicle for Sellers but his increasing paranoia with this & that, not least Orson Welles meant he left the production early causing the makers to plug the gaps with a parallel storyline involving David Niven & vignettes involving Mata Bond & Jimmy Bond. A complete mess which just goes to show what happens when you indulge a pampered star. But for all its madness, I always find it passes an enjoyable couple of hours.

Thunderpussy

I agree it's a Mess. )
It was advertised as having Seven James Bonds, Seven Directors, and Who knows
how many people ( credited and Un credited ) took a stab at writing it.
I've never been able to watch it, Only bits and pieces when it's on TV, I have it
on DVD but I think I've only had it out of its case Once.

BIG TAM

The Region 1 Collector's Edition DVD's worth having. The quite candid 'Making Of' documentary's more entertaining than the film!

rennervision

Well I've resumed viewing it and made an interesting observation. If you break it up into thirds, the movie becomes a bit more watchable. In the past I've always tried to endure it from beginning to end, which is ill advised simply because the first act with all that stuff going on with Niven is just headache enducing - so it makes it more difficult to appreciate the better second act.

I find Peter Sellers to be funny, so most of his scenes are an improvement. Even the bit with Mata Bond has its moments. (That whole "when we sit we bid, when we stand we don't bid" stuff is rather Monty Python-esque.) The bagpipe scene is pretty bizarre though and doesn't make any sense. And there's a weird edit where Sellers races after a kidnapped Vesper, then he's suddenly Le Chiffre's prisoner. (I'm assuming Sellers left the production before the scene bridging those two parts was filmed!)

Strange how this movie starts to become more interesting once it actually tries to follow Ian Fleming's original story. The movie would have benefitted greatly from simply cutting out all that nonsense with Niven in the beginning and keeping the runtime short (like most comedies). But this is still a major waste for what would seem like very lucrative rights to an actual Bond story not owned by EON.

I also had another ironic thought: James Bond and Inspector Clousea are somewhat linked by two different movies. Peter Sellers played James Bond in 1967's Casino Royale, and then Roger Moore played Inspector Clouseau in Curse of the Pink Panther.

Anyways, like I said - I'm breaking my viewing into thirds this time, so I quit watching after Le Chiffre was killed. I'll be subjecting myself to the pain of the third act later.

Blackleiter

Impossible!

Dalkowski110

This movie has a cohesive plot? Really? News to me! )

rennervision

OK - how the heck did I make myself forget about this flying saucer that shows up out of nowhere??? Well the third act is as horrible as I remembered, but somehow Woody Allen makes it through the entire picture unscathed. He actually was the best part of an otherwise horrible film, but the middle section which is based on Fleming's story is the most coherent/watchable.

Anyways - glad that's over. The only reason I watched it was because I had started viewing all the Bond films on Blu-ray from the beginning. (I even started with the 1954 TV broadcast of Casino Royale on DVD.) So by setting a goal to watch them in chronological order, this was required viewing after finishing TB. Oh well, on to YOLT.

Absolutely_Cart

Summary:

Bond (Niven) is forced out of retirement. He, as new head of MI6, hires doppelgangers to disguse as James Bond who can resist female SMERSH spies. Le Chiffre is bankrupt and owes money to SMERSH. Bond meets his long lost daughter who sabotages Le Chiffre's blackmail photo auction. Evelyn Tremble (Sellers), disguised as James Bond, beats Le Chiffre in bacarrat. Le Chiffre tortures him. Head of SMERSH, Dr. Noah (Bond's cousin), plans to exterminate all tall men and make all women beautiful, so he can get laid. The Detainor, a pretty girl (disguised as James Bond) slips an atomic bomb pill in his drink. A big brawl breaks out in the casino, the bomb explodes and all the James Bond die in heaven. Meanwhile, Dr. Noah is in hell.

chrisisall

Wow Cart, that was well done! -{

Absolutely_Cart

chrisisall wrote:

Wow Cart, that was well done! -{

thank you! (roger moore voice)

Sir Miles

Absolutely_Cart wrote:

Bond's daughter slips an atomic bomb pill in his drink.

