51

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

Casino Royale (2006)

James Bond is back in action, and has a new attitude. Or what I should really say, is he has a new attitude compared to his predeecessor Pierce Brosnan. Daniel Craig brings back the darkness of James Bond that Timothy Dalton brought to the role. He executes the role with near perfection. Casino Royale attempts to stay true to the original 1953 book by Ian Fleming, when it eventually gets to those parts that is, and does well until some of the ending scenes. While the movie was still a little too much of an action flick, it tuned the action down some, and is a big step up from Die Another Day. It will definitely be interesting to see where Craig takes this franchise. The villains and Bond girls that are an essential part of the Bond franchise are superb in this flick. Some of the action scenes are a little unbelievable, but that's ok, it's just a movie. At least there are no computer generated scenes that are very unnatural. The series is back, and waiting for the next movie seems like waiting for the next millennium to come around.

9.1/10.0

52

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

Long time user, long time no posts !!!

Just watched the film, and I must say I was very plesantly surprised with it. Not too over the top (like Die Another Day), and maintained a nice sence of suspence throughout.

Enjoyed Craig as 007 - had a nice wit about him, and certainly pulled off Fleming's 007 excellently, the best since Dalton in the late 80s.

All in all, really enjoyed it. Good, but not too many Bond girls, and was thoroughly impressed with Vesper Lynd - top Bond girl, and reminded me in parts of the character from Fleming's novel...

Good film - one of the best Bond outings for a while...

53

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

My first post ever is.....I loved it.  Certainly in my top dozen Bonds (Of course, I'll have to see it again)

Craig needs a few more under his belt before he can properly be compared but he's very good in this. Eva Green is top notch and I'm a big fan of Martin Campbell too.

All in all, I'm thrilled that the franchise is back on it's feet. 

For the first time in a LONG time, I can actually look forward to the next Bond film.

54

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

All in all, I'm impressed. To give some background on my tastes, I've always preferred the Ian Flemming novels to the movies. My favourite 007 movie is OHMSS, and I found that I was growing out of my love for the character and movies with the recent Pierce Brosnan movies. I didn't even see Die Another Day in the theatre.

Positives:
- Craig was great. Incredibly physical, but his delivery of the comedic lines and dialogue was superb.
- The opening scene in black and white was amazing.
- The stunts were exhilerating, and yet mostly believable—no more invisible cars, and cgi surfing.
- Eva was gorgeous.
- What sticks with me most about this film is the dialogue. Yes, the freakin dialogue... in a James Bond film!! The exchanges between M and Bond, and Bond and Vesper were truly the best exchanges I've ever seen in a James Bond movie.

Negatives:
- The music during the 'love' parts annoyed me... it seemed clichéd.
- I wish they had included the part from the novel where, during poker, one of the henchmen sticks a knife behind the back of Bond (I think a knife.. can't quite remember).
- Defibrillator part seemed a bit unnecessary.
- The love story could have been developed a bit better.

55

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

Why do people keep complaining about Bond not acting like the 007 we know? Why are so many people not "getting it" as to why the gunbarrel sequence wasn't used at the beginning of the film?

This movie goes out of its way to show an inexperienced Bond on his way to becoming the 007 we all know and love...

I loved the detailing in character, seeing Bond take routes that the future Bond won't - busting through walls, shooting down a guy, falling in love with a shady character, giving into his frustration chasing after the target with a knife, deciding to quit the service, etc.

The movie illustrated his inexperience, and gave us a look at a Bond before he developed a preference in Martini. The script is really great, especially the ball tickling scene.

Some negatives...

The theme song sucks.

The soundtrack didn't stand out to me whatsoever.  There were a few cues that really heightened a scene, but for the most part it just seemed like filler.

The 'riding a horse on the beach' scene was ridiculously lame. I was hoping that it was an intentional parody of itself.

56

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

*Cries*

James Bond is gone forever! Did I like CR? Yes, I did, but that old era of Bond films. I really feel like crying as I type this. It's the best Bond film of the new era, but would do anything to get the old era back.

