24 replies to this topic

[RITZ]

Right now I've just got back from a screening of CR. I've chosen to post my review on my myspace page. I promised myself I wouldn't come here since all hell will break loose when CR is out everywhere.

Undecided and confused. Thats about it right now. Read it and weap/cry/laugh/agree.

My CR review (first viewing) on Myspace "Sour Martinis"

[JimmyBond]

Interesting, but you don't really explain why you're on the fence.

[RITZ]

Thats just it. I can't really explain my reason for being on the fence. Perhaps its a natural reaction since the film is so different.

As mentioned, a repeat viewing is required.

[Mercator]

I too did not feel like the Bond film. I agree with you Ritz

Why?

No Q
No Moneypenny
No gadgets
No girls in the titles
No big villain - Ian Fleming would disapprove of this story - where was it?
No locations - why not France?
No humour
No good ending - Bond should always end with the girl. Hopefully with the funny jokes
No sets - I was expecting a big battle in the Casino Royale. Wasn't it the baddie's HQ in the original?
No 007 Theme - only came at the end
No proper Bond song - you cannot have the American rock as Bond song. Bring back Shirley Bassey or Carly Simon. They would have done a good song.
Why no Blofeld or big plan? The last few Bond films suffer from this.
I think a lot of peoples have been fooled by Daniel Craig. He is good actor with good body but Bond is not Arnold Schwartzenegger. Daniel is too tough. Roger said that Bond is someone who does not like killing - Daniel does.

I'm glad that Ritz, you have agreement with me and that I am not alone.

[RITZ]

I too did not feel like the Bond film. I agree with you Ritz

Why?

No Q
No Moneypenny
No gadgets
No girls in the titles
No big villain - Ian Fleming would disapprove of this story - where was it?
No locations - why not France?
No humour
No good ending - Bond should always end with the girl. Hopefully with the funny jokes
No sets - I was expecting a big battle in the Casino Royale. Wasn't it the baddie's HQ in the original?
No 007 Theme - only came at the end
No proper Bond song - you cannot have the American rock as Bond song. Bring back Shirley Bassey or Carly Simon. They would have done a good song.
Why no Blofeld or big plan? The last few Bond films suffer from this.
I think a lot of peoples have been fooled by Daniel Craig. He is good actor with good body but Bond is not Arnold Schwartzenegger. Daniel is too tough. Roger said that Bond is someone who does not like killing - Daniel does.

I'm glad that Ritz, you have agreement with me and that I am not alone.

I'm not sure I agree with your specific points highlight above. I wasn't bothered about no Q or Moneypenny. But locations wise it was fantastic. I can't knock that. Title sequence was incredible too. Like I mentioned in my blog, its a complete re-boot without the tired baggage of the previous 20 movies. It works well on some levels, we see a rough, naive and new Bond.

As far as the title song goes, its growing on me. Suits Daniel Craig's badass approach to things.

[killkenny kid]

I didn't care for the title sequence. And after this movie. I don't if I never see Moneypenny or Q again.

[stamper]

I fail to see how Fleming would not appreciate this movie. His writing is up there on the screen for the first time since 1969 !

By the same token, I don't see why the movie should end with Bond sleeping with the girl AGAIN, that's in boring and tired and cliched,

[RITZ]

Second review now up. Somewhat confusing to read since its basically "Sour Martinis Pt2". Oh well, thats blogging for you!

Anyway, I'm warming to the film. Still a few minor niggles. Read it, its titled "STEVE MCQUEEN BOND" on myspace - RITZ's myspace

Edited by RITZ, 24 November 2006 - 05:15 PM.

[stamper]

I too did not feel like the Bond film. I agree with you Ritz

Why?

No Q
No Moneypenny
No gadgets
No girls in the titles
No big villain - Ian Fleming would disapprove of this story - where was it?
No locations - why not France?
No humour
No good ending - Bond should always end with the girl. Hopefully with the funny jokes
No sets - I was expecting a big battle in the Casino Royale. Wasn't it the baddie's HQ in the original?
No 007 Theme - only came at the end
No proper Bond song - you cannot have the American rock as Bond song. Bring back Shirley Bassey or Carly Simon. They would have done a good song.
Why no Blofeld or big plan? The last few Bond films suffer from this.
I think a lot of peoples have been fooled by Daniel Craig. He is good actor with good body but Bond is not Arnold Schwartzenegger. Daniel is too tough. Roger said that Bond is someone who does not like killing - Daniel does.

