102 replies to this topic

[dinovelvet]

And let's not forget the highly classy game that Bond plays in Fleming's YOLT novel - Rock, Paper, Scissors

[LorneGuyland]

CraigBond not refined? The devil, as ever, is in the details; just watch the way in which he pours the wine on the train. To below half-full and with a delightful 'California twist' at the end. Textbook.

[Chula]

Chula, if you're the Fleming loyalist you claim to be...surely you would have at least enjoyed the fact that this is the first Bond movie in over thirty years to actually use the plot and pulled portions of the script right out of the novel "Casino Royale"...

I did enjoy that immensely. To hear lines taken verbatim from the novel definitely brought a smile to my face.

TO ALL WHO HAVE POSTED HERE....

Many years as a Bond fan has seen many, many sad developments with Bond. But these two are most disheartening:

1. Bond in CASINO ROYALE as more thug than Fleming's sophisticate
2. Bond fans here actually having no problem with Bond being closer to Ice Cube in XXX than Bond in Fleming's work

Enjoy the movie boys. In a few years you will certainly look back and say, "Whoa, CASINO ROYALE was another Pervert and Wade bit of stupidity that just doesn't fit the Bond character. Bond being told to wear a finer dinner jacket? JAMES BOND being told this? That isn't right."

But it seems here most of you prefer the writings of Pervert and Wade over one Ian Fleming. Sad for that.

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

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?"

-You misunderstood what she meant by 'wearing them with disdain'.

-He was confused as to how she could get him a tailored suit when she wouldn't have known his measurements, not upset that it was tailored.

Remember that he says he already has one...just not one that was to Vesper's liking. She wouldn't have had to tell him to wear it.

-he ordered one shaken not stirred earlier...does he have to say the line every time he orders a drink?

Craig is Bond. And a damn good Bond. Make no mistake about it.

[EyesOnly]

I honestly don't remember him ordering it shaken not stirred...when was this in the film?

Edited by EyesOnly, 18 November 2006 - 03:43 PM.

[Mercator]

I agree with Chula. This was not a Bond film.

Why?

No Q
No Moneypenny
No gadgets
No girls in the titles
No big villain - Ian Fleming would disapprove of this story - where was it?
No locations - why not France?
No humour
No good ending - Bond should always end with the girl. Hopefully with the funny jokes
No sets - I was expecting a big battle in the Casino Royale. Wasn't it the baddie's HQ in the original?
No 007 Theme - only came at the end
No proper Bond song - you cannot have the American rock as Bond song. Bring back Shirley Bassey or Carly Simon. They would have done a good song.
Why no Blofeld or big plan? The last few Bond films suffer from this.
I think a lot of peoples have been fooled by Daniel Craig. He is good actor with good body but Bond is not Arnold Schwartzenegger. Daniel is too tough. Roger said that Bond is someone who does not like killing - Daniel does.

I'm glad that Chula agree with me and that I am not alone.

[CharlieBind]

I think I honestly don't remember him ordering it shaken or stirred...when was this in the film?

I can't either, even when he give the list to the waiter.

[DamnCoffee]

I agree with Chula. This was not a Bond film.

Why?

No Q
No Moneypenny
No gadgets
No girls in the titles
No big villain - Ian Fleming would disapprove of this story - where was it?
No locations - why not France?
No humour
No good ending - Bond should always end with the girl. Hopefully with the funny jokes
No sets - I was expecting a big battle in the Casino Royale. Wasn't it the baddie's HQ in the original?
No 007 Theme - only came at the end
No proper Bond song - you cannot have the American rock as Bond song. Bring back Shirley Bassey or Carly Simon. They would have done a good song.
Why no Blofeld or big plan? The last few Bond films suffer from this.
I think a lot of peoples have been fooled by Daniel Craig. He is good actor with good body but Bond is not Arnold Schwartzenegger. Daniel is too tough. Roger said that Bond is someone who does not like killing - Daniel does.


I'm glad that Chula agree with me and that I am not alone.

why in the hell have you posted the same thing in Three seperate threads?

I think I honestly don't remember him ordering it shaken or stirred...when was this in the film?

I can't either, even when he give the list to the waiter.

i think he said "shake very well"

[JCRendle]

It wouldn't be the first time a Bond hasn't said "Shaken, not stirred", at least Craig's Bond orders one, unlike Moore's.

[EyesOnly]

I wouldn't mind in the next film he doesn't say, "Shaken not stirred!" ...or Bond..James Bond! It wasn't said in every movie in the Connery era!

Edited by EyesOnly, 18 November 2006 - 04:01 PM.

[Cody]

I think I honestly don't remember him ordering it shaken or stirred...when was this in the film?

I can't either, even when he give the list to the waiter.

i think he said "shake very well"

I think it was "shaken over ice".

