278 replies to this topic

[JimmyBond]

As a point of reference, does anyone remember what early reviews were like for Die Another Day and The World is not Enough? And further back, if at all possible?

I remember an early review of TWINE described it as "Like FRWL, a nice slow build."

Yeah right

[luciusgore]

Sounds like this film is a winner. Deanna Brayton is going to have to start drinking heavily.

[JimmyBond]

Sounds like this film is a winner.

Well, the only fair review is the one you make with your own eyes...but still. All those doom and gloom threads for nothing eh lucisusgore

[luciusgore]

As a point of reference, does anyone remember what early reviews were like for Die Another Day and The World is not Enough? And further back, if at all possible?

I remember an early review of TWINE described it as "Like FRWL, a nice slow build."

Yeah right

I remember early reviews for DAD. They were dead on. First half good, last half blows the whole movie. So it sounds like CR is awesome.

[Publius]

I remember an early review of TWINE described it as "Like FRWL, a nice slow build."

Yeah right

As someone who neither loves nor hates Brosnan's third, I have a feeling I'll consider that analogous to CM007's CR review - hit and miss.

[JimmyBond]

I remember an early review of TWINE described it as "Like FRWL, a nice slow build."

Yeah right

As someone who neither loves nor hates Brosnan's third, I have a feeling I'll consider that analogous to CM007's CR review - hit and miss.

Well, I knew exactly how to take CM007's review, as much as I respect his opinion, he loved Goldeneye. And I consider that to be one step above DAF as far as I'm concerned (my least watched film of the series). So there you go, if he though CR is decent, I imagine I'll feel differently

[MR. BOND 93]

It's more a movie for people who like the books and who think From Russia With Love was probably the pinnacle of the movie series.

That's me!

Yayyyyy

This is all such good news!!!!!!!!!!!!! I seriously am about to die with anticipation

Edited by MR. BOND 93, 04 November 2006 - 03:12 AM.

[Bond_JamesBond007]

Ahhh I can't wait for this movie. It's so close yet so far!!!!

[Mister Asterix]

From the user 'Bondsum' on another forum:

[mra]Please say which forum. It

[Tarl_Cabot]

It's more a movie for people who like the books and who think From Russia With Love was probably the pinnacle of the movie series.

That's me!

Yayyyyy

This is all such good news!!!!!!!!!!!!! I seriously am about to die with anticipation

Yes!

New review on AICN. Said it's better than DAD but not as good as '
Goldeneye'. I'll accept that as a mid 20's reviewer's take.

[Harmsway]

From the user 'Bondsum' on another forum:

Harmsway, Leon, Dog Bond, you're going to love this Bond.

Looks like this CNB rumour was just that - a rumour!

And the film seems to be great!

Hey, that's directed towards me!

And the AICN review doesn't seem like it's coming from a guy whose perspective I'd meld with; he doesn't seem to particularly respond well to the overall approach of CASINO ROYALE.

[K1Bond007]

And the AICN review doesn't seem like it's coming from a guy whose perspective I'd meld with; he doesn't seem to particularly respond well to the overall approach of CASINO ROYALE.

I'm not sure what to make of that review to be honest. He's very middle of the road almost like he's afraid to take a stance right now for fear of looking stupid or something later. You know when you walk out of a movie and you're like that was good then an hour or a day later you're like WTF. Yeah. It's the Star Wars Episode 1 effect for many (or the Bond effect - I walk out of most Bond films excited that I just saw a Bond film only to have it set in later that it wasn't so good. I think Mr. Asterix said he felt the same way). It just seems like the reviewer was afraid to say either he liked or disliked certain aspects. For instance, he completely avoided stuff you wanted to know like Craig's performance which he barely spoke of. The good news is he said it was better than DAD. Good enough for me.

[triviachamp]

How much is 57 million Pounds? That's the budget in the Telegraph article

[K1Bond007]

How much is 57 million Pounds? That's the budget in the Telegraph article

Around $110. Use Google: like this. You can do it for most conversions (not just currency).

[dinovelvet]

Yes!

New review on AICN. Said it's better than DAD but not as good as '
Goldeneye'. I'll accept that as a mid 20's reviewer's take.

Yeah, I don't know how to wrap my head around any review that says 'not as good as Goldeneye' as GE would for me be one of the films I would use as a negative comparison, i.e. "CR wasn't as bad as GE".

Still, its a thumbs up, innit.

[JimmyBond]

Yes!

