Casino Royale Predictions?
Gassy Man
USAPosts: 2,972MI6 Agent
(I don't believe there are any possible spoilers here, as I've seen the characters and plot points touched on mentioned elsewhere on the bbs.)
I don't mind going "on record" now with predictions of how "Casino Royale" will turn out artistically and otherwise, if for no other reason than to check back here in six months to see where I erred. Feel free to add your own predictions.
First off, I suspect that "Casino Royale" will turn out far better than most people expect. It will do very good business worldwide but probably not as much as "Die Another Day," mostly because some audiences will balk at a new James Bond and a down-to-earth plot. Box office will suffer a bit in the U.S. On the other hand, critics will mostly approve of the new Bond film, though the standard "Should the Bond films be retired already?" question will be raised in more than a few reviews. DVD sales will be quite strong.
Craig will be solid in the Bond role, even if some people will still not accept his performance or appearance. There will be more criticisms of his hair being too light than his ability to embody the character. Some people will still gripe that he isn't quite tall or handsome enough to play Bond. (These criticisms will all but disappear when EON follows "Casino Royale" with a more outlandish, FX-ridden Bond in a couple years.)
Eva Green will be good but not great as Vesper, and the romance between Bond and Vesper will work, but Jeffrey Wright will steal the show as Felix Leiter, as he will have the film's best lines. He won't be the Leiter we're used to, but he'll own the character, and the byplay between him and Bond will rival that between Vesper and Bond. Mads Mikkelsen will be excellent as Le Chiffre, though he will choose to underplay some scenes and seem more brooding than menacing.
Martin Campbell's direction will be a weak point, as his unimaginative camera set-ups will undermine otherwise good Bond moments. The gunbarrel sequence will be retained, an error in my opinion given that this is "Bond Begins." (I much prefer another poster's idea that it be at the end of the film in some way, perhaps with a "real life" version and 007 killing his would-be assassin in the exchange.) The art direction and costuming will be among the best in many years, though this film will still not look as good as the early Bonds it will try to emulate. (The cinematography will be more muted, and Campbell will rely on too many close-ups that keep us from getting a good look at things.) There will be some annoying camerawork, such as staggered quick zooms, but Campbell might wisely go for split screens during the poker game.
Fearing scaring away the teen audience, the film will get a PG-13 rating, meaning it will never quite reach the intensity it should (but under a better director could, even at that rating), but it will be darker in tone than the last couple of Bonds. The film will run slightly over two hours, but the pacing will be uneven, not so much because of the script but because of the editing, which will chop a few scenes that require building emotional intensity into more expository sequences to make room for the action sequences and some obligatory ponderous visuals.
David Arnold will not score this film but will return for the next Bond outting. The producers will hope to get U2 to do the theme song and contribute to the score but will settle for a lesser known pop group because of price, which may also handle orchestrations. There will be more pop music built into the soundtrack than in previous Bonds.
The action sequences will be superb, and there will be no obvious CGI. Craig will shine in the fistfights and driving scenes, despite his supposed inability to drive stick. He'll rely a bit more on martial arts than in previous films.
All in all, "Casino Royale" will be a crowd pleaser, though it will fall just short of the heights it wants to reach. It will bode well for the future of the franchise.
Now, I fully expect to find some of these predictions to be flat out wrong in the next few weeks, if not sooner. I'm a little shaky on who will score the film, for instance, and the producers might, in fact, return to Arnold, who could do the job. But I'm reasonably confident about the rest.
EDIT: Ah, grammar.
I don't mind going "on record" now with predictions of how "Casino Royale" will turn out artistically and otherwise, if for no other reason than to check back here in six months to see where I erred. Feel free to add your own predictions.
First off, I suspect that "Casino Royale" will turn out far better than most people expect. It will do very good business worldwide but probably not as much as "Die Another Day," mostly because some audiences will balk at a new James Bond and a down-to-earth plot. Box office will suffer a bit in the U.S. On the other hand, critics will mostly approve of the new Bond film, though the standard "Should the Bond films be retired already?" question will be raised in more than a few reviews. DVD sales will be quite strong.
Craig will be solid in the Bond role, even if some people will still not accept his performance or appearance. There will be more criticisms of his hair being too light than his ability to embody the character. Some people will still gripe that he isn't quite tall or handsome enough to play Bond. (These criticisms will all but disappear when EON follows "Casino Royale" with a more outlandish, FX-ridden Bond in a couple years.)
