SPOILER: "The game is..."
#151
Posted 26 September 2005 - 11:10 PM
#152
Posted 26 September 2005 - 11:11 PM
And there's the dastardly Phil Helmuth, let's see what he's got under his sleeve...OOOH, two queens! The odds are NOT in his favor!
Bad idea.
Maybe they'll get Phil Helmuth to play Le Chiffre. And Michael Madsen can return as his character from that terrible poker show on ESPN. And Annie Duke can play Vesper.
#153
Posted 26 September 2005 - 11:14 PM
So, is Bond going to have to work his way up through online poker to qualify for the event? Hmmm...wonder if it will be televised on ESPN2. James Bond in the World Series of Poker. So, is Bond going to switch to drinking Lone Star beer instead of his traditional Martini? Actually, it should be interesting to see a young Bond getting carded. Oh, EON what wonderful ideas you have!
LOL welcome to CBN.
#154
Posted 26 September 2005 - 11:19 PM
#155
Posted 26 September 2005 - 11:29 PM
Felix is helping him out.
#156
Posted 26 September 2005 - 11:50 PM
#157
Posted 26 September 2005 - 11:53 PM
#158
Posted 26 September 2005 - 11:55 PM
#163
Posted 27 September 2005 - 12:24 AM
#164
Posted 27 September 2005 - 12:49 AM
#165
Posted 27 September 2005 - 01:26 AM
#166
Posted 27 September 2005 - 01:31 AM
Hated this news the first moment I read it.
It seems they are always looking for any reason, as small as it is, to make changes to the original story in the novel.
Dammit! This is the last FLEMING book to adapt, and still they have to change, change, change ...
I keep thinking on all the books. What magnificent movies they'd make if well adapted, in the original order.
This is our last chance to read the opening credits " **** as James Bond 007 in Ian Fleming's ..." and they will make it everything but Ian Fleming's.
They're changing the game, they'll change the torture scene, the carpet beatter will be something else for whatever reason, Vesper will not be named Vesper because nowadays there aren't women with that name, and so on...
I'm overreacting, but I'm sick of them messing things up!
Still, the game is the centerpiece of the movie. Maybe it isn't all lost.
My feelings exactly! More horrible news.
So far there is absolutely nothing i like about CR.
The location has been changed, the car has been changed and now the game has been changed. The only thing that hasn't changed is that we are likely to get boring, "Mr Sleepwalk through my Bond films" Brosnan.
Talk about pandering to the lowest denominator.
It's about time this tired old film series is to put to rest until proper remakes of the books are made.
#167
Posted 27 September 2005 - 01:38 AM
This element, while undoubtedly inserted to capitalize on a trend (and a young demographic), "commonizes" Our Hero, and blurs part of the distinctiveness of Bond movies.
A Corona with a lime, please --- shaken, not stirred.
On a positive note: had Casino Royale's script been polished two years ago, Bond and LeChiffre would have matched wits on "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?" ("007: Final Answer?")
Edited by tonymascia1, 27 September 2005 - 01:41 AM.
#168
Posted 27 September 2005 - 01:49 AM
#169
Posted 27 September 2005 - 02:00 AM
#170
Posted 27 September 2005 - 02:07 AM
I'm finding it hard to believe that this film will be a "faithful adaptation" of the novel like they keep telling us. All the reboot talk and now a James Bond-signature-staple (chemin de fer) is out with poker in it's place. The locations are off somewhere else which means I'm resigned to believe that Rene Mathis, yet again, won't appear (Mathis being French).
This sounds about as faithful as TMWTGG or DAF.. etc. Some may feel those to be better than the novels, but for Casino Royale - a novel that is obviously one of Fleming's finest, I was actually hoping for an actual faithful adaptation. I still hope we get it, but it doesn't look that way at all. C'est la vie....