It wasn't his daughter...it was The Detainer -{

AlphaOmegaSin

Absolutely_Cart wrote:

Summary:

Bond (Niven) is forced out of retirement. He, as new head of MI6, hires doppelgangers to disguse as James Bond who can resist female SMERSH spies. Le Chiffre is bankrupt and owes money to SMERSH. Bond meets his long lost daughter who sabotages Le Chiffre's blackmail photo auction. Evelyn Tremble (Sellers), disguised as James Bond, beats Le Chiffre in bacarrat. Le Chiffre tortures him. Head of SMERSH, Dr. Noah (Bond's cousin), plans to exterminate all tall men and make all women beautiful, so he can get laid. Bond's daughter slips an atomic bomb pill in his drink. A big brawl breaks out in the casino, the bomb explodes and all the James Bond die in heaven. Meanwhile, Dr. Noah is in hell.

Very nice Summery {[]

Thunderpussy

If you can explain CR67, then you haven't really understood it ! )

Absolutely_Cart

If you can explain it well, check yourself into an asylum.

Thunderpussy

I think it's meant to be a conundrum, a loop of incoherent nodules of transience
Thinking, which will cause any attempt at an explanation to invert in on itself, so
That you begin to argue with your own conclusions.

Absolutely_Cart

That's more sophisticated of an analysis than the movie is worth. Lol. And that's coming from the guy who made an essay-length thread about it.

Thunderpussy

I do take pleasure in the fact that CR67 is not just another spoof movie, but
The king of all spoofs. ) it's so over the top, to be ridiculous, so in a way
It has that part of the Bond tradition, if you're going to do it, do it BIG ! )

AlphaOmegaSin

Bond needs to be big {[]

Absolutely_Cart

Thunderpussy wrote:

It has that part of the Bond tradition, if you're going to do it, do it BIG ! )

Right.

Also.

Casino Royale 67 > the Diamonds Are Forever movie

Also.

I edited by summary to reflect that The Detainer (disguised as James Bond 007) killed Dr. Noah - not Bond's daughter.

Blackleiter

Thunderpussy wrote:

I do take pleasure in the fact that CR67 is not just another spoof movie, but
The king of all spoofs. ) it's so over the top, to be ridiculous, so in a way
It has that part of the Bond tradition, if you're going to do it, do it BIG ! )

BIG does not mean good or funny or interesting. CR67 is an unfunny, incoherent, boring mess. It still stands as one of the worst major studio releases I have ever seen, and it is a disgrace to the James Bond legacy. :v

Thunderbird 2

Absolutely_Cart wrote:

Summary:

Bond (Niven) is forced out of retirement. He, as new head of MI6, hires doppelgangers to disguse as James Bond who can resist female SMERSH spies. Le Chiffre is bankrupt and owes money to SMERSH. Bond meets his long lost daughter who sabotages Le Chiffre's blackmail photo auction. Evelyn Tremble (Sellers), disguised as James Bond, beats Le Chiffre in bacarrat. Le Chiffre tortures him. Head of SMERSH, Dr. Noah (Bond's cousin), plans to exterminate all tall men and make all women beautiful, so he can get laid. The Detainor, a pretty girl (disguised as James Bond) slips an atomic bomb pill in his drink. A big brawl breaks out in the casino, the bomb explodes and all the James Bond die in heaven. Meanwhile, Dr. Noah is in hell.

Almost Perfect!

1) One doppleganger, Cooper. Similar to actual Bond. (Ie, like Connery in the initial era Eon films). The others are simply renamed James Bond 007, inc the women, and some animals.

2)Dr Noah is Sir James Bonds nephew. "I should never have let Nellie send him to progressive school!"

Thunderpussy

Call me silly but BL, I'm picking up on a very subtle hint that you may not be a fan of
CR67 ?, Others might not have noticed as I'm incredibly sensitive, to this sort of thing. )

CmdrAtticus

I was pretty disgusted when CR was first released myself. How dare they do this to Fleming's first novel! However over the years I started to appreciate how great a time capsule of the 60's the film is and it's amazing how many actors they got to be in it.
There are scenes that still amuse me simply because they are so bizarre. Most of the film comes across as a Monte Python/SNL sketch directed by Mel Brooks that just goes on too long. It's what happens when you have that many directors and egotistical actors with their hands in the scripting pot. There was just no way that the studio could save any type of coherency from it so they just did the best they could in the editing room and hoped people would flock to it because of the marketing (the poster, lots of actors, the score and it's about James Bond).