Eva Green will be good but not great as Vesper, and the romance between Bond and Vesper will work, but Jeffrey Wright will steal the show as Felix Leiter, as he will have the film's best lines. He won't be the Leiter we're used to, but he'll own the character, and the byplay between him and Bond will rival that between Vesper and Bond. Mads Mikkelsen will be excellent as Le Chiffre, though he will choose to underplay some scenes and seem more brooding than menacing.
Martin Campbell's direction will be a weak point, as his unimaginative camera set-ups will undermine otherwise good Bond moments. The gunbarrel sequence will be retained, an error in my opinion given that this is "Bond Begins." (I much prefer another poster's idea that it be at the end of the film in some way, perhaps with a "real life" version and 007 killing his would-be assassin in the exchange.) The art direction and costuming will be among the best in many years, though this film will still not look as good as the early Bonds it will try to emulate. (The cinematography will be more muted, and Campbell will rely on too many close-ups that keep us from getting a good look at things.) There will be some annoying camerawork, such as staggered quick zooms, but Campbell might wisely go for split screens during the poker game.
Fearing scaring away the teen audience, the film will get a PG-13 rating, meaning it will never quite reach the intensity it should (but under a better director could, even at that rating), but it will be darker in tone than the last couple of Bonds. The film will run slightly over two hours, but the pacing will be uneven, not so much because of the script but because of the editing, which will chop a few scenes that require building emotional intensity into more expository sequences to make room for the action sequences and some obligatory ponderous visuals.
David Arnold will not score this film but will return for the next Bond outting. The producers will hope to get U2 to do the theme song and contribute to the score but will settle for a lesser known pop group because of price, which may also handle orchestrations. There will be more pop music built into the soundtrack than in previous Bonds.
The action sequences will be superb, and there will be no obvious CGI. Craig will shine in the fistfights and driving scenes, despite his supposed inability to drive stick. He'll rely a bit more on martial arts than in previous films.
All in all, "Casino Royale" will be a crowd pleaser, though it will fall just short of the heights it wants to reach. It will bode well for the future of the franchise.
Now, I fully expect to find some of these predictions to be flat out wrong in the next few weeks, if not sooner. I'm a little shaky on who will score the film, for instance, and the producers might, in fact, return to Arnold, who could do the job. But I'm reasonably confident about the rest.
EDIT: Ah, grammar.
Comments
What's up with David Arnold?
You are absolutely right about Martin Campbell. Take his feature film CV as a whole and it is very poor, and his work on Goldeneye is hideously overrated by far too many Bond fans. That film is littered with unimaginative and downright dull camera setups. If anyone is going to screw up the film it will be him. Also disappointed to see the return of Phil Meheux with his dull colour schemes.
I think the chemistry between Craig and Green will be explosive, far hotter than anything we've seen in decades from a Bond film (Brosnan was used somewhat as a sex symbol in the first two films, not at all in the last two; I don't remember Dalton being sexy, nor Moore really...all were attractive but where's the raw animal appeal from the Connery/Lazenby haydays? I think we'll get some of that old fashioned "I want to hump the bejeezus outta THAT guy" reaction with Craig, just judging on that swim trunk pic...
Campbell can do everyone a favor and get out of the way. After the directorial excesses of Tamahori, I think there's a very good chance Campbell will (perhaps even will be told to) tone down any splashy stuff, and just get the dang thing on film. If he does that, let's the actors do their thing and the script carry it, he'll not hurt CR. This is one Bond film where some close control from the producers is appropriate, IMO, and as that's what they seem to do best...
They have a great cast, and reportedly a great script. Get it all in the can and it should be a crowd-pleaser (even with the unfortunate Mr. Craig in it...or perhaps BECAUSE of him
Hopefully we'll get the 'Edge of Darkness' Campbell rather than the 'Vertical Limit' Campbell!
Totally agree with you about the pacing. Goldeneye is already a third of the way through until 007 finds himself in M's office, and given that particular story he should have been given his mission a lot earlier.
Is it confirmed that Stuart Baird is in the cutting room for CR? He might do better than Terry Rawlings whose CV is just as shaky as Campbell's, ignoring the Ridley Scott collaborations of course.
When you say 'beach scene', do you mean the one where Bond is sat reflecting in the dusk? I really liked that scene - it reminded me very much of Fleming, and I could imagine him being proud of it. Granted, not much was happening, but it was a nice little moment, which I see no harm in. But you may be referring to something else completely...