*Will play James Bond for free*

57

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

Its going well guys!!!!!!! ajb007/cheers ajb007/biggrin

From Wiki:

Critics

Reviewers gave a very positive response to the film, especially in terms of Craig's performance. The Daily Mirror (which had once ran a front page news story critical of Craig, with the headline, The name's Bland - James Bland) and The Daily Telegraph compared him to Sean Connery, and the latter praised the script as smartly written, the former noting how the film departed from the series' conventions. The Times also compared Craig to Timothy Dalton, and praised the action as edgy, with another reviewer citing in particular the crane sequence in Madagascar. Paul Arendt of BBC Films went higher in his praise, acclaiming Craig as the first actor to truly nail Ian Fleming's character. Kim Newman of Empire and Todd McCarthy of Variety agreed. In North America, the movie was also tremendously well-received. MSNBC gave the movie a perfect 5 star rating while Rotten Tomatoes gave the movie a spectacular aggregate rating of 96%, the highest rating for a wide-release of the year. The Users' rating was 90%. The movie has also attained an 8.1/10 from IMDB.

A reviewer for The Sun praised the film for its darkness and Craig's performance although they felt "like the novel, it suffers from a lack of sharpness in the plot" and felt it required some editing. "Napoleon Solo" of AICN said the film would leave audiences excited for a sequel, and the character development of Bond is superb. However unlike all Bond movies this one has more action, and Daniel Craig looks more of a action hero than a spy. A downote came from Tim Adams of The Observer who felt the film came off uncomfortably in an attempt to make the series grittier. Emanuell Levy agreed, feeling the film's terrorist villains lacked depth, and the ending was long, although he praised Craig and gave the film a B+ overall.

Box Office

UK ticket sales for the first day of release were GB£ 1.7 million, the highest for any Bond film. The record was held previously by Die Another Day (GB£ 1.1million).[45] Opening day estimates in the United States show it on top with $14,750,000.

1. TWINE  2. FYEO  3. MR  4. TLD  5. TSWLM 6. OHMSS  7. DN  8. OP  9. AVTAK  10. TMWTGG  11. QoS 12. GE  13. CR  14. TB  15. FRWL  16. LTK  17. GF  18. SF  19. LaLD  20. YOLT  21. TND  22. DAD  23. DAF.

"If you'll forgive me, that's a little too scented for my palate."

58

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

If any of you think that this average spy movie was even a proper James Bond film let alone a "good" James Bond film..then you can not (in my opinion) be a true Bond fan!:p

Where do I begin?

First of all what was that barrel scene at the begining...Bond with out a tie? and it was not the classic barrel scene that we all know and love!

And then it goes in to a type of arty film noir....terrible!
I could aanalise each and every part of the film but I will not!

The title scenes did not have one silloheted woman...WHY? sexism? political correctness? Every Bond ilm has to have this...NO EXSCUSE!

Bond films are MEANT to have the cliches! if they dont then they become (like this film) another spy film that happens to have James Bond in it!

DANIEL CRAIG :  an excellant Bond...played it well and given the RIGHT Bond film he shall prove to be brilliant.

THE GIRLS:  attractive, well played...BUT none of them were a MAY-DAY or an ONNATOP or  a FATIMA BLUSH

THE SONG: Pathetic...we need big trumpets/lush strings/and a voice like Tom Jones or Shirley Bassey.

THE ACTION SCENES:  good...but where was the big ending action scene? the building falling in to the water?- hardley the macnifecent Spy Who Loved Me ending!

THE PLOT : kept close to the book...so welldone!

THE BADDIES : probally the biggest let down of the entire film!!!!!!  there was about 10 bad guys...none apart from one you really got to know!
The baddies are meant to be larger than life characters...with a hench man to match!
This one had a kind of main baddie...who was played well...but who got shot quite quickley and had about 8 other baddies above him (who you breifly met)
 

THE HENCH MAN: what henchman? where is JAWS where is The turban guy from Octopussy? Where is Mr Wint and Kipp? where where where where???? toatl rubbish!



This was the worst Bond film ever!!!!!

And beleive me I know about Bond films...I have nearly everyone on DVD...early every book on James Bond...and treat it as a near OBBSESSION!

THis film was made for non Bond fans!  Bring bacjk the Glamour...Bring back the Cliches! Bring back the lush stringed music! Bring back the beautiful Love scenes! 

