108 replies to this topic

[Royal Dalton]

I can't stand Casino Royale.

What? Why?

Same here why!?!?!

It's miscast, the script's full of awful dialogue and unnecessary Brosnan-style action sequences, I hate Campbell's cramped direction, the digital grading is horrible, and it's got Richard Branson in it.

[BourneAgainBond]

I think it will be better then CR or QOS because of all the talent involved, Q's back, everything has been kept secret, and because its not an introduction film like CR.

About Newman, I think it gives the series a new life. We can't say what it will sound like and I bet Newman doesn't know exactly how it all will turn out till the end either.

[SycloneFS]

I can't stand Casino Royale.

What? Why?

Same here why!?!?!

It's miscast, the script's full of awful dialogue and unnecessary Brosnan-style action sequences, I hate Campbell's cramped direction, the digital grading is horrible, and it's got Richard Branson in it.

Really? I guess I can understand that. I always felt the airport sequence could of been done with out the big actionhype to it and after White kills Le Chiefe, the rest of the movie slowed down too much and harmed the film alittle bit. As a whole for the first time I figued they did a good job on the first try at Casino Royale (cuz face it 20+ years down the line they'll redo it again at some point) Never felt tho the dialoge was bad. I figured after DAD it was a big improvement, but I think most can agree tho anything was a improvement over DAD. lol (sorry for the dis on DAD if any are a fan of it.)

Edited by SycloneFS, 01 March 2012 - 03:57 AM.

[SecretAgentFan]

I can't stand Casino Royale.

What? Why?

Same here why!?!?!

It's miscast, the script's full of awful dialogue and unnecessary Brosnan-style action sequences, I hate Campbell's cramped direction, the digital grading is horrible, and it's got Richard Branson in it.

Miscast?

Awful dialogue?

I´d like examples, please.

The action sequences... well, I can imagine which you are referring to. Although I disagree.

[DamnCoffee]

As much as I love Casino Royale, some of the dialogue in it is pretty bad. Not 'Brosnan era bad', but let's just say... It's not strong. Now I say some, not most. Most of it is pretty strong, but some examples off the top of my head...

"Rolex?" - "OMEGA!!!!"
"If all that was left of you, was your smile and your LITTLE FINGER." (?)
"Ssssskewered."

Edited by Mharkin, 01 March 2012 - 10:07 AM.

[Captain Tightpants]

The worst example was "I would, if I new what it was". Not because it's a particularly bad piece of writing, but because Eva Green is so wooden she makes Megan Fox look like something other than a cardboard box.

[Vauxhall]

I like the "skewered" line; fits very well in the repartee of the conversation. It's Craig's delivery of it that I find very odd.

[BourneAgainBond]

"Sorry. I'll shoot the camera first next time."
"I did. I thought one less bomb maker in the world would be a good thing." - Aren't my favorite lines.

Edited by BourneAgainBond, 01 March 2012 - 12:29 PM.

[SecretAgentFan]

Hmm. In my mind, these examples can hardly be considered as "bad" dialogue. It´s just your preference. Which is perfectly fine, of course. But really bad dialogue?

"I want to kiss you like I did that time at the lake on Naboo." That is a clunker. Did we get this stuff in CR? Don´t think so.

[Miles Miservy]

I try not to dwell on the hype too much. I can remember becoming significantly excited about the up-and-coming release of DIE ANOTHER DAY, only to exit the theater, the day it openned, wondering where 2 hours of my life just went. Even my 11 year old had a strong opinion. Her exact words were, "Well, THAT most certainly sucked."

However, upon learning that Pierce Brosnan would NOT be returning to play OO7 in CASINO ROYALE, I was thoroughly prepared to attend that premier for the sole purpose of ripping the movie apart. Like everyone else though, it blew me away and I hadn't a bad thing to say about it.

I jumped into seeing Quantum OF SOLACE with both feet & enjoyed that one just as well. To this day, I do not understand why so many fans were displeased with it.

So, am I looking forward to SKYFALL this November? ...You bet. Will I be following the news coverage leading up to and following the film's release? ...Absolutely. Will I get sucked into the hype of how it's going to be the "BEST BOND EVER"? ...Probably not. I'll go to the theater, buy my ticket & then by the time the end credits role, I'll determine whether or not I will be purchasing the movie for my collection.

