278 replies to this topic

[Jackanaples]

http://www.dailymail...in_page_id=1924
4/5

Finally some alleged flaws:
"We don't know who Bond is chasing or why"
"LeChiffre is one of Fleming's drabber characters"
"LeChiffre's motivation just being money is drab"
"First hour not gripping"

Eh, I just read that review too. He also says something about Bond being right back on his feet after Le Chiffre has a go at him. Personally, I don't think he's as quick as some of the other reviewers in the audience.

[Skudor]

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.

Oh, goody goody. Now all I have to do is use that time machine I invented to get me to Nov 17!

[Bureau Of Weapons]

http://www.dailymail...in_page_id=1924
4/5

Finally some alleged flaws:
"We don't know who Bond is chasing or why"
"LeChiffre is one of Fleming's drabber characters"
"LeChiffre's motivation just being money is drab"
"First hour not gripping"

By the way, this reviewer spoils some of the movie, so be warned.

Miss out the best bits!

Daniel Craig is probably the best and most serious actor to have been cast as 007 and this film makes full use of his range.

We should always expect negativity from the Mail.They're probably balking at the presence of so many non caucasian members of the cast.

[Bon-san]

And, weren't the Brosnan films picked on for making the great James Bond too vulnerable?

They only really paid lip service to the idea of Bond being vulnerable- let's have him looking pensive here; give him a bad shoulder etc. - it was never a proper vulnerability where Bond actually seemed human.

Well, I was picking on the writer's claim that it was a 'first' to show a Bond with 'some vulnerability'. Whether prior attempts at vulnerability were 'proper' is of course a point of debate. And not one I'm going to engage in here, as it's been done to death in discussions on this board in regards to the pros/cons of Lazenby and Brosnan Bonds vis a vis their characters' respective vulnerabilities.

[Johnboy007]

All of this certainly sounds encouraging.

[marktmurphy]

Have we had the Star's one?

http://www.dailystar...il.html?sku=663

[JCRendle]

Have we had the Star's one?

http://www.dailystar...il.html?sku=663

"to Craig

[sharpshooter]

I have read all the reviews, and I am feeling very proud to be a Bond fan. I think "good on you Daniel!!!" You have done it!
Cant wait now.

[EyesOnly]

Does he not say Bond...James Bond in the film?

[JCRendle]

He does in the script

[MooreisMore]

Daniel Craig doesn't need any awards because he has won the viewers.

Suck it CNB!

*DX crotch chop*

Edited by MooreisMore, 04 November 2006 - 04:57 PM.

[sharpshooter]

CNB is rendered obsolete. People who have, and will see the film will disagree completely. CNB served as great determination for Craig, and in tern reveals a royal flush.

[Jet Set Willy]

I expected these kind of positive reviews. The film is faring up to exactly what I am hoping it will be, and Craig is winning support left, right and centre from the media.

This must be utter dismay for all the saddos over on CnB. Hahahaha!!

We are all set for CR to smash all previous box office Bond records, as I predicted many months ago.....

[zencat]

This is huge. First off, previewing a film this early shows incredible confidence in the film. They knew it was great, and it appears critics and fans agree. This is fantastic. Can't wait until Nov 17. Congrats to Eon and Daniel Craig.

BOND IS BACK!!!

[Jackanaples]

Do you think it has a chance of toppling THUNDERBALL's record? I'm starting to wonder.

And I'm with you, the reviews are sounding as positive and enthusiastic as I predicted they would be months ago.

[Whalltt]

Great "reviews" so far! Keep them coming!

This will hopefully spread out like wildfire in the next days, and tease even more people to see the film

[The Admiral]

Don't worry - his very last words in the film are:

"The name's Bond, James Bond."

[JCRendle]

From zonymousbond, MI6 Forums

I just got back...

If you really want to know little about the film when you watch it, I'd advise you not to read this review. I have put spoilers for most things, and there are only very mild spoilers left.

OK, I'm not a great reviewer, but I'll have a go anyway:

Wow.

I think it's safe to say Bond is back, and he's better than ever. I can also say that Craig is the best Bond since Connery. As soon as the film starts, Craig IS Bond. He is even closer to Fleming's creation than Dalton, and that's saying something. He plays a much more real James Bond, funnier, witty, and not the superhero Bond Brosnan gave us. He doesn't try to be Connery (like Brosnan did); he brings something new to Bond. The pre-titles are very tense, and brilliantly edited in B/W. Craig just looks so classy when he assassinates Dryden. SPOILER - HIGHLIGHT TO READ:
And yes, there is no gunbarrel at the start, it happens in the bathroom just before the title sequence

Now, the titles. In a word, brilliant. Much better than the not-so-great titles we got throughout the Brosnan era. I had my reservations about the Cornell song when I first heard it a few weeks ago, but it works brilliantly with a full orchestra, and I really like it. The rest of the soundtrack is easily some of Arnold's best. Not up to Barry's standards (of course), but a very good soundtrack. The crane chase/fight through Madagascar (?) is the best action sequence for a long time. It's just brilliantly shot and choreographed, and very tense. The script is pretty solid, too. I didn't read anything before seeing the film, because I didn't want to be spoilt, so I'm not sure how close it was to the first draft released online. It has some good laughs (no 'yo momma' crap, just well-scripted British-style comedy), most of them coming from Judi Dench, in her best performance of M so far.