These are all the reasons why this movie is so good !
Bond is a gorilla in a suit, like Sean was. He doesn't enjoy killing, he enjoy the death of his opponent when he is tough one (like the airport scene) which is absolutely not the same

[bond 16.05.72]

I don't get your comment on the delivery of Craig's "Bond! James Bond!"

Buttock clenchingly poor, that's a bit strong, I thought it was fine and not a hint of smarm we've come to expect with Brosnan.

We're all intitled to our opinion, glad to hear your warming to it, personally it's my No.1, I'm no newcommer, been a Bond fan for nearly 30 years now.

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

No Q
No Moneypenny

You mention Fleming in a few lines... neither of these characters were big in the books and frankly neither of them were completely necessary in the story. We've had so much Mi6 time with the last few movies I was glad to have a little bit of a break.

No gadgets

Uh huh...what do you call the glove box hospital in the DBS?

No big villain - Ian Fleming would disapprove of this story - where was it?

You ever read Casino Royale?

No locations - why not France?

Are you mad that the locations weren't real? Or that it wasn't France?
Anyway I didn't see an issue with the Bahamas and Montenegro.

No humour

What movie were you watching? ('Oh, and the valet ticket', 'you Ok?', 'whole world's going to know you died scratching my balls')

No good ending - Bond should always end with the girl. Hopefully with the funny jokes

If you couldn't appreciate the gravity of the ending then there's really nothing I can say here...

No sets - I was expecting a big battle in the Casino Royale. Wasn't it the baddie's HQ in the original?

Original what? Apparently you never have read Casino Royale..

No 007 Theme - only came at the end

The end still counts as part of the movie. And it is used subtly throughout the rest of the score.

Why no Blofeld or big plan?

Are you....serious?

I think a lot of peoples have been fooled by Daniel Craig. He is good actor with good body but Bond is not Arnold Schwartzenegger. Daniel is too tough. Roger said that Bond is someone who does not like killing - Daniel does.

Oh does he now? He seemed to go to great lengths to avoid killing anyone but Mollaka in the embassy...

And I suppose killing men who are shooting at you (such as in the stairwell or in Venice) makes you a sociopath?

Pierce killed a lot more randomly than Daniel so far.

[James Bond [007]]

I too did not feel like the Bond film. I agree with you Ritz

Why?

No Q
No Moneypenny
No gadgets
No girls in the titles
No big villain - Ian Fleming would disapprove of this story - where was it?
No locations - why not France?
No humour
No good ending - Bond should always end with the girl. Hopefully with the funny jokes
No sets - I was expecting a big battle in the Casino Royale. Wasn't it the baddie's HQ in the original?
No 007 Theme - only came at the end
No proper Bond song - you cannot have the American rock as Bond song. Bring back Shirley Bassey or Carly Simon. They would have done a good song.
Why no Blofeld or big plan? The last few Bond films suffer from this.
I think a lot of peoples have been fooled by Daniel Craig. He is good actor with good body but Bond is not Arnold Schwartzenegger. Daniel is too tough. Roger said that Bond is someone who does not like killing - Daniel does.

I'm glad that Ritz, you have agreement with me and that I am not alone.

With all due respect do you understand Ian Fleming's James Bond at all?

No Q, Moneypenny or gadgets? Well Q wasn't really needed here, Moneypenny wasn't really needed even though she did appear on the book but had no importance in it and the no gadgets thing I think that the cellphones and laptops served as gadgets.

No girl in the titles? It really wasn't needed also we had a great title sequence seeing Bond fight bad guys.

No big villain - Ian Fleming would disapprove of this story - where was it? - Honestly, have you read the novel? There was no big villain there either it was just Le Chiffre in the novel.

No locations? What about the Bahamas, Prague, Montenegro (even though it was a fictional city), Venice? They were all great locations.

No humor? You didn't laugh at the torture scene with the "I have an itch down there, would you mind?" and the smirk that Bond gave when he changed the detonator to Carlos?

No good ending? Again the novel, he didn't end up with the girl because she died as in the novel, but there was a great ending in the film with the "The name's Bond... James Bond".

No action scene in Casino Royale? So what there was a great Parkour action/chase scene with Mollaka in Madagascar, we had a great stairwell fight.

