Casino Royale

  • Thread starter Thread starter Belcanto
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Belcanto

Guest
I saw the new James Bond movie, Casino Royale, on Thanksgiving.

First, I thought that Daniel Craig did an outstanding job as James Bond. He was better than Pierce Brosnan, in my opinion, and definitely better than Timothy Dalton. He wasn’t so much a playboy as in the Brosnan films, but a brooding assassin, which is how it should be.

Unfortunately, as with most James Bond movies, the plot made little sense. I couldn’t figure out who the main bad guy was until midway through, and I never did understand what his motivation was- what was he trying to do? Blow up some buildings, shoot a politician-- what? :confused:

Personally, I’ve never been a big fan of James Bond in general, but this one is definitely worth seeing. The action, although highly elaborate, is actually believeable, unlike the cartoonishness that characterizes so many Bond films.

Anyone else on here seen it?

Pax Tecum,
Jay
 
I, for one, will not see it since I am boycotting all of Sony due to the Da Vinci Code.
 
Belcanto said:
Unfortunately, as with most James Bond movies, the plot made little sense. I couldn’t figure out who the main bad guy was until midway through, and I never did understand what his motivation was- what was he trying to do? Blow up some buildings, shoot a politician-- what? :confused:
Click to expand...
I saw the movie and thought it possibly the best Bond film I’ve seen. …OK… I admit I haven’t really seen more than bits and pieces of the Sean Connery films.

Spoiler warning*******
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Le Chiffre was a gambler/speculator/player in many things. When he tried to blow up something or assasinate a politician it was to win a bet or play the stock market in a way other than what was generally expected to happen. For instance, the company (Boeing?) that released the new plane was expected to have its stock value go way up. Le Chiffre was counting on the stock price to go lower. He probably planned to sell short to make a profit. But he did his gambling with other people’s money so he was in a lot of trouble when Bond thwarted his plans.
 
SMHW said:
.
Le Chiffre was a gambler/speculator/player in many things. When he tried to blow up something or assasinate a politician it was to win a bet or play the stock market in a way other than what was generally expected to happen. For instance, the company (Boeing?) that released the new plane was expected to have its stock value go way up. Le Chiffre was counting on the stock price to go lower. He probably planned to sell short to make a profit. But he did his gambling with other people’s money so he was in a lot of trouble when Bond thwarted his plans.
Click to expand...
OK, thanks. Figures that a Bond villain would use the most convulted, difficult way imaginable to commit a crime. :rolleyes: Why can’t they have a believeable plot for once? Oh well, it is James Bond, after all.

Just as an aside, from the Bond films that I have personally seen, Golden Eye is my favorite.

Pax Tecum,
Jay
 
I really enjoyed the movie. I think Daniel Craig is the best Bond sinse Sean Connery. While the Pierce Brosnan movies weren’t completely bad (I thought Goldeneye was actually very good), his did tend to get way to fantastical with the gadgets. Casino Royale was more like the classic bond movies.
 
Read the books. Not only the Ian Fleming books, but the John Gardner books.

I love the movies, but I love the books more.
 
Thought the movie was good. I liked the more realistic way Craig played Bond (though I did like Q and the gadgets). I thought Vespa was a MUCH more believable character than Denise Richards as Christmas Jones. And even some of the other Bond girls from the Brosnan stint.

My 3 critiques:
  1. I didn’t think Vespa was that drop-dead gorgeous like they played her up to be. Very pretty? Yes. Absolutely hot? No. When Bond said he wanted everyone to be focused on her when she walked in the room my first thought was that I would give her a passing glance, but wouldn’t be awe-struck by her. I thought the hispanic, married woman was much more attractive.
  2. I wasn’t a fan of Bond falling in love with Vespa. The Bond Craig played was too cool, too cold for that right off the jump.
  3. They kept adding too many twists at the end.
 
I loved it. I was worried about a blond/blue eyed Bond, but apart from that, he seems to be the most accurate portrayal of Bond since Dalton. And the plot stuck close to that of Flemming’s novel, at least as far as the card game drama goes. I liked that it wasn’t all about sex and technology but more about intense drama and action. Fantastic.
 
One of the year’s best films. I really think Craig deserves an Oscar nod, but of course action movies hardly ever get nominated. Still, there was Depp for PotC…
 
Some people, myself included, don’t think Craig is a right person for a James Bond as far as appearance is concerned. They should just have him play as a type of action hero, but not Bond. It’s the only reason why I don’t watch CR.
 
I saw it and liked it as well. One of my favorite Bonds.