Spoiler

There is one hilarious part where Bond is about to say M's real name, and M stops him

The film slows a little with the introduction of Solonge, and there are a few great scenes

Spoiler

especially when Bond wins the Aston Martin DB5

There is a huge set piece which I knew nothing about as well, and is very well done.

Then to the casino... The Casino scenes are very good, and Vesper Lynd is very well played by Eva Green. This isn't a normal Bond girl; she is quite hostile to the arrogant Bond when they first meet. Le Chiffre is also the best villain, since I dare say it, Blofeld, or Auric Goldfinger. Mathis is Kerim Bey V2.0, a great character. My only regret is that Felix Leiter gets very little screen time, and we really don't see much of him. Valenka is also gets little screen time, but it doesn't matter so much. There are a lot of great scenes in the casino, and I won't spoil them.

Spoiler

Then after Vesper is kidnapped, there is a short but sweet car chase, ending in the brilliant crash we all saw in the trailer.

The Le Chiffre torture scene is very faithful to the book, and Craig really shows Bond's pain. After Le Chiffre is killed, Bond wakes up in hospital, just like in the book. The scenes after this are quite different from the book though,

Spoiler

as Vesper does not commit suicide, she is killed in a huge action scene where a Venice house collapses. She drowns inside a flooded elevator. The sequence isn't the best set piece of the film, but it is very good all the same.

At the end, there is a very good sequel set-up, and the introduction of a classic line, and a classic theme. My only disappointment about the end is that it just says 'James Bond Will Return', and it doesn't say the film's title. Well, too bad, you can't have everything.

My verdict:

The Acting... Craig is up there with Connery as the best Bond of all time. He is a much more Fleming-like, real Bond, even more so than Dalton. Eva Green is brilliant as Vesper, just as I imagined her in the novel. Mads Mikkelsen is a really, really, great, evil Le Chiffre. Giancarlo Giannini is wonderful as Mathis, and his part almost reminds me of Kerim Bey/Draco/Colombo. Jeffrey Wright has a sadly small part in the film, so I can't judge him that well. He was pretty good from what I saw. Judi Dench is brilliant, as always, and is very funny at some points. Caterina Murino as Solonge is good in the few scenes she is in. Oh, and Michael G. Wilson gets a cameo or two.

The Action... Brilliant. All the set-pieces are expertly choreographed and filmed.

The Direction... Martin Campbell is a really good director. Goldeneye was good, but he does an even better job in this. The violence is brutal and realistic.

The Music... One of Arnold's best soundtracks, a huge improvement on DAD's soundtrack. YKMN sounds much better in the film.

The Script... Great. There are some bits that could be improved, but very good overall. There are some genuinely funny bits.

Overall View... I think Bond has successfully been updated to the 21st century with Casino Royale. After the last three Bond films (in my opinion, all terrible), we needed a change. Excellent film.

10/10

***** stars out of *****

A*

[Auric64]

From IMDb

The film isn't as action packed as the trailer might suggest.

This isn't a Bond movie for people who love the gadgets and the girls and the supervillains and the nuclear warheads and the killer satellites and the silly jokes. 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.

Could this be a problem for the general audience, though? The film sounds as though it could be one of the best for the last 20 years or so, (and I`m hoping to eat a very large slice of humble pie if it is that good - as I was against Craig`s casting AND the reboot) but the general audience IS used to the gadgets, the supervillians, nuclear warheads, killer satellites and silly jokes. They`ve had that since 1995 and it appears they enjoyed it, going by the box office returns.

With CR`s less action packed script, will the audience be shifting in their seats for long periods of time, expecting the customary set piece to happen every 20 minutes, (as happened during the Brosnan years) and getting upset and annoyed when it doesn`t?

As much as many Bond fans on here are looking forward to CR being a return to the type of FRWL style adventure, (and I am one of those fans) will the lack of action, coupled with Bond`s vulnerability and the script giving the characters depth, make CR fall foul of the audience who didn`t seem to agree with the Dalton films, which pretty much offered the same. It wasn`t to the audiences liking, (particulary LTK) and that was one of (many) factors that helped to signal the end of the series for another 6 years.