There IS one thing I love to do, that drives my kids CRAZY... I don't let them leave the theater until the words "JAMES BOND WILL RETURN" scrolls up the screen.

[SycloneFS]

I try not to dwell on the hype too much. I can remember becoming significantly excited about the up-and-coming release of DIE ANOTHER DAY, only to exit the theater, the day it openned, wondering where 2 hours of my life just went. Even my 11 year old had a strong opinion. Her exact words were, "Well, THAT most certainly sucked."

However, upon learning that Pierce Brosnan would NOT be returning to play OO7 in CASINO ROYALE, I was thoroughly prepared to attend that premier for the sole purpose of ripping the movie apart. Like everyone else though, it blew me away and I hadn't a bad thing to say about it.

I jumped into seeing Quantum OF SOLACE with both feet & enjoyed that one just as well. To this day, I do not understand why so many fans were displeased with it.

So, am I looking forward to SKYFALL this November? ...You bet. Will I be following the news coverage leading up to and following the film's release? ...Absolutely. Will I get sucked into the hype of how it's going to be the "BEST BOND EVER"? ...Probably not. I'll go to the theater, buy my ticket & then by the time the end credits role, I'll determine whether or not I will be purchasing the movie for my collection.

There IS one thing I love to do, that drives my kids CRAZY... I don't let them leave the theater until the words "JAMES BOND WILL RETURN" scrolls up the screen.

I Do the exact same thing at the end of the film. I always have high hopes that maybe just maybe the will put james bond will return in.... but as usual it never does but hey you can't help but hope lol

[Captain Tightpants]

"Sorry. I'll shoot the camera first next time."
"I did. I thought one less bomb maker in the world would be a good thing." - Aren't my favorite lines.

I actually think these are great lines. Both really embody Bond. The first shows his slightly blithe attitude towards it all - he knows his actions have stirred up controversy, but at the same time, he knows that all the bickering from oversight committees won't change anything, least of all the way he felt that he had no other option but to kill Mollaka. The second encompasses what I think is Bond's belief that evil needs to be found and destroyed; unlike many heroes, Bond is not reluctant to chase down a villain. He doesn't have to wait for a villain to strike close to home before he can get himself involved - the fact that evil exists to begin with is reason enough for it to be sought out and destroyed. So no matter how minor Mollaka was in grand scheme of things, Bond clearly thinks that the world is a better place without him.

[havok_007]

Its Bond, theres going to be the odd cheesy line. I thought the ones in Casino Royale where fine. They do get slightly cringe worthy when you have watched the movie more than 5 times I must admit.

Anyway, back on the topic.

I hope this movie surpasses CR, it was almost a 10/10 Bond movie for me. It was missing a few things to make it perfect. 4 stars (and a half).

I am reasonably confidant that this will be on par with CR.
Super Talent on board. I think the director has got a real hold of what a bond movie is unlike the last one. I thought QoS was tremendously average.

Shouldn't be that hard to make one just as good. Just takes a bit of effort and imagination. Confidence is high!

[Skudor]

I'll be confident of how good it is when I've seen it. Been dissappointed too many times, even though the last two were great. It'll take a while to get me into auto-wide-eyed-optimist mode.

[Aris007]

No one can tell for sure if Skyfall will top Casino Royale or the other way round. It's a matter of how the elements will come together. Certainly the ingredients are top-notch, that doesn't mean though that the product will be that way.

Then it's the matter of personal taste. Personally I think that Mendes will produce a Bond film we've never seen in a bad way for fans who expect a classic anniversary film and in a good way for fans who want something balanced and a spy "grown-up" picture. At least that's what the huge amount of London scenes suggest. That's what I want, but I wouldn't curse and swear if they gave us a classic film that makes sense though. I not for a second will like an action-packed full of nonsense film just for popcorn.

[MajorB]

Script, script, script, script, script. If it's great, then the other elements that we're hopeful about will probably make it pretty amazing. If the script isn't great, the rest won't matter much. Fingers crossed. We'll see.

[SteveBolton]

I was disappointed with QOS but I've got a gut feeling this one is gonna rank alongside Casino Royale.

[Professor Dent]

I try to go into movies with modest expectations so everything doesn't turn out to be a disappointment. While I wanted QOS to be a great movie, Forster never inspired a lot of confidence. He just seemed like the wrong guy for a Bond movie. To be fair, if the writers strike didn't happen, maybe it would have turned out differently & picking him would have been seen as a great move. For Skyfall, Mendes does seem like a great choice at this point.

