102 replies to this topic

[Chula]

Keeping my tradition since 1977 of seeing a Bond film on opening day, I planned ahead for CASINO ROYALE, saw it today, and in keeping with current Bond tradition, I walked out of the theater almost vomiting.

There are about a zillion things wrong with this film, but I'll try to get some feedback on just one: Was this James Bond?

I'll play along with the producers and buy into that "every legend has a beginning" crap. So this is Bond how he became the cynical, hardened double-oh killer. Fine. This is Bond's beginnings.

But in this picture Bond has no cultured tastes!!!!!

Examples:
- Vesper points out how poorly he wears the cut of his suits,
- he claims he already has a dinner jacket when Vesper offers him the tailored one,
- when offered a martini shaken not stirred he says to the bartender, "Do I look like I care?"

So are we to stupidly go along with the writers that Bond "before the legend" was a tee-shirt and jeans kind of guy who drank whatever was the special of the night at the local bar? That's Bonds origins?!? How insulting to any fan who has seen any Bond film or read any Bond novel.

No, I'll forget I saw CASINO ROYALE and remember that Bond is so cultured in his tastes that he can even tell the year of the original vintage on which a sherry is based.

[00Twelve]

Actually yeah, we are supposed to believe that. It's being in the 00 section that allows Bond to go on well-funded missions and acquire tastes for things. See, this film takes place earlier in Bond's career than even the novel (whose protagonist has never been played more accurately than in this film...read more Fleming, you'll see). Bond wasn't always sipping martinis and adjusting his tie underwater during a boat chase, sorry to tell you.

[Chula]

It's being in the 00 section that allows Bond to go on well-funded missions and acquire tastes for things.

Let me get this straight. You believe that Bond appreciates the beauty of a finely tailored suit, or an exquisitely prepared meal simply because the guys at work told him to?

A man who can tell you if caviar comes from North of the Caspian Sea or not picked that up as part of on the job training in the double-of section?

No, my friend, cultured tastes are not something you learn in a worshop at work. Cultured tastes, especially to the extreme that Bond takes them, are a part of who you are. This film CASINO ROYALE completely bastardizes this part of who Bond is.

You, my friend, should read more Fleming in order to see just how cultured Bond is. You'll see Bond's exquisite tastes and knowledge are not something you acquire in your mid-thirties just because you go on "well-funded missions".

Edited by Chula, 17 November 2006 - 09:44 PM.

[marktmurphy]

No, my friend, cultured tastes are not something you learn in a worshop at work.

Whereas you learn manners and how not be patronising at school. Perhaps you should have paid more attention.

This man is Bond- he has the taste for the high life, but a guy from the special forces learns to live without them. He went to all the right schools, but regards himself as something slightly apart from them; just as Fleming's Bond did. This is spot on.

[00Twelve]

Well, OK, I understand your complaint. However, no film or novel has gone back this far in Bond's career EVER. Other than the Higson novels, which I don't really see as canon, anyway. So, historically, before Bond was accepted into MI6, he was...fighting World War II. Hardly a time to acquire tastes for caviar and sherry. Bond is a civil servant and has never been rich enough on his own to afford the fine suits and food we've seen him enjoy. Craig doesn't exactly dress like a slouch before he dons the tuxedo, either. And the car he drives may not be an Aston Martin or a Bentley, but the thing is, Bond (again, historically) went straight into the military before even finishing board school. So, when, between the age of 17 and the time that he went straight from the RNVR to MI6 service (otherwise called "World War II"), did he pick up these infallible tastes?

I never said he got these tastes for fine things from "training," but from being sent to all points of the globe on missions (some for assassination, some not) and having the opportunity to eat, wear, and drink anything he likes on the government's tab. Fleming's Bond NEVER made enough money to wear a Brioni tux. Dr. No, the film, takes place 10+ years into Bond's 00 service. Casino Royale, the novel, takes place an unnamed number of years into Bond's 00 service. Ten years is PLENTY of time to acquire tastes for wine and food, if you are alowed to travel as 00s are.

