[Chyld]

Its good. Its nice to see a Bond film not adhearing to a strict mathematical formula. They shunned the crazy gadgdets, insane cars (although the car was nice), and chain of booty, and just had Bond kicking ass, taking names, and doing quite well at poker. There's also a nice plot twist that should have been obvious, but threw me like a legless man off of a horse. Well worth your time, basically.

[Dr Lecter]

Just got back from seeing it, two words: fucking awesome. He's a more realistic Bond, the storyline is more realistic, and the whole thing just has that new blood the whole franchise needs. The next film is suppose to be a direct sequel of this film, rather than a whole new mission. Sounds quite interesting, follow up a new style of film with something the franchise has never done before. I say, although the old Bonds are classics, this is the way of the Bond future.

This post has been edited by Dr Lecter: 17 November 2006 - 07:12 PM

[Jordan]

I fucking knew it. I knew he would rock the party that rocks the partay.

Good on you Daniel Craig! Show up those losers who thought a darker, campier bond was the better route.

[TruJade]

I saw it last night.
And i have to say i didn't like it. It would've been awesome but some parts ruined it.
It turned into a chick flick for about 10 min.

and i wish they had never happened.
The villian is a little weak
and the whole torture chair seems like

it belong in the deleted scenes or the bloopers.
Nothing against Dan Craig who i actually liked as Bond
but Casino Royal was a bit all over the place.

it was like 3 movies in one.
Can't believe i went through a snow storm for that movie.
I say save ur money and rent it first.

[Icey]

I disagree, I thought the villain and the torture scene were the strongest scens of the movie. Mikael Madsen is like, awesome, much love. All in all I enjoyed it, it was very long, but very enjoyable. I must say that even though Craig ain't my favorite Bond, this is officially my favorite Bond film, closely followed by License to Kill.

[assignedrisk]

'TruJade'
I saw it last night. And i have to say i didn't like it.

I didn't either.

The villian is a little weak and the whole torture chair seems like it belong in the deleted scenes or the bloopers. .

Call me retro, but my still all time favorite Bond film is "Goldfinger." The late German actor who played the villian was the best best best of all in my view. http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Mptv/1230/th-9455_0072.jpg


Call me retro, but my still all time favorite Bond film is "Goldfinger." The late German actor who played the villian was the best best best of all in my view. http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Mptv/1230/th-9455_0072.jpg
[/quote]


Sorry, the link won't work.

[Jaded Wolf]

I saw this just last Saturday night and I really enjoyed it. Plus, wasn't the ending the beginning of another James Bond film? I could be wrong but it looked familiar. This James Bond atempts to show how Bond became the way he is and it does so quite well. I really don't care what the guy looks like because a guy's looks aren't that important. I liked this grittier, more realistic, more extreme Bond. This actually made the British not look like wimps.

[TruJade]

Sorry but the film still felt weak.
For instance james bond would never have gotten
(how do i put this without being a spoiler)
'sick' from a drink or dabbled with meaningless characters.

But yeah i have to say that villian
OMG he looked so scary and you sit there
thinking this guy is the shit but he's really
just full of it and the 'eye cry'

WHAT!?!? ????? !!!!!!
Does that even happen!
Plus I'd be more interested in knowing more about him
and how he got into the business and

getting that scar then how he plays poker or the chick he screws.
Did i mention the inconsistances, where were the Americans!
They were suppose to help but nothing. Did the director and writers just forget to add them back in? Its gonna take me a while to warm up to this movie

and Vesper ... are you serious give me a break
and while you're at it throw in a Kit-Kat bar
cuz that chick was a mental trip!
And i'm not the only one who left the theatre disappointed.

I held my standards pretty high for Dan Craig, and he didn't let me down
it was the movie. It didn't work.
All i can say is don't listen to the reviews or even me for that matter.
If you haven't seen the movie just go into it open minded.

[civilian_number_two]

I liked it. Any complaints that this guy didn't behave like the James Bond of previous films ought to be quietly laughed away: Bond has always been reckless; Bond has always become (briefly) quite involved with the women he meets and will risk life and limb to help them; Bond frequently stumbles his way to the resolution of his cases, apparently not realizing how much eventually depends on chance and adrenaline. I appreciate that you'd like it for Bond not to get sick from a drug put into his drink, but in fact, Bond getting caught by villains is also a part of the lauded James Bond formula. Given the venue, he really shouldn't have seen it coming. However, if you're hoping for something more true to form, please remember that the classic Bond flew in outer space, drove a car that turned into a submarine, and fought a woman who had a knife in her shoe. So it's been campy for a while, and I'm glad to say campy this one was not. The action is more kinetic than human endurance may allow, but hey, they weren't going to throw that away. But I'm glad there were no gadgets; I only wish too there had been no pop song.

[TruJade]

Ok I can definately accept your opinion.
It's the first to really make sense.
I also was glad there were no gadgets either.

And bascially the stunts
(all except for that scar faced
black guy who could move like the wind)

were acceptable as physically possible.
My only thing was the Bond Girls
(even the evil one) still had

his loyalty to the very end.
That was not Bond like.
Calling her a bitch in the end was.

They're supposed to leave an impression on
you of some sort but they don't.
If i hadn't been so in to getting to understand
his relationship with these woman, I wouldn't have cared.