That to me is the only thing I am worried about. I never thought I would be looking forward to this film as much as I now am, and I`m really hoping I can come out of the cinema feeling as positive as the newspaper reviewers have been.

I just hope the general audience, (who are Bond fans but not hardcore Bond fans as we are) will feel the same and make this film the smash hit it seems to deserve to be.

Best

Andy

Edited by Auric64, 04 November 2006 - 05:34 PM.

[JCRendle]

Andy, that's why the trailers show the action, it gives the impression of more action - so the general audiences go, paying their money, before find that it's less action packed.

[Stephenson]

I think today's audience is more than prepared for this type of Bond film. The recent failures of pure action type films with little or no plot shows (in a way) that people may be sick of mindless action, and are looking for something more character driven. The Bourne films weren't exactly fights, car chases or explosions from start to finish; there were plenty of "quiet" moments in those movies. There was about twenty minutes in the middle of Spiderman 2 that focused solely on the mundane life of Peter Parker without his powers. Longer stretches with little or no traditional action will go over just fine, as long as a sense of tension and suspense is maintained. For me, it is far more important that the early reviews have all been sure to mention that there is still humor in the film and that the action is impressive.

[kneelbeforezod]

Yeah, well said Stephenson.

People often imply that if you move away from the cartoonish Die Another Day, you automatically end up with the Dalton films. This is not the case, and it sounds like this film is a different beast, superior to Dalton's films, which were average IMO.

[blueman]

I want to hear from GS!!! Reaction!!!

[Scottlee]

Some unbelievable reviews about this film so far. What's also very exciting is that this is only Craig's first Bond film, yet people are already claiming he's completely nailed the role inch perfect. I can't wait for the cinema release date. I just hope it's as good as the people in the know seem to say it is. I'll tell you one thing though, with all this fantastic press, it's hard to see the film not exceeding expectations at the box office. And this is important for Craig's future as Bond.

[Publius]

Do you think it has a chance of toppling THUNDERBALL's record? I'm starting to wonder.

Nah, we won't see that again for a great many years (due to population growth), presuming Bond is even around by then. But although I still think CR might have a less than rosy time at the box office (unrelated to its quality), I also think it could very possibly be as popular as, say, Live and Let Die.

Regardless, I'd be very surprised at this point if it didn't do well enough to pave the way for a solid Craig trilogy (at least), hopefully with a good story arc.

[Vauxhall]

From zonymousbond, MI6 Forums

After Le Chiffre is killed, Bond wakes up in hospital, just like in the book. The scenes after this are quite different from the book though,

Spoiler

as Vesper does not commit suicide, she is killed in a huge action scene where a Venice house collapses. She drowns inside a flooded elevator. The sequence isn't the best set piece of the film, but it is very good all the same.

Sounds fishy to me. I don't think that they would change that particular detail. Perhaps someone who has seen the movie could confirm that...

Spoiler

Vesper intentionally drowns herself

[Harmsway]

Sounds fishy to me. I don't think that they would change that particular detail. Perhaps someone who has seen the movie could confirm that...

Spoiler

Vesper intentionally drowns herself

Users over at MI6 who saw the film confirmed just that.

And as far as Zonymousbond goes, he actually came around after I discussed it with him. He didn't really grasp what was going on the scene, but after we talked, he concluded he'd misinterpreted it. He'd been confused by the scene.

I described stuff from the script to see if it matched with what he saw, and it did, and then he had one of those "Oh, so that's what was going on" moments.

[Scamp]

Hi, just back from seeing the film and thought that it was without doubt the best Bond film since Connery's tenure. It is believable, humourous and will keep people interested from start to finish. No combination or amount of trailers or TV spots will prepare you for this film. It is outstanding! It sets us all up for what is to come. I had the pleasure of attending with two ladies who have since change their minds about Daniel Craig's suitability & handsomeness for the part and they were suitably impressed by film as a whole, and believe me they are both hard to please at the best of times! Seeing this film will spoil you for the others, other than Connery of course!Daniel Craig gives at least the equal of Connery's performance, and by the end of the film you certainly wouldn't want to bump into him "when he's angry", he ouzes all the qualities that Fleming wanted us visualise when he wrote the books! Daniel Craig's portrayal IS James Bond.

Edited by Scamp, 04 November 2006 - 09:29 PM.

[JimmyBond]

The fellow on IMDB (who "reviewed" the film a while back, no not Moomoo, but the other guy) said that this film will spoil the Brosnan films for you.

As unlikely as that sounds, is it plausible?

[Scamp]

Not necessarily spoil. It will make you see Bond in a more "realistic" way. Brosnan was good as Brosnan's Bond but not necessarily as Fleming's Bond. Craig's Bond is an up to date version of Fleming's Bond.