All this is rather speculative, as Fleming's Bond lived in a different era, in a different society, where black tie was far more common for going out to gamble than today. This film updates Bond to be beginning his 00-life today. Where you hardly see black-tie events outside of film premieres and galas and awards ceremonies. Bond is who he needs to be to fit the same persona in today's time, IMO.

Just being a devil's advocate .

[sorking]

I'm still giggling from the idea that 007 has been into properly-mixed martinis, tailored clothes and wine since he was in short trousers.

I mean, the point of Casino Royale (the movie) is that these must, by definition, be aquired traits. And they had to come from somewhere. SOME of that is with him at the start of the film - he's clearly comfortable in a casino, and knows his way around a cocktail - and the rest forms around him right before your eyes.

Was he 'James Bond', our cinematic pal, at the start of the film? Maybe not. By the end? No question.

[marktmurphy]

I mean, the point of Casino Royale (the movie) is that these must, by definition, be aquired traits. And they had to come from somewhere. SOME of that is with him at the start of the film - he's clearly comfortable in a casino, and knows his way around a cocktail - and the rest forms around him right before your eyes.

Exactly; and he clearly knows his way around a natty suit for his arrival at Nassau; even his tasteful get up at M's house is very sharp. He's no uncultured slouch; he just happens to dress for the occasion, which is a bit more believable than the Brosnan years which seemed to think that 'stylish' had to mean a suit and nothing else.

[Harmsway]

But in this picture Bond has no cultured tastes!!!!!

How about Bond's ordering the Bollinger and caviar after being with Solange? That's not cultured at all.

Examples:
- Vesper points out how poorly he wears the cut of his suits,

No, she points out that he wears his suits with disdain. As in, "I'm too good for this suit."

- he claims he already has a dinner jacket when Vesper offers him the tailored one,

Why is this against his fine tastes? He already had a dinner jacket and it was presumably tailored as well (he knew what tailoring was, after all).

- when offered a martini shaken not stirred he says to the bartender, "Do I look like I care?"

Only because he's pissed off at that moment in time and just wants a drink. If you were watching, you must have remembered that exceedingly particular Vodka Martini recipe he lists.

[Chula]

Just being a devil's advocate .

Exactly what I was looking for, thus I posted this looking for other's ideas. (You could have done without the childish "read some Fleming nonsense." That silliness just leads to threads of nastiness.)

I can accept what you say to a point. But you are disregarding this point: The point is that Bond is not just cultured and particular...he is CULTURED and PARTICULAR! The guy smokes special made cigarettes. The guy "knows a good tailor" in Hong Kong. The guy drinks a martini shaken not stirred (and by all real accounts, this is a difference that even the most finicky wouldn't even notice).

And to suggest that Bond learns about life's finer things by going on "well funded missions" is a bit out there. Bond is beyond cultured. Even M rolls his eyes at Bond regarding his knowledge of sherry...and lepodoptery (you think he picked up lepodoptery in double-oh workshops?).


The Bond character is well beyond liking the finer things in life. He is absolutely fanatical about it (the exact temperature in which to serve saki). When it comes to this cultured matter, the Bond presented in CASINO ROYALE shows no similarity to the Bond in the novels or previous films. This CASINO ROYALE Bond would prefer his dinner jacket over a tailored one?This sounds like the guys down at the plant coming off the night-shift when their wife tells them they have to put on a tux for a wedding.

By reducing Bond to a classless civil servant, the writers of CASINO ROYALE have insulted anyone who has read a Fleming novel or has seen Bond in the films.

[Mathis05]

One question Chula: so you would prefer another Brosnan/Moore fiasco, right? Case in Point. Watch a Moore film; CR is the closest we've come to the intricate being of Bond. I'm guessing just by the fact that your tradition started in '77 that Moore had a strong emphasis on your perception of Bond.

Edited by Mathis05, 17 November 2006 - 11:15 PM.

[Chula]

- when offered a martini shaken not stirred he says to the bartender, "Do I look like I care?"