In regards to the bagpipers scene in the third act, Peter Sellers became such a problem during the filming that the decision was made to fire him before he had finished all of his scenes. As a result, the end of the marching band torture scene was noticeably altered and Sellers' subsequent scenes were written out. In fact, Peter Sellers and Orson Welles hated each other so much that the filming of the scene where both of them face each other across a gaming table actually took place on different days with a double standing in for one the actors. Another strange fact is that Charles Feldman wanted Connery to be Bond but was unwilling to meet Connery's $1-million salary demand, so he decided to turn the film into a spoof, and cast David Niven. Later after the production costs skyrocketed, he told Connery it would have been cheaper to have accepted his salary.

Blackleiter

Thunderpussy wrote:

Call me silly but BL, I'm picking up on a very subtle hint that you may not be a fan of
CR67 ?, Others might not have noticed as I'm incredibly sensitive, to this sort of thing. )

Amazing! I didn't think anyone would be able to pick up on that, but clearly I underestimated you. I won't make that mistake again, my friend! )

Thunderpussy

) ) ) it's my gift.

MilleniumForce

CmdrAtticus wrote:

I was pretty disgusted when CR was first released myself. How dare they do this to Fleming's first novel! However over the years I started to appreciate how great a time capsule of the 60's the film is and it's amazing how many actors they got to be in it.
There are scenes that still amuse me simply because they are so bizarre. Most of the film comes across as a Monte Python/SNL sketch directed by Mel Brooks that just goes on too long. It's what happens when you have that many directors and egotistical actors with their hands in the scripting pot. There was just no way that the studio could save any type of coherency from it so they just did the best they could in the editing room and hoped people would flock to it because of the marketing (the poster, lots of actors, the score and it's about James Bond).

In regards to the bagpipers scene in the third act, Peter Sellers became such a problem during the filming that the decision was made to fire him before he had finished all of his scenes. As a result, the end of the marching band torture scene was noticeably altered and Sellers' subsequent scenes were written out. In fact, Peter Sellers and Orson Welles hated each other so much that the filming of the scene where both of them face each other across a gaming table actually took place on different days with a double standing in for one the actors. Another strange fact is that Charles Feldman wanted Connery to be Bond but was unwilling to meet Connery's $1-million salary demand, so he decided to turn the film into a spoof, and cast David Niven. Later after the production costs skyrocketed, he told Connery it would have been cheaper to have accepted his salary.

A serious Connery CR would have been a nice companion to the official series.

Blackleiter

MilleniumForce wrote:

CmdrAtticus wrote:

I was pretty disgusted when CR was first released myself. How dare they do this to Fleming's first novel! However over the years I started to appreciate how great a time capsule of the 60's the film is and it's amazing how many actors they got to be in it.
There are scenes that still amuse me simply because they are so bizarre. Most of the film comes across as a Monte Python/SNL sketch directed by Mel Brooks that just goes on too long. It's what happens when you have that many directors and egotistical actors with their hands in the scripting pot. There was just no way that the studio could save any type of coherency from it so they just did the best they could in the editing room and hoped people would flock to it because of the marketing (the poster, lots of actors, the score and it's about James Bond).

In regards to the bagpipers scene in the third act, Peter Sellers became such a problem during the filming that the decision was made to fire him before he had finished all of his scenes. As a result, the end of the marching band torture scene was noticeably altered and Sellers' subsequent scenes were written out. In fact, Peter Sellers and Orson Welles hated each other so much that the filming of the scene where both of them face each other across a gaming table actually took place on different days with a double standing in for one the actors. Another strange fact is that Charles Feldman wanted Connery to be Bond but was unwilling to meet Connery's $1-million salary demand, so he decided to turn the film into a spoof, and cast David Niven. Later after the production costs skyrocketed, he told Connery it would have been cheaper to have accepted his salary.

A serious Connery CR would have been a nice companion to the official series.

Absolutely!

Jarvio

Me and BL may disagree about AVTAK, but I have to agree with him on CR '67. It is a pile of poo.

Absolutely_Cart

I'm glad Niven and Sellers did this one - rather than Connery. It's nice to have as many interpretations of the character as possible.