I only wish too there had been no pop song

And you didn't like the theme song? Is that what you're talking about?
'Cuz i thought Chris Cornell did a pretty good job.
I know it doesn't seem so at first
but the chorus is JB through and through.

[civilian_number_two]

Since the film was like a restarting of the series, I wanted no pop song. DR NO had no pop song. That's all. The song I don't care about either way; I certainly can't remember any of it.

[TruJade]

Your intentions may be noble in
an effort to return JB to his inital glory
but now a days, at least in my experience, a movie

needs wide spread media attention
or it doesn't do that well at the box office.
So does it need to have a catchy tune associated with it?

Probably not, but in this case it needs all the help it can get.

[Just your average movie goer]

Well, I've finally seen the film and I have to say it's a mixed bag. Almost everybody seems to think this is the best Bond film ever - and I'll admit that for large parts of the movie, it felt like it was. However, I think a lot of us are getting confused about something.

This film did a lot of brilliant things and delivered us either the best portrayal of Bond ever... or at the very least, the best since Connery. However, it's not sufficent for a movie to do things brilliantly - a good movie should be in itself brilliant, and I'm not sure that Casino Royale was.

The story is not that tight or memorable and I had a certain feeling of "What was the point of all that?" at the end. This seemed to be a great character study with incredible character development but little else.

I'll give my own run-down of the film (spoilers included) with my thoughts.

The pre-credit sequence was very good and a refreshing way to start the film.

The big action sequence that followed with the chase through Magadascar was not a good idea though. It struck me as odd that with all the attempts to make Bond seem more real and more grounded that they came up with the most ridiculous over-the-top foot chase to ever grace the screen. Now I realise that a lot of you would probably argue that the parkour (free running) stuff was done for real and so it's okay. I disagree. The stuff was done for real - however, it was done piece by piece under controlled circumstances by a parkour world champion, practically a professional acrobat. The character however was supposed to just be a bomb maker.

So what we ended up with was something that looked like it was out of X-Men. So much for the realism.

However, the action comes down from the construction cranes and into the embassy, the movie resumes its coolness. From here on in, the movie is just a joy to watch and Bond is brilliant the whole time. Daniel Craig never lets us down.

The same can't be said of the production team and the script writers however. They made a brilliant 1/2 a movie and for about an hour, I thought this was the best Bond film ever made - no contest.

Then it came to the torture scene. At this point, I'd just like to say "Thank you, Tru Jade!" I am glad I'm not the only person who thought this had no business being here. It was really tasteless, unnecessarily horrible and served no purpose to the plot - as Le Chiffere was finished. It was also completely inappropriate for the type of movie this was. If it had been in some obscure R-rated horror movie, that might have been okay - but not in Bond. Now, before somebody else says it, I know that this scene was in Ian Fleming's novel. However, in the novels, Bond kills Dr No by burying him in manure and he also has a kid with Kissy Suzuki. So I don't think the movies really need to stay completely faithful to the novels. I mean, they were happy enough to get rid of the Baccarat and give Bond a mobile phone.

After this, it's all an extended anti-climax with some needlessly complicated plot and a doomed romance that really seems to start and finish in the last third of the movie. It's also very predictable. Once Bond resigns, we know Vesper is done for because if she stays around, then Bond's 007 adventures will be over forever - and we know that's not going to happen.

The bad guys introduced in this afterthought ending are never given a proper introduction and as we never really find out who they are or what they're up to, it's hard to give a stuff about anything that happens with them.

It is only at the end with the cool final scene that the movie regains its composure. The future looks promising for 007. I love Daniel Craig and I can't wait to see where the producers take Bond next. However, I think this movie was a bit of a false start.

It broke ground, it did lots of cool things and introduced the best Bond in a long time but I don't think Casino Royale quite made it. I look forward to the next one though.

[TruJade]

MAN! That was a pretty loooong read, well not really, but well worth it.
I agree with you on everything.

In my haste and anger over the film i may have gone a little overboard,
but it's only because i'm so passionate about the movie i see.

You know it's quite pricey to go to the cinema and i don't like to sit thru crap ass films...
(though i sat thru Miami Vice to see how the wretched film would end)

Then it came to the torture scene. At this point, I'd just like to say "Thank you, Tru Jade!" I am glad I'm not the only person who thought this had no business being here. It was really tasteless, unnecessarily horrible and served no purpose to the plot

I to am also glad that sumone else thinks that was just so bad and pointless.
I received alot of flack from Bond worshippers who love the movie.

But, eh... now i know i've got support from sumone who is obviously sane.

[civilian_number_two]

Movie Goer, you are like Haley's comet these days. You come along rarely, but every time you are worth paying attention to.

I know what you mean about the whole "what was the point?" business, but actually I liked that in this one. Bond didn't save the world from a madman who had a secret base in outer space or under a volcanic lake. He stopped money from being fed to a terrorist organisation, and killed a few people in the process. I liked the smallness of the story, and hope for more of that in the future. The giant obvious nonsense is what made Bond embarrassing to like.

The torture is out of place in a standard Bond film, and I'd like to see less of that in the future, but if this is "the one with the torture in it," then I don't think that's so bad.

My main complaints with this film were that all of the good action is right at the beginning and that Bond is playing Texas Hold-em, just becasue it's popular these days on ESPN. Boo, how marketable. But everything else I liked. I look forward to seeing Daniel Craig in future installments, now that he's gotten the "I'm a n00B" gimmick out of the way.