Only because he's pissed off at that moment in time and just wants a drink. If you were watching, you must have remembered that exceedingly particular Vodka Martini recipe he lists.

Interesting post, Harmsway. I could offer opposite explanations for each of your explanations, but I'll just settle for debunking the one above.

You say Bond says what he says to the bartender because he "just wants a drink." Since when has Bond ever "just wanted a drink"? Bond always prefered his drink a particular way. That's what we like about him. The world can be blown up in a matter of hours, but Bond still prefers his drink a certain way. This Bond in CASINO ROYALE clearly doesn't care what is served to him. Does that sound like Bond, or Vin Diesel?

(And the Vesper Martini he concocted I'm sure you're aware is directly from the book. Thank Christ for that direct Fleming lift otherwise we would have had Bond as Al Bundy in this film.)

[Hunter Tremayne]

Sounds like someone needs to watch My Fair Lady sometime soon.

[Chula]

.....I'm guessing just by the fact that your tradition started in '77 that Moore had a strong emphasis on your perception of Bond.

No, I grew up watching the Connery Bonds on TV and seeing Moore's in the theaters. I like the fact that over their films we have a colorful palette to choose from.

Look, we all like particular things about Bond. High on my list is that Bond is culturally a cut above James Cagney, Tarzan, Indiana Jones, Zorro, Superman, Spiderman, Clint Eastwood or any other hero out there. Bond knows the best wines, the finest foods (read Fleming and there are dishes Bond orders which I can not even pronounce), exquisite clothes, appreciates the workings of the world's finest motor cars, the top places to ski, etc.... This is all important to the James Bond character. This truly sets him apart from any other hero who kills bad guys.

To give me a Bond who shows very little of that is just flat out wrong. Even upon losing that first battle against LeChiffre, Bond as we know him would casually walk over to the bar and order his martini HIS particular way. It is actually Bond's way of controlling things. Can you see that?

[JimmyBond]

I can accept what you say to a point. But you are disregarding this point: The point is that Bond is not just cultured and particular...he is CULTURED and PARTICULAR! The guy smokes special made cigarettes. The guy "knows a good tailor" in Hong Kong. The guy drinks a martini shaken not stirred (and by all real accounts, this is a difference that even the most finicky wouldn't even notice).

And the only way to get that cultured and finicky is to develope a taste for it. You arent born with those kinds of tastes, you learn to appreciate them over time.

You're trying to slam this film for all the wrong reasons.

[Chula]

Sounds like someone needs to watch My Fair Lady sometime soon.

Now that's funny.

A few on this thread actually believe that after being given double-oh status, all double-ohs are handed over to H Branch and Henry Higgins. It is here where they learn that a martini should be shaken and not stirred.

[Dr. Noah]

That's the whole point. the transformation is the FUN of this film. If Bond knows how to do all those things at the beginning of the movie, WHEN DOES HE TURN INTO BOND??? Did he wear formal diapers? The guy just got out of Navy special ops. When was he wearing a tuxedo before???

Can you imagine a more pointless scene than a perfectly-tailored Pierce Brosnan with dyed hair and capped teeth pretending to be surprised how good he looks when he sees himself in a tux for the first time?

[Dr. Noah]

Sounds like someone needs to watch My Fair Lady sometime soon.

Now that's funny.

A few on this thread actually believe that after being given double-oh status, all double-ohs are handed over to H Branch and Henry Higgins. It is here where they learn that a martini should be shaken and not stirred.

So when was he wearing a tux with Navy special ops?

That's the point of the movie, dude. What's the big deal of seeing a guy's first missions if he's already like he'll be at the end of the movie???? Did he wear formal diapers as a baby, or something?

Would there be anything more pointless than Pierce Brosnan with dyed hair, capped teeth and lipo'ed gut pretending to be shocked at how good he looks when he puts on a tux for the first time?

[sorking]

Chula, I thought my own point was reasonable and made logical sense. I'd like to expand and respond, to anyone interested, if I can avoid your somewhat harsh and sweeping statements in the comeback.