You guys want to see a darker Bond? reallY?  then go watch Licence to Kill! go watch Man with the Golden Gun..!  TIMOTHY DALTON played a dark gritty Bond...but it ws stll a Bond film!

Please dont let 007 become just another spy film!

Daniel Craifg is brilliant..we have a great Bond! Now give him the JAMES BOND film he deserves and we need to  see again!

59

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

In a nutshell: I loved it. Give it a 006 rating.
Craig is the best Bond since early Connery (before Sean got too old and bored with the role). Casino Royale is the best film since OHMSS.

At last... a Bond film that played with my nerves and emotions. Real suspense, watching a Bond who sweats and bleeds and fights his way out of tough situations without relying on invisible cars, exploding pens, magnetic wristwatches, or other silly gadgets to save the day.

The main complaint others have about Craig seems to be that he is not as suave and debonair as previous Bonds. To me, Bond became way too smooth when Roger Moore took on the character (Simon Templar is James Bond with tongue-in-cheek and twinkle-in-eye). I think Craig's Bond keeps the suaveness level down to Fleming's and early-Connery's Bond, more of an animal seductiveness than movie star charm, and we must remember that Craig's rough-edged Bond is still evolving and maturing. Dalton had a nice balance between tough and smooth, but he didn't have the same physical presence as Connery or Craig.

I always had a feeling when reading Fleming's novels that Bond was sort of an emotionally cold character who had been through a lot of emotional and physical suffering in his youth, and Craig is the first film Bond to really convey that aspect of the character.

LeChiffre is more like a classic, believable Fleming villain, less like a Star Trek character
(Zao) or a variation on Dr. Evil (Stromberg, Drax, Renard, Pleasance/Blofeld).

The girls are gorgeous and integral to the plot (not just "eye candy" props lounging around in bikinis like harem bimbos).

I could go on and on about why I like this film so much more than any of the others of the past 35 years.

My only small complaints:
I dislike the choppy, rapid camera angle changes in the chase scene. I kow this is to make the action seem more fast and furious, but I find it a bit annoying and hard to tell what's supposed to be going on.

The poker game should have been more tense and suspenseful. I can't suggest how it should have been done, but reading the gambling scenes in the novels CR and MR was a lot more exciting.

But my complaints are small compared to my joy that IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND IS FINALLY BACK IN ACTION! ajb007/cheers

60

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

Johnny Danger wrote:

In a nutshell: I loved it. Give it a 006 rating.
Craig is the best Bond since early Connery (before Sean got too old and bored with the role). Casino Royale is the best film since OHMSS.

At last... a Bond film that played with my nerves and emotions. Real suspense, watching a Bond who sweats and bleeds and fights his way out of tough situations without relying on invisible cars, exploding pens, magnetic wristwatches, or other silly gadgets to save the day.

The main complaint others have about Craig seems to be that he is not as suave and debonair as previous Bonds. To me, Bond became way too smooth when Roger Moore took on the character (Simon Templar is James Bond with tongue-in-cheek and twinkle-in-eye). I think Craig's Bond keeps the suaveness level down to Fleming's and early-Connery's Bond, more of an animal seductiveness than movie star charm, and we must remember that Craig's rough-edged Bond is still evolving and maturing. Dalton had a nice balance between tough and smooth, but he didn't have the same physical presence as Connery or Craig.

I always had a feeling when reading Fleming's novels that Bond was sort of an emotionally cold character who had been through a lot of emotional and physical suffering in his youth, and Craig is the first film Bond to really convey that aspect of the character.

LeChiffre is more like a classic, believable Fleming villain, less like a Star Trek character
(Zao) or a variation on Dr. Evil (Stromberg, Drax, Renard, Pleasance/Blofeld).

The girls are gorgeous and integral to the plot (not just "eye candy" props lounging around in bikinis like harem bimbos).

I could go on and on about why I like this film so much more than any of the others of the past 35 years.

My only small complaints:
I dislike the choppy, rapid camera angle changes in the chase scene. I kow this is to make the action seem more fast and furious, but I find it a bit annoying and hard to tell what's supposed to be going on.