I agree with the person who said that Craig played Bond well. He game bond a more human side, some who could get hurt, lose and make mistakes. It made for a better and more realistic movie (well as realistic as a bond film can get).

If I remember correctly they havent signed Craig for more than just this Bond movie, hopefully after the success of this one they will sign him for a few more because he did a 👍 job.
 
was this movie successful? I sure hope it was. I was disappointed since I heard that stupid penguin movie beat it out. I was thinking this is bad news for Bond if a penguin movie can beat it but maybe Bond did really well as well ad this Penguin movie alos did really well but just better than Bond since it is more of a family movie.
 
wjp984 said:
was this movie successful? I sure hope it was. I was disappointed since I heard that stupid penguin movie beat it out. I was thinking this is bad news for Bond if a penguin movie can beat it but maybe Bond did really well as well ad this Penguin movie alos did really well but just better than Bond since it is more of a family movie.
Click to expand...
I think it is just that the penguin movie is doing really good, not that Casino Royal is doing bad… Some channel I forget which (headline news?) was saying that it was on track to being the highest grossing Bond movie ever.
 
wjp984 said:
was this movie successful? I sure hope it was. I was disappointed since I heard that stupid penguin movie beat it out. I was thinking this is bad news for Bond if a penguin movie can beat it but maybe Bond did really well as well ad this Penguin movie alos did really well but just better than Bond since it is more of a family movie.
Click to expand...
“Family” movies (I can think of a lot of movies that families should sit down and watch that don’t have that label) almost always dominate for a week or two after their release. It’s not unusual.
 
I saw this and as an afficionado of Ian Flemings Bond series, I thought that it was about time they brought 007 back to his roots.

For those that didn’t realize it, this was a Bond movie about Bond himself. It was almost a prequel, in that it was about Bond right after he earned his 00 status. That is why the bad guys took a back seat in this picture.

I also think that Daniel Craig made and excellent Bond as he is more what James Bond from the books was supposed to be like. Remember he is supposed to be an under cover, secret agent, and to me when they used “pretty boys” like, Moore, Dalton and Brosnan, you have to ask, how could such a man truly walk into a place unnoticed. It just wouldn’t happen. Sean Connery played the part well, but until Craig, there had not been a Bond that was true to the image in the books since George Lazenby.

The recent Bond movies have portrayed James Bond as a sexy, indestructable super hero with fancy gadgets and witty one liners. He was more of an unmasked Batman, than a secret agent. This recent movie, finally brought him back down to earth and made him human again who makes mistakes and is able to be hurt but was still intelligent without having to crack a pun every 30 seconds.

I am hoping that this is a re-tooling of the Bond and that more like it are soon to come.

Finally as much as I dislike Sony, they have too many holdings to actually boycott them effectively. Things like the Game Show Network, Loews Cinema (the movie theaters), Jeopardy game show, Wheel of Fortune game show, Columbia House Records (holds partial interest with Time Warner), Columbia Pictures, Tri-Star Pictures, Columbia Tri-Star Pictures and the list goes on.

ketupa.net/sony1.htm
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Pictures_Entertainment
sony.net/SonyInfo/CorporateInfo/Subsidiaries/outside.html
 
well I am glad to hear that the Bond film is doing so well. It was really good and I really enjoy the game of poker and that was an added benefit. I don’t think there has been a good poker movie since Maverick.
 
I thought it was a great movie. Daniel did a great job as Bond. His physical appearance was a big differance from other bonds though. I actually thought this one was a lot easier to understand then the otehr bond movies.
 
child_of_God85 said:
I really enjoyed the movie. I think Daniel Craig is the best Bond sinse Sean Connery. While the Pierce Brosnan movies weren’t completely bad (I thought Goldeneye was actually very good), his did tend to get way to fantastical with the gadgets. Casino Royale was more like the classic bond movies.
Click to expand...
I know!!! The gadget fascination was just too much with the Bronsan movies. He was a pretty good Bond though.

I thought it was a great movie. Daniel did a great job as Bond. His physical appearance was a big differance from other bonds though. I actually thought this one was a lot easier to understand then the otehr bond movies.
 
Roman_Catholic said:
I saw it and liked it as well. One of my favorite Bonds.

I agree with the person who said that Craig played Bond well. He game bond a more human side, some who could get hurt, lose and make mistakes. It made for a better and more realistic movie (well as realistic as a bond film can get).

If I remember correctly they havent signed Craig for more than just this Bond movie, hopefully after the success of this one they will sign him for a few more because he did a 👍 job.
Click to expand...
I read somewhere that he is already in filming of the next movie.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top