The guy drinks a martini shaken not stirred (and by all real accounts, this is a difference that even the most finicky wouldn't even notice).

Actually, it's the kind of difference the finicky would scoff at. At best, it makes little difference. At worst, it chips the ice, making for a weaker drink. Which is to say, your notion that Bond can be definied by these simple cinematic affectations is based on, amongst other things, a catchphrase that sees Bond ordering a badly-made drink.

It's saying that affectation, or characteristic, is the same as character.

Now, as it happens, I have my own feelings about this. I like the notion that he's deliberately keeping one thing in his life flawed - in a world of money and perfection, to keep one thing that way helps maintain his edge. It reminds him not to become complacent or sloppy. But it's just a notion.

(One that partially fits your own feelings on the character, so I hope it's clear I'm not outright disagreeing.)

And to suggest that Bond learns about life's finer things by going on "well funded missions" is a bit out there. Bond is beyond cultured. Even M rolls his eyes at Bond regarding his knowledge of sherry...and lepodoptery (you think he picked up lepodoptery in double-oh workshops?).

You think the Bond of Casino Royale is uneducated, unsophisticated. I disagree; I think it's a reading, a theory. That his cold, harsh near-psychotic indifference to life has found a place in a more physical and military life makes sense to me, but that doesn't mean that's all there is to the man.

As I say, he's clearly shown as knowing his way around first-class. Around food, wine, cocktails, cars, clothes. Not dwelling on it isn't the same as not conveying it.

But again I say - you didn't feel it. Which is okay. Many of us did.

The Bond character is well beyond liking the finer things in life. He is absolutely fanatical about it (the exact temperature in which to serve saki). When it comes to this cultured matter, the Bond presented in CASINO ROYALE shows no similarity to the Bond in the novels or previous films.

NO similarity. At all? My opinion, generally, is that when a statement so sweeping is made, it's impossible to debate intelligently.

He orders the Vesper martini in minute detail. This one thing, at least, surely means that you can't say 'no similarity' - 'little similarity' at best. Which I disagree with, but hey, people are entitled to opinions and interpretations.

As to that one moment of 'Do I look like I give a damn?' - to reject that line because it shows he's 'not cultured enough to be Bond' is bizarre. The line is clearly written with a knowledge of what makes Bond what he is; that the culture IS in his nature. But it's also written to convey a few more things.

For example, that this mission is under his skin. To the point where it's damaging him internally. He DOES give a damn about how his drink is made - the earlier scene shows that more clearly than practically any scene in the film series' history - and now his priority has shifted. And it's wrong that it has.

The audience KNOW it's wrong - because Bond's changed in front of our eyes with something we feel specifically belongs to him.

The whole point being made is that Bond will spend the rest of his professional life making sure not to let this stuff get to him. He's learning that lesson right in front of your eyes. As with the excellent 'get the girl out' knife moment, it shows that the emotion makes him a weaker agent.

Which is to say - he'll regret the things he's done this time. He'll never fall in love, he'll never get too angry, never let things slip out of his control...and he'll never ignore the details of his drink order again!

This CASINO ROYALE Bond would prefer his dinner jacket over a tailored one?This sounds like the guys down at the plant coming off the night-shift when their wife tells them they have to put on a tux for a wedding.

Ignoring the harshness, I do agree with you that of course he'd go for a tailored suit...but, also, as has been said, that his personal budget to-date would not usually run to such a thing. To have a taste for the finer things doesn't mean the reach to always get them. (Unfair to mock this reading, I felt.)

Still, I think that scene has been misinterpreted. It's not about the suit, it's about the girl. It's about ego. SHE has been shopping for HIM?! She's telling him what to wear?! This selfish indignation is VERY Bond.

Also, he's genuinely surprised. Partly because it's a lot more intimate that he's used to. And partly because she's kinda impressive - sizing him up for a fitted suit without his participation. It's about her being special.

By reducing Bond to a classless civil servant, the writers of CASINO ROYALE have insulted anyone who has read a Fleming novel or has seen Bond in the films.