The poker game should have been more tense and suspenseful. I can't suggest how it should have been done, but reading the gambling scenes in the novels CR and MR was a lot more exciting.

But my complaints are small compared to my joy that IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND IS FINALLY BACK IN ACTION! ajb007/cheers

61

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

Oops, sorry to repost above, but I wanted to add (quoting myself):

"I always had a feeling when reading Fleming's novels that Bond was sort of an emotionally cold character who had been through a lot of emotional and physical suffering in his youth, and Craig is the first film Bond to really convey that aspect of the character."

BUT Craig did a great acting job when showing Bond's emotional sides. When he falls in love with Vesper, the warmth melts away the cold exterior. This is perhaps the best thing about Craig's Bond. He has a cold, ruthless exterior, an armor to protect and contain the vulnerabilities and emotions which he would rather keep concealed.

62

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

Read my post...he last one on page 4 for a proper Bond fan Review!

63

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

I liked it, but I don't class it as anything other than a worthy entry to the series.

Let's get the obvious out of the way, a compelling performance from Daniel Craig. He showed the toughness and physicality that everybody, without exception, believed he would bring to the role. He also looked comfortable, and showed promise in terms of the expected quips and snappy dialogue. If I'm honest, despite him being in no way my choice as Bond, he has done no wrong here. He's done an exceptional job with the material and baggage he's been given to work with.

However, I still have to maintain that I saw nothing in the story or tone, that, with a few tweaks, couldn't have given Brosnan a fitting swansong.

One of the other criticisms leading up to the film and reboot, has been the inclusion of Judi Dench. In viewing this film, I am convinced that the producers would have been mad to let her go, inconsistencies aside. Her 'M' character is too good to waste, and the class with which Judi Dench delivers the role, with this new 'raw' Bond was a highlight for me.

Overall, the rest of the cast all did a very good job, none of them standout, but all above reproach.

I also kinda admired the song and credits, I was surprised first of all, but then appreciated them for their creativeness, in trying to homage what had gone before, but do something different, in line with the 'new Bond' and 'Casino' motif.

Another good point was the return to fisticuffs, as opposed to gunplay, a valid criticism of the 'machine-gun' Brosnan movies.

However, the film had a lot of problems.

Pace - A necessary slave to the storyline of the book, but the seemingly thrown-in Bang, Bang double-dose of action setpieces were too much too soon, and the rest of the film dragged on by comparison.

Realism - I also found these setpieces jarred with me, they were just too far over the edge of belief suspension, given the tone of realism we were told the producers were trying to achieve. They also were quite weak plotting-wise, highlighting the fact that the second half of the movie was a character-driven interpretaion of the literary Casino Royale, and the first half a tacked-on nod to the expectations of a Bond audience, wanting action, stunts and spectacle. Don't get me wrong, the stunts themselves were immaculately impressive in their execution, but disappointing in context of the story. Slightly too much death-defying, and pyrotechnics where none were needed.

Romance - Didn't work, happened too quickly, and the tone of flirting and teasing, all the way up to the Vesper kidnapping, suddenly turned to Bond in love and throwing his career away. This was down to poor script and poor judgement, not the fault of the actors. I think this is where they really needed to make 'implicitly clear' that it had been a long few weeks of spending time together, but instead undying love is declared the first time Vesper wakes him from his recovery, and the subsequent beach\vacation scenes could have been the very next day, for all that the film showed. Additionally, without the suicide note, the 'impact' on Bond is severely diluted, and the 'I'm sorry' just wasn't enough for me to justify his cold attitude, and delivery of the line from the book. Essentially in the book, Bond is stripped bare and betrayed, but you feel the agony of the betrayal from both sides. In Casino Royale (the movie) he's simply been 'played' by a beautiful woman, something that likely happens to every healthy heterosexual man, several times in a lifetime from teens to twenties to early-thirties, especially is you are a bit of a 'player' yourself. This is the weakest part of the film, and I think scenes from a few of the Brosnan movies put the handling of this part of the story to shame.

All in all, very good, not great. Not the 'great departure' from all I like about Bond that I feared, but the clear necessity to 'retain' some of those elements, in an admittedly difficult storyline, was hamfisted. I'm looking forward to the next, and am more intrigued than ever as to what the tone and story will be, because it needs to be an original piece, as opposed the Fleming novel that either 'elevated' or 'restricted' the traditional elements of a Bond movie that any Bond fan wants.