No Fleming Bond novel has ever been faithfully adapted. Some, like FRWL and OHMSS are closer to the book than others (e.g. any 70s Bond movie which typically throws out everything but the villain's name and a location or two), but even these added extra plot elements and action/violence and explosions to make it more exciting on screen. Everybody knew that a verbatim adaptation of Casino Royale was never going to be on the, er, cards. The novel itself isn't long enough to make a 2 hour plus movie. If purist fans are going to be freaking out over cosmetic changes like this, then its going to be a bumpy ride from here on out. I really think people are emphasizing the wrong thing here; the point of the scene is not that they're playing baccarat, its that they're engaging in a psychological duel that will be won through a mix of skill, reading the opponent, and luck. The point is that this will still be in the movie; whether they do it with baccarat or poker is a minor detail as far as I'm concerned.
Then don't sell it to fans that it's a "faithful adaptation". Dr. No and FRWL are faithful enough, as is Goldfinger, Thunderball, and OHMSS. Sure they have their differences, but they're largely the same. That's all I'm looking for. I didn't say word for word exact. Changing the game, a 28-year old rookie Bond, Panda's, and God only knows what else is not even close to a "faithful adaptation" from where I sit.
It's not to say this won't or can't be a good movie, but the rumors (which could just be 'that') don't sound all too faithful to me.
#171
Posted 27 September 2005 - 02:10 AM
#172
Posted 27 September 2005 - 02:12 AM
#173
Posted 27 September 2005 - 02:17 AM
#174
Posted 27 September 2005 - 02:29 AM
I'm surprised how many people are assuming that SMERSH will be in this movie, and that LeCheffier will be a "Russian agent" as in the novel (even IMDb says this). This movie is set in 2006. How can it have anything to do with Communist Russia?It would be boring if it were a faithful adaptation. and too short. Something will have to be added. Perhaps elaboration on SMERSH, you know continuing where the novel left off?
#175
Posted 27 September 2005 - 02:35 AM
I'm surprised how many people are assuming that SMERSH will be in this movie, and that LeCheffier will be a "Russian agent" as in the novel (even IMDb says this). This movie is set in 2006. How can it have anything to do with Communist Russia?It would be boring if it were a faithful adaptation. and too short. Something will have to be added. Perhaps elaboration on SMERSH, you know continuing where the novel left off?
I think a lot of people assume SMERSH will just stand for something else...granted if that Shatterhand report was true, he technically could be a Russian agent.
#176
Posted 27 September 2005 - 02:42 AM
I'm surprised how many people are assuming that SMERSH will be in this movie, and that LeCheffier will be a "Russian agent" as in the novel (even IMDb says this). This movie is set in 2006. How can it have anything to do with Communist Russia?It would be boring if it were a faithful adaptation. and too short. Something will have to be added. Perhaps elaboration on SMERSH, you know continuing where the novel left off?
Indeed. SMERSH was already dated in 1963 when they filmed FRWL, so they changed it to SPECTRE. I don't see SMERSH making a comeback in 2006, fifty years after its demise. Given that the Bahamas now appears to be the primary filming location, its safe to assume that Russia won't have anything to do with it. I suppose Le C. could be 'Russian Mafia' but that's already a cliche.
#177
Posted 27 September 2005 - 02:55 AM
So, is Bond going to have to work his way up through online poker to qualify for the event? Hmmm...wonder if it will be televised on ESPN2. James Bond in the World Series of Poker. So, is Bond going to switch to drinking Lone Star beer instead of his traditional Martini? Actually, it should be interesting to see a young Bond getting carded. Oh, EON what wonderful ideas you have!
I've read several of your posts over on MI6, and I agree with most of what you say!
#178
Posted 27 September 2005 - 03:04 AM
#179
Posted 27 September 2005 - 03:05 AM
This might not technically be a SPOILER, but seeing as it is a MAJOR plot element (the first CR plot element yet to be revealed), we decided to err on the side of caution. So don't go if you don't wanna know. And if you do go, remember where you read it first.
SPOILER: 'Royale' Plot Element Revealed
"The game is..."
...Poker instead of Baccarat? This is their idea of reinventing Bond? Vesper Lynd is played by a young American actress? Daniel Craig as Bond? How about beer nuts instead of caviar while they're at it. Instead of elevating viewers into Bond's world, they are dumbing down Bond into the audience's world. What a junky turn of events. They can have it. I won't waste my money...
Edited by Slaezenger, 27 September 2005 - 03:08 AM.
#180
Posted 27 September 2005 - 03:06 AM