No 007 Theme? Well it was at the end because it suited the ending.

No proper Bond song? Well most people will agree with you there also I personally liked the song but at least we had a great Title Sequence.

Why no Blofeld or big plan? Again The novel read it, Because the villain was a banker for a World Terrorist Organization and he wanted the gain the money he had lost.

I said it many times here and i'll say it again Read the novel and you will see the greatness of this movie that represented Ian Fleming's James Bond.

Edited by James Bond [007], 24 November 2006 - 09:05 PM.

[mrweasley]

[quote name='James Bond [007]' date='24 November 2006 - 22:01' post='655762']
[quote name='Mercator' post='649961' date='18 November 2006 - 15:28']


I said it many times here and i'll say it again Read the novel and you will see the greatness of this movie that represented Ian Fleming's James Bond.
[/quote]

It's not the Bond Flemig described. Craig is harder, yes but he has many attributes Fleming's Bond has not. For me Craig's Bond feels forced. Every actor brought something new to the character. Craig does not, he creates a whole new person. May be this sophisticated, smart, but dangerous British Agent is not the thing the general audience wants to see anymore. So the producers made him more like Ethen Hunt, Jason Borne, Jack Bauer etc. But with doing so the character lost, in my opinion, something essential. We were all disappointed after DAD and wanted something new. But this Bond is for me not Bond. The movie is thrilling, well made and so on but it doesn't feel like Bond.

[EyesOnly]

In no way do I think Craigs Bond is forced. If anything, their personalities seem very similar. I always thought Brosnan's bond was forced, and I never disliked him...but if anyone never brought anything new to the table it would be Brosnan! I see alot of Fleming in Craig, and I think it shows with flying colors!

[mrweasley]

@ EyesOnly: What of Flemig do you see in Craig?

[EyesOnly]

First off, Craig is the first Bond that made me see that there are thoughts and feelings after a brutal fight! Did you see the way Craig looked after the bathroom fight or the stairwell fight? He actually displayed the words from Fleming onto the big screen! When you saw Bond take his shirt off, clean the blood off his hands and head, watching him down some hard liquor..... then takes a long look in the mirror giving us that feeling that he truly dislikes this job of killing/amazed to be alive! This to me is the most powerful moment of the film...yes there are other great moments such as the torture...but this actually sent chills down my spine, finally we see a more 3 demensional character who like Moore and Brosnan killed, said a witty quip and then on to the next part of their day!

Craig carries himself very well, had the arrogance, wit, and look that remind me all very much of fleming...of course this is all my opinion! I have read all the Bond novels and he nails this very well! I never saw any bit of forcefulness from him at all, where as Moore and Brosnan looked like they had to really try hard to be, well, a prick! Connery, Craig and even Lazenby got this down to a T! Hope this helps!

[Roger Moore's Bad Facelift]

If you couldn't appreciate the gravity of the ending then there's really nothing I can say here...

"Gravity", eh?
Dang, I must've missed that completely.
Didn't anyone else feel the submerged venetian building was a last minute effort to shoe-horn some epic Bond-style conclusion into an otherwise low-key film?
Most of the film strives to transgress tired Bond cliches, and yet here we are once again, having an overblown ending just for the sake of it.

Tonal incongruities like that are all over this film.

Edited by Roger Moore's Bad Facelift, 25 November 2006 - 06:36 PM.

[James Bond [007]]

It's not the Bond Flemig described. Craig is harder, yes but he has many attributes Fleming's Bond has not. For me Craig's Bond feels forced. Every actor brought something new to the character. Craig does not, he creates a whole new person. May be this sophisticated, smart, but dangerous British Agent is not the thing the general audience wants to see anymore. So the producers made him more like Ethen Hunt, Jason Borne, Jack Bauer etc. But with doing so the character lost, in my opinion, something essential. We were all disappointed after DAD and wanted something new. But this Bond is for me not Bond. The movie is thrilling, well made and so on but it doesn't feel like Bond.

James Bond in Casino Royale (Daniel Craig) is charming, sophisticated, handsome; chillingly ruthless and licensed to kill secret agent just as Ian Fleming described in Casino Royale (novel). Another thing, the producers didn't make him more like Ethan Hunt or any of those they made him Ian Fleming's James Bond.

Edited by James Bond [007], 25 November 2006 - 06:55 PM.

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

If you couldn't appreciate the gravity of the ending then there's really nothing I can say here...