Also, just some perspective on the Box Office - It's been a really poor year for blockbuster movies, so something really was just waiting to bring the audience back in droves, and Casino Royale was it, as far as I'm concerened. The marketing of the movie 'has' been exceptional, and there is also the big curiosity factor of a new Bond, and good reviews help.

I've said it before, it can only truly be considered a triumphant success if it exceeds DAD's worldwide $450m, adjusted for inflation and ticket prices. Funnily enough, I have a feeling it may come respectably close, and we must applaud the producers for their gamble, because whatever the measures used to judge, they took a huge gamble, and have won on many levels.

64

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

This might not be long but here's my Review:

Amazing action sequences. MGM must of went all out. Also Danial craigs acting was phnemonal. But, there was no q or Moneypenny. I mean i can deal without moneypenny but no q. Overall great movie it could of been better with Q but oo well still great movie overall. danial craigs right up there with all the other top bonds but I think we should give him a little time.

65

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

As always, I am late to the party, but as always, everyone's secretly been waiting for me to arrive and can't wait to hear from me, so here I am ajb007/biggrin

My initial impression, two days after I saw it?  I liked it.  I really, really, really liked it.  No, I loved it.  It's a fantastic film, and it's a fantastic Bond film.  I was so worried that with all the changes, everything I loved about 007 would be thrown down the toilet, but it hasn't happened at all.  This doesn't feel like the start of Bond Series 2.0; CR can quite happily slot in with the other films (though it might feel a little uncomfortable sat next to Moonraker).

I'm not going to review the whole thing, just record a few of my thoughts: 

- The titles were excellent, though I miss the naked girlies (would it have been too difficult to have the Queen of Hearts in the nude?).  It even made me enjoy Chris Cornell - who'd have thought?  And I grinned like a demented person at Based on the novel by Ian Fleming.

- All the action sequences were superbly staged; violent, knockabout stuff, that showed pain and agony, and that Bond didn't just cruise through.  Saying the Madagascar sequence was superb is redundant, and the Miami chase was truly edge of my seat stuff.  I particularly loved Bond's swing into the tanker cabin through the shattered windscreen.  It didn't feel lopsided, which had been a concern of mine when I read the previews - the Venice sequence was a perfect bookend.

- M swearing like a trooper was great, as well as the glimpse of Mr M.  Judi Dench's best performance so far.

- Poor Solange!  Not only is she tortured to death, no-one even bothers mentioning her name on screen.  Caterina Murino was utterly lovely though.  I had thought she was a bit horsey, in photographs; but onscreen she was just beautiful, with a lovely sadness.

- What was with Valenka's outfits?  She couldn't wear a dress or a swimsuit without enormous pieces of it being chopped out to reveal her midriff.  Does Le Chiffre's yacht have moths?

- Speaking of Le Chiffre - great.  No campery, or flouncing; just a nasty, sinister man.  Including his inhaler was a great moment from the novel.

- Actually, all the bits from the novel were incorporated wonderfully.  It was such a thrill to see them appear onscreen after years of just being on the page.

- Vesper, however, was nothing like the book.  She was better.  The Vesper in the novel is a neurotic, and it's difficult to see what Bond sees in her.  Eva Green was just stunningly beautiful, and a wonderful actress.  She was Bond's equal, despite what's been said; instead of her being a (yawn) woman who can beat people up, she matches him in wit, intelligence and guile - the things that matter.  I could see what he saw in her - in fact, when she was washing in the bathroom, and Bond delivered her evening dress, even I thought "Wow!", and I am a confirmed woofter.  Her final death scene was heartbreaking, even though, as we all know, she was a bitch.

- I know nothing about poker, and, after this film, I know nothing about poker.  I missed the baccarat.  But I was still caught up in the excitement, just as I can read the bridge game in MR without any idea how to play and get caught up in the tension. 

- The poison sequence was one bump too far, I have to say; it's the only thing in the whole film that I feel could have been excised without any problem.  And with this new, realistic Bond, I'm glad there are no silly fictional gadgets; after all, we all have mini defibrilators and syringes of poison antidotes stowed in secret compartments in our cars, don't we?