New review on AICN. Said it's better than DAD but not as good as '
Goldeneye'. I'll accept that as a mid 20's reviewer's take.

Yeah, I don't know how to wrap my head around any review that says 'not as good as Goldeneye' as GE would for me be one of the films I would use as a negative comparison, i.e. "CR wasn't as bad as GE".

Still, its a thumbs up, innit.

Same here, I find GE highly overrated, and consider it one of the worst films in the series.

[Harmsway]

GOLDENEYE, despite all of its numerous flaws, still has something about it that the rest of the Brosnan Bond flicks don't. I can't quite explain it - but there's just something there. It's easy to understand how that film could re-establish Bond for so many people.

[JimmyBond]

Not trying to turn this into a thread about GE, but that film has always been an anomoly for me. I enjoy parts of it (every scene between Brosnan and Bean sizzle with tension), I enjoy the finale, and the tank chase is great. But the movie as a whole just does nothing for me.

[Jim]

The Times liked it - suggests something for the Murdoch press?

http://entertainment...2437429,00.html

Craig has an impressive physique (generously displayed) that makes him a far more plausible Bond than many of his predecessors. But his main asset quickly becomes evident. He can act

Ooh.

[Harmsway]

I guess I just respect of a lot of the quality I feel is there to be found in GOLDENEYE. It has many issues; the script's not perfect, the pacing is off, and the movie is more than a little too drab.

But for the only time in the Brosnan era, the casting is near-perfect. The characters, for once, are actually memorable. The action is tense and suspenseful and as violent as it ever was during the Brosnan era. There are moments that are really classic (Xenia and Bond meet in the bathhouse; Boris playing with Bond's grenade pen).

But that's just me. When push comes to shove, I hope CASINO ROYALE is far better than GOLDENEYE. By all rights, it should be.

[Publius]

GOLDENEYE, despite all of its numerous flaws, still has something about it that the rest of the Brosnan Bond flicks don't. I can't quite explain it - but there's just something there. It's easy to understand how that film could re-establish Bond for so many people.

It's a Dalton movie in disguise.

Anyway, when a review says a Bond film is not as good as GoldenEye, or Goldfinger, or whatever, it doesn't mean much to me, because (as much as I do love them) I find they're overrated and often used more as buzzwords. What I look for in reviews is specific description or comparisons and contrasts, not a vague ranking order. This applies to Craig's performance, too.

[Harmsway]

The Times liked it - suggests something for the Murdoch press?

http://entertainment...2437429,00.html

Craig has an impressive physique (generously displayed) that makes him a far more plausible Bond than many of his predecessors. But his main asset quickly becomes evident. He can act

Ooh.

Zing. Definitely a generous review.

[00Twelve]

It's more a movie for people who like the books and who think From Russia With Love was probably the pinnacle of the movie series.

That's me!

Yayyyyy

This is all such good news!!!!!!!!!!!!! I seriously am about to die with anticipation

Oh...wow. Um, yeah, that pretty much describes me to the letter as a Bond fan.

[Harmsway]

GOLDENEYE, despite all of its numerous flaws, still has something about it that the rest of the Brosnan Bond flicks don't. I can't quite explain it - but there's just something there. It's easy to understand how that film could re-establish Bond for so many people.

It's a Dalton movie in disguise.

I suppose that might be it. It definitely feels like a continuation from those films. That connection was even more evident with Michael France's first draft (which had Dalton *everywhere* - Pushkin even showed up).

Anyway, when a review says a Bond film is not as good as GoldenEye, or Goldfinger, or whatever, it doesn't mean much to me, because (as much as I do love them) I find they're overrated and often used more as buzzwords. What I look for in reviews is specific description or comparisons and contrasts, not a vague ranking order. This applies to Craig's performance, too.

I quite agree. "Best Bond since Connery" or "Best Bond film since GOLDFINGER" or whatever - all meaningless. What matters are the comments themselves.

[Publius]

The Times liked it - suggests something for the Murdoch press?

http://entertainment...2437429,00.html

Craig has an impressive physique (generously displayed) that makes him a far more plausible Bond than many of his predecessors. But his main asset quickly becomes evident. He can act

Ooh.

Speaking of specific comments, I quite like this one:

"Every decade gets the Bond it deserves and we are living in some pretty scary times. Craig is up there with the best: he combines Sean Connery

[Harmsway]

New review from The Mirror (very positive):

4 November 2006
GRITTY BOND RENEWS HIS LICENCE TO THRILL
007 CASINO ROYALE: THE FIRST REVIEW
By David Edwards Mirror Film Critic
TURNING to face the world's most famous superspy, the bartender asks: "Shaken or stirred, sir?"