To make a statement so sweeping and without qualification is an insult to anyone expected to read such nonsense. :-p

Edited by sorking, 18 November 2006 - 12:30 AM.

[JCRendle]

But in this picture Bond has no cultured tastes!!!!!

How about Bond's ordering the Bollinger and caviar after being with Solange? That's not cultured at all.

Examples:
- Vesper points out how poorly he wears the cut of his suits,

No, she points out that he wears his suits with disdain. As in, "I'm too good for this suit."

- he claims he already has a dinner jacket when Vesper offers him the tailored one,

Why is this against his fine tastes? He already had a dinner jacket and it was presumably tailored as well (he knew what tailoring was, after all).

- when offered a martini shaken not stirred he says to the bartender, "Do I look like I care?"

Only because he's pissed off at that moment in time and just wants a drink. If you were watching, you must have remembered that exceedingly particular Vodka Martini recipe he lists.

Ah - you point out exactly what I was about to.

- when offered a martini shaken not stirred he says to the bartender, "Do I look like I care?"

Only because he's pissed off at that moment in time and just wants a drink. If you were watching, you must have remembered that exceedingly particular Vodka Martini recipe he lists.

Interesting post, Harmsway. I could offer opposite explanations for each of your explanations, but I'll just settle for debunking the one above.

You say Bond says what he says to the bartender because he "just wants a drink." Since when has Bond ever "just wanted a drink"? Bond always prefered his drink a particular way. That's what we like about him. The world can be blown up in a matter of hours, but Bond still prefers his drink a certain way. This Bond in CASINO ROYALE clearly doesn't care what is served to him. Does that sound like Bond, or Vin Diesel?

(And the Vesper Martini he concocted I'm sure you're aware is directly from the book. Thank Christ for that direct Fleming lift otherwise we would have had Bond as Al Bundy in this film.)

What about Moore's films where never orders a Vodka Martini, shaken not stirred or Connery, who only ordered it once?

[Harmsway]

When it comes to this cultured matter, the Bond presented in CASINO ROYALE shows no similarity to the Bond in the novels or previous films. This CASINO ROYALE Bond would prefer his dinner jacket over a tailored one?This sounds like the guys down at the plant coming off the night-shift when their wife tells them they have to put on a tux for a wedding.

Umm, he wears the tailored tux, so obviously he prefers it. But it's never said that the dinner jacket he had before *wasn't* tailored. He knew enough to know that the jacket was tailored, and his amazement wasn't over that it was a tailored tux, just that she was able to have it tailored for him from sight alone.

You say Bond says what he says to the bartender because he "just wants a drink." Since when has Bond ever "just wanted a drink"?

When he's been exceedingly pissed off, as he is in that moment.

Bond always prefered his drink a particular way.

Hence the movie going to great lengths to describe his particular recipe for the Vesper martini. He's exceedingly particular, and this is true. This moment is different, though - he's angry and is being flippant for the hell of it.

The world can be blown up in a matter of hours, but Bond still prefers his drink a certain way.

That's movie Bond, not Fleming Bond. So let's get that out on the table.

[Chula]

sorking, good post.

Once again I can take point against just about everything you say. I've said my thoughts in all these posts here. No need to go further.

However, I can actually trump all your points with two things I have held back on:

- Bond in bad short-sleeved shirts!!!!
- Bond playing Texas Hold Em Poker!!!!!!

You still want to tell me this is the sophisticated Bond that the filmmakers and Fleming have given us in the past?

- I don't want to see Bond wearing shirts that can be purchased in The Gap's Kids Department!
- Bond's world is not the world of card games played by every drunken kid in a frat house!

They ripped the sophistication right out of Bond in this film. If you think it is there (or if you think he can later acquire it in workshops in Q Branch), then we will never see eye to eye.

[Dr. Noah]

Good point. Just watch TWLM over and over. Never watch a film with a different idea. It's a shame all 21 can't be exactly alike.