- Mathis is a traitor?  No, no, no, no, NO!

- The torture sequence.  Cue the sound of a hundred men crossing their legs.  But excellently done (though if that was a 12a then LTK is practically a U).

- The German banker was a little too broad for me; he seemed a bit like Lieutenant Gruber from 'Allo 'Allo.

- Venice was ravishingly shot, though would it have been too much to ask for a single double taking pigeon as Bond ran across St Marks' Square? 

- The final scene, and the final line, and the final bit of music.  Oh yes.

I feel like I have forgotten something... oh yes; Daniel Craig.  Or as he is currently known, James Bond - and there is absolutely no room for disagreement.  The man was completely, utterly, 100 % Bond, from the very first shot.  He was physical, he was intelligent, he was witty.  You know how you have those debates about "Roger was great, but he couldn't do coldness", or "Timothy was great, but he couldn't do humour"?  I can't think of a single facet of Bond's character that Daniel Craig didn't do.  I thought he was absolutely superb.  My only gripe is that he kept sucking his cheeks in times of crisis; it started to look a little Blue Steel.  However, his great goody trail made up for it ajb007/wink  If reports are to be believed, Barbara Broccoli pushed Craig through against the wishes of other team members; all I have to say is well done Babs, and this more than makes up for the Rita Coolidge debacle.

Can't wait to see it again.  And again.  And again.  Did I mention I loved Vesper's theme in the score?  Or the black and white bit?  Or the murder in the Bodyworld exhibition?  Or the finger sucking moment?  Or the... oh, bloody hell, when is it on again?

Founder of the Wint & Kidd Appreciation Society.

@merseytart

66

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

If anyone is still dying to read yet another CR review, mine can be read here:

The Bond movie that made me cry (well, almost)

Now I'm off to see it again. ajb007/smile

Last edited by zencat (19th Nov 2006 21:20)

www.thebookbond.com - New Look. New Book. Pure BOND.

67

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

Donald Grant weighs in.

Well I'm not going to get into dissecting CR bit by bit.  It's been done enough here.  However, I will say that I liked Craig's Bond a great deal.  Bond is back to being a kick ass bad boy for a change.  I was very impresed with Craig's physicality and swagger.  My wife thought the walk was a bit over done, but having seen it twice now, I thought the swagger was right on, almost a nod to Connery.

The way Bond carried his weapon in an "in the pants" holster was very good too.  The most tactical way is on the hip, however behind the hip is a common compromise to concealability.  Likewise, another compromise to concealability is in front of the hip with the muzzle pointing toward the groin.  I've known people to carry it that way too and without the holster, very dangerous in my opinion, but also very "bad boy".

I also happened to like the main title sequence.  Again it showed off the physicality of this new Bond.  The end shot of Craig staring into the camera as if to say "you want some of this?" was fantastic.

I also likeed the fact that Bond was not always wearing a suit.  An MI6 Agent's appearence should fit the situation.  Suits when needed only.

I must say too that Mr. Craig is not the most handsome Bond, however his swagger and confidence makes you forget it.  As we all know, success with women has a lot to do with confidence as anything else.  Blond hair didn't matter either.

Lastly, I was a doubter and now I'm not.

DG

Last edited by Donald Grant (19th Nov 2006 23:00)

So, what sharp little eyes you've got...wait till you get to my teeth.
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee124/DonaldGrantPhotos/image_zps6a725e59.jpg
"People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."  Richard Grenier after George Orwell, Washington Times 1993.

68

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

Running commentry of the James Bond film - Casino Royale…if it can be called a James Bond film.