"Gravity", eh?
Dang, I must've missed that completely.
Didn't anyone else feel the submerged venetian building was a last minute effort to shoe-horn some epic Bond-style conclusion into an otherwise low-key film?
Most of the film strives to transgress tired Bond cliches, and yet here we are once again, having an overblown ending just for the sake of it.

Tonal incongruities like that are all over this film.

Well in particular I was referring to Vesper's suicide...and the very end of the movie with Daniel still coming out on top sans Bond girl and cheesy one-liner.

I agree that the house was overblown just for the sake of it, though I enjoyed that sequence more than I thought I would initially...

[Dr. Noah]

' date='25 November 2006 - 18:51' post='656280']

It's not the Bond Flemig described. Craig is harder, yes but he has many attributes Fleming's Bond has not. For me Craig's Bond feels forced. Every actor brought something new to the character. Craig does not, he creates a whole new person. May be this sophisticated, smart, but dangerous British Agent is not the thing the general audience wants to see anymore. So the producers made him more like Ethen Hunt, Jason Borne, Jack Bauer etc. But with doing so the character lost, in my opinion, something essential. We were all disappointed after DAD and wanted something new. But this Bond is for me not Bond. The movie is thrilling, well made and so on but it doesn't feel like Bond.

James Bond in Casino Royale (Daniel Craig) is charming, sophisticated, handsome; chillingly ruthless and licensed to kill secret agent just as Ian Fleming described in Casino Royale (novel). Another thing, the producers didn't make him more like Ethan Hunt or any of those they made him Ian Fleming's James Bond.

Here's what Craig says (translated from French:

http://www.allocine....l...395072&pa...

"There was several things (that influenced me). People usually mention the 'Bourne' saga, which were superb films. They are very rough. But we (Eon) already had that kind of film. If you remember 'Get Carter' and spy films with Michael Caine in the 60's, for example. Those always interested me. And I think that James Bond had a lot of
that at first. It disappeared, then returned with Timothy Dalton. I always integrate cinematic influences in my work, and this one counted a lot for Casino Royale."

[James Bond [007]]

If you remember 'Get Carter' and spy films with Michael Caine in the 60's, for example. Those always interested me. And I think that James Bond had a lot of
that at first. It disappeared, then returned with Timothy Dalton. I always integrate cinematic influences in my work, and this one counted a lot for Casino Royale."

What are you trying to prove? Because if you read carefully it mentions that Timothy Dalton had a lot of influence in his performance on Casino Royale, and most people agree that Timothy Dalton's Bond is a lot like Fleming's Bond.

[EyesOnly]

That might explain Daniel Craigs subtle "uh huh" when David Letterman was showing pictures of the past Bond actors!

[James Bond [007]]

That might explain Daniel Craigs subtle "uh huh" when David Letterman was showing pictures of the past Bond actors!

Exactly watch the interview with Letterman again, and notice how Craig says "hmmm" when he shows the picture of Dalton, he clearly had an influence on Craig's performance as James Bond.

[Dr. Noah]

' date='25 November 2006 - 20:49' post='656372']

If you remember 'Get Carter' and spy films with Michael Caine in the 60's, for example. Those always interested me. And I think that James Bond had a lot of
that at first. It disappeared, then returned with Timothy Dalton. I always integrate cinematic influences in my work, and this one counted a lot for Casino Royale."

What are you trying to prove? Because if you read carefully it mentions that Timothy Dalton had a lot of influence in his performance on Casino Royale, and most people agree that Timothy Dalton's Bond is a lot like Fleming's Bond.

Why do you think I posted it?

[James Bond [007]]

' date='25 November 2006 - 20:49' post='656372']

If you remember 'Get Carter' and spy films with Michael Caine in the 60's, for example. Those always interested me. And I think that James Bond had a lot of
that at first. It disappeared, then returned with Timothy Dalton. I always integrate cinematic influences in my work, and this one counted a lot for Casino Royale."

What are you trying to prove? Because if you read carefully it mentions that Timothy Dalton had a lot of influence in his performance on Casino Royale, and most people agree that Timothy Dalton's Bond is a lot like Fleming's Bond.

Why do you think I posted it?

I thought you posted it because it mentioned at first the Bourne films, some people might interpret that Daniel Craig says that the Bourne films were an influence on his portrayal as James Bond, but at least you aren't one of those people.