On the quality end, I would hope it's as good as CR. I'm looking forward to the trailers being released. I remember watching the CR trailers countless times before seeing the movie. They had a feel about them that really gave me a good vibe about the movie. Even today when I watch them, they have a feel that I don't get from the QOS trailers.

[007RogerMoore]

SF will most likely be better. CR was the restart, and had to show certain things to make Bond the person he later is. Unfortunately, the quality suffered for it and the result was my least favorite Bond movie, by far. Why most people love this movie I don´t understand. It not a Bondian movie at all. I think Bond should be Bond, with gadgets and a villain with his own lair and a larger than life plan. Instead we get a love story with terrible drama and an attempt to be Bourne. I don´t like the emo-style and miss DAD with it´s OTT-moments.

SF will probably be better and if it is as good as QOS I will be happy.

[The Shark]

The problem with CR is not the lack of gadgets, but the presence of leftovers from the Brosnan age, along with shoddy writing and hit-and-miss casting (i.e. Eva Green).

[Matt_13]

...You seriously think Eva Green was miscast?

[The Shark]

... Yep. I wasn't convinced by the romance for one second. We are told they're in love by braindead dialogue ("Everyone has a tell, except you. I think that's why I love you") but never shown by the actors.

[DamnCoffee]

While I love Casino Royale, I can't help but agree with you to an extent. In both the novel and the movie, i don't believe for a second they were both in love. Infact, the entire Venice sequence is probably the weakest past of the entire movie (Along with Miami and the Parkour Chase)

[Vanish]

I'm pretty confident that Skyfall will be the best of Daniel Craig's movies so far - And I have absolutely nothing to base that on, just a feeling I get based on Sam Mendes' comments and Daniel Craig's enthusiasm. And the glimpses we've seen so far (the moody Shangai still, the London on-set pics) have been refreshingly different.

As for criticism about CR, I agree to some extent. I love the movie, but I don't think it's perfect, and a big part of that is because the dialogue is "overwritten" in a lot of scenes. Especially the train sequence between Bond and Vesper, yikes.

QoS had the opposite problem, of course, with a lot of undercooked dialogue that was on-the-nose expository.

[Vauxhall]

While I love Casino Royale, I can't help but agree with you to an extent. In both the novel and the movie, i don't believe for a second they were both in love. Infact, the entire Venice sequence is probably the weakest past of the entire movie (Along with Miami and the Parkour Chase)

Surprised about the parkour sequence - one of my absolute top Bond stunt sequences!

[Miles Miservy]

The problem with CR is not the lack of gadgets, but the presence of leftovers from the Brosnan age, along with shoddy writing and hit-and-miss casting (i.e. Eva Green).

Eva Green was NOT miscast;

Halle Berry was miscast...
Denise Richards was miscast...
Lynn Holly Johnson was miscast...
Tanya Roberts was DEFINATELY miscast...

But Eva Green did just fine. She was beautiful enough to fall in love with; as well as cold enough to be capable of betrayal.

[The Shark]

The problem with CR is not the lack of gadgets, but the presence of leftovers from the Brosnan age, along with shoddy writing and hit-and-miss casting (i.e. Eva Green).

Eva Green was NOT miscast.

Shout as loud as you want, but Green played a spoilt, bitchy, schoolgirl. Not the girl a bloke like a Bond would fall head over heals for.

[I never miss]

The problem with CR is not the lack of gadgets, but the presence of leftovers from the Brosnan age, along with shoddy writing and hit-and-miss casting (i.e. Eva Green).

But you are SO WRONG Mr Bond!

- Le Chiffre - Casino Royale

[Simon]

As to the original question, I have no doubts at all.

The quality is going from strength to strength - minor strike affecting blips aside.

[Loomis]

... Yep. I wasn't convinced by the romance for one second. We are told they're in love by braindead dialogue ("Everyone has a tell, except you. I think that's why I love you") but never shown by the actors.

How does this mean that Green was miscast, though? I'd agree that some of the dialogue in CASINO ROYALE is rather "on-the-nose" and wince-inducing, and that the romance is narrated to us rather than shown, but surely the writers and director are to blame and not Green (who presumably had no say whatsoever over the content of the script). All she could do - and all she did do - was her best with the material she was given.

If she was indeed at fault, and miscast, then so was Craig.