1. W000SH *BUZZ OF ELECTRICITY AND MECHANICS* WHAT WAS THAT? Oh I see, it was the gun barrel scene, hmm, where was the slightly faded Bond and swirling barrel? The usual James Bond theme tune that has lasted since the time of Connery?
I sure as hell didn't see it

So naturally…not a great start to the Bond film


Scene 1 - What the hell is this? Film Noir? Was this a flashback? A memory? Something happening in the present? A scene from Sin City? Certainly not a James bond film. I don't care if it’s a flashback (James bond shouldn't have flash backs anyway) you do not see things from the characters' points of view….you just don't ok….its not a deep meaningful story…its 007

Credits - ok I knew the song was crap…but oh well I'll live….my this is interesting, I love this 1960s colourful casino feel. And the people are nice and simple silhouettes again like the pre-Brosnan films………..there's a silhouette man…and another…and another…….where's the silhouette woman?........c'mon every James bond film has women……nope…..just men fighting to bad Coldplay kind of music.

Action scene: not bad, nice directing, nice show….pity about the 2006 mobile phones…I mean if this is a prequel to Dr No, I'm not saying its got to be  pre 1962 gadgets but lets say somewhere in the late 70s to 80s yes?
    If M became the NEW M during the Brosnan era than why is she in the pre Dr No era, would it be so hard to find some guy who looked like Bernard Lee?

The girls; Bond's firs Bond girl in this, the wife of one of the many villains, was stunning, she had the right entrance (on the horse) she had the style, the looks, the clothes….but she was all to done and dusted and lets face it terribly boring before we even got a chance to know her
Vesper, great character, I liked her strength mingled with the naivety, it was excellent, not too much a crime fighter, but not too much a bimbo. But she was in no comparison to the any of the past Bond Girls. La Chiffre's girlfriend could have really been something as well, she had an extremely good  presence and look for the role…unfortunately she had barely any dialogue and barely any screen time….I felt that it would have been interesting to see her interact with Bond, if not act as one of his pursuits.

Villains - There's one, no there's one…no its definitely La Chiffre who's in charge…but wait…..he's working for someone else who never even mentions'  Bond's name!! The eye thing is creepy…pity you only saw it bleed once or we might have had an interesting gimmick going on here

Clichés - Granted that this is set when James Bond is starting out and my not have developed his clichés yet….but this is Bond film, you need something in there to say this is James Bond! Not Mr Spy Crime Fighter!

All in all, one of the worst Bond films ever made, saved only by Daniel Craig's excellent performance

2/10

69

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

TraceyV wrote:

Running commentry of the James Bond film - Casino Royale…if it can be called a James Bond film.


1. W000SH *BUZZ OF ELECTRICITY AND MECHANICS* WHAT WAS THAT? Oh I see, it was the gun barrel scene, hmm, where was the slightly faded Bond and swirling barrel? The usual James Bond theme tune that has lasted since the time of Connery?
I sure as hell didn't see it

So naturally…not a great start to the Bond film


Scene 1 - What the hell is this? Film Noir? Was this a flashback? A memory? Something happening in the present? A scene from Sin City? Certainly not a James bond film. I don't care if it’s a flashback (James bond shouldn't have flash backs anyway) you do not see things from the characters' points of view….you just don't ok….its not a deep meaningful story…its 007

Credits - ok I knew the song was crap…but oh well I'll live….my this is interesting, I love this 1960s colourful casino feel. And the people are nice and simple silhouettes again like the pre-Brosnan films………..there's a silhouette man…and another…and another…….where's the silhouette woman?........c'mon every James bond film has women……nope…..just men fighting to bad Coldplay kind of music.

Action scene: not bad, nice directing, nice show….pity about the 2006 mobile phones…I mean if this is a prequel to Dr No, I'm not saying its got to be  pre 1962 gadgets but lets say somewhere in the late 70s to 80s yes?
    If M became the NEW M during the Brosnan era than why is she in the pre Dr No era, would it be so hard to find some guy who looked like Bernard Lee?

The girls; Bond's firs Bond girl in this, the wife of one of the many villains, was stunning, she had the right entrance (on the horse) she had the style, the looks, the clothes….but she was all to done and dusted and lets face it terribly boring before we even got a chance to know her
Vesper, great character, I liked her strength mingled with the naivety, it was excellent, not too much a crime fighter, but not too much a bimbo. But she was in no comparison to the any of the past Bond Girls. La Chiffre's girlfriend could have really been something as well, she had an extremely good  presence and look for the role…unfortunately she had barely any dialogue and barely any screen time….I felt that it would have been interesting to see her interact with Bond, if not act as one of his pursuits.