The second film with Craig is where the potential problem spot will be. The "new guy" factor is gone, the long interval is gone (assuming they go back to a 2-year gap), and if people don't buy Craig's performance in CR, look out! We could have a disaster on our hands.
In fact, I see the next 2 movies shaping up to be very much similar to Dalton's 2-film run in terms of box office. TLD was decent, followed by a big drop for LTK.
To be fair, though, there were elements I enjoyed -- the bathhouse confrontation, the visual allusions to "Goldfinger" in the DB5, the girl, the tank chase, the song. I'm sure there's more. But I found the production overall hardly better than a cable TV movie.
That said, perhaps Campbell has matured over the years. As I've posted before, his "The Mask of Zorro" is actually pretty good and reasonably inspired. If he can bring that zeal to "Casino Royale," but on a more serious level, cool. I just don't hold out for it. Other than Purvis and Wade's involvement, Campbell's helming this project is really the only thing I'm shaky about in the whole process, Daniel Craig's casting included.
the only thing I didn't like was the fact that they spent five minutes explaining what gadgests are in the car and then we only see it for about a minute. did they think about putting more of the car in and the run out of time or something?
http://www.themovieinsider.com/calendar/2006/november/
Now you can dismiss this as an unscientific sample, and it is. However, these were all avid moviegoers of varying ages and all are familiar with the James Bond series. They all seemed turned off by the selection of Craig as Bond. I believe their negative reaction is what EON will find the rest of the moviegoing publics reaction will be.
EON has a lot of work to do to convince the public this guy is Bond. I think the reason all the entertainment shows and print media were invited to the Bahamas was because EON knew the CR ship was taking on water and they needed to do something. Well they have a lot more to do.
My prediction for CR is that this movie will do poorly in comparison with previous Bond movies, unless it receives stellar reviews. This prediction is based on CR having an unknown cast, a new Bond who's appearance is different than what the public expects in the cinematic Bond and a re-boot that no one asked for. As I stated previousely, only great reviews will save this movie and if the reviews are poor I believe it will be the worst box office Bond ever.
I did the same thing as Barry with some friends and coworkers on several occasions over the past couple of months. Like Barry, the replies I got were universally negative. Not particularly scientific, I know, but these are the kinds of mainstream moviegoers CR needs to get into the theaters. Craig was roundly dismissed as "not looking Bond-like" and everybody kept asking why Brosnan wasn't coming back. I was also really surprised at how disappointed people got when I told them Q was not going to be in CR.
My experiences show that the average moviegoer is aware of "the formula" and quickly loses interest if the movie deviates from it in any significant way. I also think most people have some basic conceptions about what Bond should physically look like based on the past 20 movies; Craig doesn't look to fit that mold and I've gotten a lot of negative feedback about it.
Based on what little we've been shown, I'm still not convinced this movie has what it takes to pull in a large mainstream audience. While it may very well please hardcore fans, that's still a very miniscule percentage of the moviegoing population.
And for that reason, I wouldn't be surprised seeing Bond 22, with or without Craig, resembling the Brosnan films to a great degree. Like it or not, like pearl diving with no aqualung, I don't think that the series can last for a long period of time without the "smarmy" forumula that people have come to expect. Keep Q away for one movie (it's been done before), sure, but I dare them to leave out Q and the gadgets indefinately, along with the OTT action sequences and the cheesy one-liners that Bond purists abhor.
The Precious Classic Formula will ultimately triumph, despite these occasional departures. Craig's handling of the requisite humour (however well- or poorly-written), along with matters of charm and suave sophistication, will ultimatley tell the tale as to how successful a Bond he will be. If he succeeds as Bond in the scenes which don't call for ass-kicking and death, I think he'll get a degree of slack for not being as 'terribly handsome' as his predecessors.
We should see some shots of him looking better dressed before long, I should think.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I've read the whole novel, so I already know whats gonna happen.
Ah, then you might be disappointed to know that the plot of the novel as been changed a bit, and only makes up one act of the film. The rest is completely original, so there's still a lot to be spoiled or kept secret.
The only thing I feel comfortable saying is I think Craig will give a good performance because I think he's a very good actor and he's really giving it 100% now. That doesn't mean he'll be popular as Bond though. I don't know about that yet.
And as for the other performances and the film as a whole I really don't know. I think the script is quite good (based on the reviews) but as to how it will play out - who knows?
Excuse me, but WHAT trailer?