[Harmsway]

Bond in bad short-sleeved shirts!!!!

See THUNDERBALL. Or DR. NO. Or GOLDFINGER. Heck, see a lot of the older Bond flicks. And read the Fleming novels, too. I thought the short sleeved shirts were classy and contemporary. If Bond was a modern fashionable man in 2006, he would wear that.

Bond playing Texas Hold Em Poker!!!!!!

Fleming endorsed poker as one of the most vicious games he'd ever played. Furthermore, it's Tenez les Cartes Poker, and I thought it came across as absolutely classy, well as classy as any card game he ever played.

[sorking]

- Bond in bad short-sleeved shirts!!!!

Yeah, see every bad outfit in the last...forever. I like Connery's blue toweling number m'self. :-)

Also, 'bad' shirt' is a matter of opinion. Given that Lindy Hemming has forgotten more about clothes than you and I will ever know - alongside the fact that I'll bet good money it cost more than we've ever spent on a shirt - I'm gonna go with the experts.

- Bond playing Texas Hold Em Poker!!!!!!

I don't know where this idea has come from that just because 'regular people play poker' that it's somehow 'common'. Do you have any idea how significant the poker variations are in casinos around the world?

The change was a very smart move dramatically, it goes without saying - because it's about more than luck - but it's also a realistic update.

They ripped the sophistication right out of Bond in this film. If you think it is there (or if you think he can later acquire it in workshops in Q Branch), then we will never see eye to eye.

Actually, we'll never see eye to eye because your responses are pretty facetious... ;-)

[icecold]

I think it's funny how people who've supposedly read Fleming's novels see this film and go "That guy's not James Bond!".

[JCRendle]

- Bond in bad short-sleeved shirts!!!!

You do know he was undercover don't you?

- Bond playing Texas Hold Em Poker!!!!!!

Ah, even if Bond didn't particularly like the game, he doesn't choose it - Le Chiffre does.

[Chula]

- Bond playing Texas Hold Em Poker!!!!!!

Ah, even if Bond didn't particularly like the game, he doesn't choose it - Le Chiffre does.

Actually, the filmmakers chose it. They chose to dumb down the proceedings. Fleming had it as baccarat.

To conclude.....


Well, it seems that an unsophisticated Bond is fine with hard-core Bond fans. Unreal. What's next? Bond as an American agent? P. Diddy as Bond? Bond hooking up with men? Bond not knowing how to defend himself? You guys would all come here and say, "No, it's great. It works."

[Publius]

No offense, but you're overreacting. I'm also wondering how you survived...well, the Bond series, for one.

Most of your criticisms have been shot down thoroughly already, but as a poker enthusiast let me add that there's nothing "uncultured" about Texas Hold 'Em. Don't led the name (which wasn't even stated in the film, was it?) fool you: it's the international card game of our day (and if you consider it a sport, rivaling only football/soccer), far more of a phenomenon than baccarat (yes, even affecting "classy" casinos...is baccarat even still alive?), and undoubtedly a better candidate for a cinematic showdown.

[Chula]

there's nothing "uncultured" about Texas Hold 'Em....far more of a phenomenon than baccarat

Texas Hold Em...You said it yourself..."a phenomenon." Trendy. The latest rage. You think a sophisticated, cultured gentleman should be involved in the latest phenomenon? (Remember Bond's comments regarding the phenomenal Beatles in GOLDFINGER? Bond has no interest in the latest phenomenons.) A sophisticate does not go in for fads or phenomenons. But this CASINO ROYALE Bond does. As I said, the writers of CASINO ROYALE have made Bond a common Joe.
Oh, now try and shoot that criticism down thoroughly as you say all my points have been.

[JimmyBond]

Would the sequence have been more riveting if it was Baccarat? I think the point is that Baccarat is more about luck, whereas Poker (in any variation) has a lot to do with skill: how well you are at making a poor hand turn into a good one, and how well you are at bluffing.

That sounds a lot more interesting than watching a protracted segment of people playing what is essentially a glammed up version of Black Jack.