Villains - There's one, no there's one…no its definitely La Chiffre who's in charge…but wait…..he's working for someone else who never even mentions'  Bond's name!! The eye thing is creepy…pity you only saw it bleed once or we might have had an interesting gimmick going on here

Clichés - Granted that this is set when James Bond is starting out and my not have developed his clichés yet….but this is Bond film, you need something in there to say this is James Bond! Not Mr Spy Crime Fighter!

All in all, one of the worst Bond films ever made, saved only by Daniel Craig's excellent performance

2/10

This really is one of those reviews where every point makes me think 'but I liked that about the film!'

For the most part, each to his own, but I will pick you up on what you said about the villains.

I found Le Chiffre terrifying. Why? Because he was weak, he was under pressure. He was a desperate man, low in the hierarchy. That meant he would go to desperate lengths to save his own skin, and I think that made him much more dangerous. Can you imagine Blofeld sweating and physically hurting Bond himself. No, he'd push a button.

Last edited by i expect u2 die (19th Nov 2006 23:40)

70

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

I've learnt an important lesson from this film. "Never trust anyone completely, they could be plotting against you." That means noone. Not your friends, family, even the people you're close to.

71

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

My thoughts on Casino Royale:

-I thoroughly disliked it. Seriously, this is definitely the worst Bond movie ever made, and my least favorite. Daniel Craig just doesn't fit as Bond. If I want a tough guy Bond, I'll go watch TLD or LTK. Le Chiffre was an interesting villain, but he just didn't seem evil enough.

-The product placement was absolutely gratitous! Every time we see an electonic device there's a Sony logo on it! WTF?!

-The theme song sequence was good, the song was okay. The retro casino look, and the silhouettes I dig. But why break with tradition and not have the name of the movie in the theme song?

-The whole "prequel" thing just sucks. Seriously. It's nothing more than a way to start a whole new series of Bond movies.

Conclusion: Horrible movie, I don't consider it canon. The car was very cool, though.



-Vroom

72

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

jetsetwilly wrote:

- The titles were excellent, though I miss the naked girlies (would it have been too difficult to have the Queen of Hearts in the nude?).  It even made me enjoy Chris Cornell - who'd have thought?

Although I've said this elsewhere, this is the thread where my initial review is so I should clarify...  On second viewing, the titles ended and I thought to myself "Why didn't I like them before??"  Perhaps knowing what to expect made me appreciate them more, perhaps it was the shock of no nude girlies at all, but they're actually alright.  And a better position in the cinema second time round made Chris Cornell seem a little bit fuller and more balanced, so while still far from being the greatest song on earth, wasn't as bad as I initially thought. 

Oh, and I didn't notice the film dragging even slightly second time round.  Again, perhaps knowing what to expect alters that perception.

http://media.open2.net/flags/unitedkingdom.png

73

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

I saw Casino Royale and love Casino Royale!!

Daniel Craig has outdone himself as the newest James Bond.

(Edit: Copyright image removed)

He looked the part and played the part. I'd give casino royale a giant 007

Last edited by Moonraker 5 (20th Nov 2006 10:08)

74

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

Finally saw it on Saturday night. Brief comments:

1.Unfashionable i know but i loved the theme song and opening credits, i've been humming it all weekend.

2.I came out of DAD abit depressed and wondering whether the franchise had finally run its course. Came out of this one reinvigorated and excited cant wait for the next one!

3.I struggle to think of anything i didn't like, it was almost too good to be a Bond film if you get my meaning. Real sophisticated adult entertainment.

4. BTW my favourite Bond is Roger Moore, and i still loved it! ajb007/insane

5. Finally, the Sunday Express gave it an excellent review this weekend, but mused whether it would appeal to the audience of 'teenage American boys' that flocked to DAD. Since i know there are some on this site id love to know your opinions. Is this kind of gritty Bond a turn off for American audiences?

75

Re: Casino Royale Reviews

Definitely not! I saw a group of boys, probably 13 and 14, all taking a picture after seeing the movie and yelling "Bond rocks" instead of "cheese."

I agree that there was no one part I didn't like, except for the TS. I was never bored, which is unusual because even in my favorite of Bond films there is always a boring part. Not so in this one.