"Do I look like I care?" comes James Bond's icy reply.

Make no mistake, the rulebook has been well and truly torn up for 007's latest movie.

And Casino Royale is a breathless, thrilling romp that will win over a whole new generation of fans.

Easily the best Bond film since GoldenEye, it's 144 minutes of non-stop, end-to-end action that proves there's plenty of life in the world's longest-running movie franchise.

But a word of warning - this is unlike any other Bond flick. Dark, gritty and surprisingly violent, the suave, smooth-talking secret agent of old is replaced by a steely-eyed killer with a dash of vulnerability.

And new 007 Daniel Craig - the man with the golden hair, whose casting provoked an outcry among fans - is simply brilliant, oozing the kind of edgy menace that recalls Sean Connery at his very best.

Based on Ian Fleming's first Bond novel, the action begins with Her Majesty's finest assassinating two baddies in a bid to earn his licence to kill. It then switches to his first assignment, spying on terrorist suspects in Madagascar.

His mission soon leads him to the Bahamas, where he learns of the evil Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen), who's planning to bankroll a series of terrorist outrages by holding a high-stakes poker contest at Le Casino Royale in Montenegro.

Bond is given $10million to infiltrate the game, the rookie spy still isn't trusted enough by handler M (Judi Dench), who assigns the shapely Vesper Lynd (Eva Green) to keep an eye on him - though 007 still manages to get to grips with mysterious Solange (Caterina Murino).

It's fitting that the film revolves around a card game since, by turning the Bond formula on its head, director Martin Campbell has taken one of the biggest gambles in cinema history. While 007 still gets to drive around exotic locales in his Aston Martin and ends up in a clinch with his leading lady, that's about the only thing Casino Royale has in common with the 20 films that have come before.

Aside from his readiness to kill, this Bond is far more vulnerable than his predecessors - not only does he have his heart broken, he also winds up almost dead after a severe beating at the hands of Le Chiffre.

After a pummelling, Connery and Roger Moore simply dusted off their DJs but this time 007 winds up on the critical list. And if the torture scene doesn't stun, the action set-pieces most certainly will.

Aside from some awesome chases, we get to see Bond trying to stop a jet being blown up in a scene that'll make your head spin faster than downing five vodka martinis.

Tellingly, Campbell is the man who re-energised the series with GoldenEye, the 1995 entry that introduced Pierce Brosnan.

And, incredibly, he's done it again, turning a franchise that, after 2002's Die Another Day, was looking distinctly second-rate - especially in the face of competition from the likes of Mission: Impossible and The Bourne Identity.

The year's most eagerly anticipated film does not disappoint. You'll be shaken. You'll be stirred. Heck, you'll be blown away.

CASINO ROYALE will be released in cinemas nationwide on November 17.

[Jim]

The Daily Mirror.

The Daily "James Bland / Craig cannot drive / Craig looks like a craggy-arsed builder / ask stupid questions about Sienna Thingy" Mirror

says

And new 007 Daniel Craig - the man with the golden hair, whose casting provoked an outcry among fans - is simply brilliant, oozing the kind of edgy menace that recalls Sean Connery at his very best.

What extraordinary people.

[00Twelve]

Brilliant.

And Jim, "Murdoch press?" One somewhat-less obviously liberal news network and it's a conspiratorial conservative mouthpiece? It's the only place they are ever heard on any of the TV networks! (Sorry to digress from the topic.)

Edited by 00Twelve, 04 November 2006 - 09:21 AM.

[JimmyBond]

You know, while Brosnan was Bond, I had resigned myself to accepting that we'd be getting variations of TND, and I was fine with that (hell I consider DAD to be one of my favorites). Judging from these reviews though, it looks like we're going to finally get the type of Bond film I've been waiting nearly ten years for.

[K1Bond007]

The Daily Mirror.

The Daily "James Bland / Craig cannot drive / Craig looks like a craggy-arsed builder / ask stupid questions about Sienna Thingy" Mirror

says

And new 007 Daniel Craig - the man with the golden hair, whose casting provoked an outcry among fans - is simply brilliant, oozing the kind of edgy menace that recalls Sean Connery at his very best.

What extraordinary people.

Douchebaggery at its best.