[icecold]

I agree with Chula. This was not a Bond film.

Why?

No Q So?
No Moneypenny ...So?
No gadgets Yes, there were. Just not any invisible or submersible cars
No girls in the titles And?
No big villain - Ian Fleming would disapprove of this story - where was it? Ian Fleming would disapprove of his own story? I'd call you an idiot but that would be an understatement.
No locations - why not France? No locations? How can you do anything without a location? I counted at least 7 different locations...
No humour Maybe you need to develop a better sense of it...
No good ending - Bond should always end with the girl. Hopefully with the funny jokes Bond should not always end with the girls, and if you call those jokes funny? Oh dear...
No sets - I was expecting a big battle in the Casino Royale. Wasn't it the baddie's HQ in the original? There was no big battle at all in the book. What are you talking about?
No 007 Theme - only came at the end Many of John Barry's scores (which are the best of the series) feature very little of the Bond theme but rather utilise the title theme throughout the film, as in CR.
No proper Bond song - you cannot have the American rock as Bond song. Bring back Shirley Bassey or Carly Simon. They would have done a good song. Apparently you can have the American rock as Bond song, because they did and it's the best one in many, many years...what about British rock? I guess LALD isn't a proper Bond song, either.
Why no Blofeld or big plan? The last few Bond films suffer from this. No, the last few Bond films suffer from subpar scripts, uninspired action bits, and bad acting/directing.
I think a lot of peoples have been fooled by Daniel Craig. He is good actor with good body but Bond is not Arnold Schwartzenegger. Daniel is too tough. Roger said that Bond is someone who does not like killing - Daniel does. Oh, Roger said that Bond is someone who does not like killing? Well...excuse me. He must be more of an expert on the matter than Ian Fleming himself! If I recall correctly Bond has never 'liked' killing, but he can definitely get a satisfaction out of it under many circumstances, which is why he has a licence to kill. It doesn't bother him. And I dont know what films your watching but Daniel Craig is not Arnold Schwartzenegger, he's a very physically fit man, but no body builder. I apologize if looking at yourself in the mirror and watching Pierce Brosnan have made your concepts on what is fit and what is not change.

I'm glad that Chula agree with me and that I am not alone. No, but your minority is very small...

[marktmurphy]

TO ALL WHO HAVE POSTED HERE....

Many years as a Bond fan has seen many, many sad developments with Bond. But these two are most disheartening:

1. Bond in CASINO ROYALE as more thug than Fleming's sophisticate
2. Bond fans here actually having no problem with Bond being closer to Ice Cube in XXX than Bond in Fleming's work

Enjoy the movie boys. In a few years you will certainly look back and say, "Whoa, CASINO ROYALE was another Pervert and Wade bit of stupidity that just doesn't fit the Bond character. Bond being told to wear a finer dinner jacket? JAMES BOND being told this? That isn't right."

But it seems here most of you prefer the writings of Pervert and Wade over one Ian Fleming. Sad for that.

Just posting the same thing over and again and ignoring what everyone's been saying is not a conversation. Read the posts above and say why you think our point of view is wrong- don't just keep saying 'Bond is a thug' and painting all other Bond fans as idiots, because it's really not making you look any cleverer. Quite the opposite, in fact.

[Moore Baby Moore]

No big villain - Ian Fleming would disapprove of this story - where was it?

Ian Fleming would disapprove of a story he himself wrote.

Wow. I've heard people claim that Fleming got Bond all wrong (like Siegel and Shuster got Superman all wrong, or like Kane and Finger got Batman all wrong), but to claim he'd denounce a story he wrote himself as unsuitable for Bond? That's something totally new.

1. Bond in CASINO ROYALE as more thug than Fleming's sophisticate

So I was just imagining Bond's nastier qualities in the Fleming books? He didn't come off as half the smooth operator he tends to be in the films.

2. Bond fans here actually having no problem with Bond being closer to Ice Cube in XXX than Bond in Fleming's work

If you believe this, then you don't know one one single thing about Fleming's work. You're basing everything on the cliche image presented in the movies.

Enjoy the movie boys. In a few years you will certainly look back and say, "Whoa, CASINO ROYALE was another Pervert and Wade bit of stupidity that just doesn't fit the Bond character. Bond being told to wear a finer dinner jacket? JAMES BOND being told this? That isn't right."

But it seems here most of you prefer the writings of Pervert and Wade over one Ian Fleming. Sad for that.

Wow. Not only do you know nothing whatsoever about Fleming's work or the James Bond character, but you also seem to think you know better than we do. This egomania of yours is not becoming.

[Chula]

Just posting the same thing over and again and ignoring what everyone's been saying is not a conversation.

I never shy from a good debate. I have answered all thrown at me (do some reading) and it is actually the others who can't seem to digest facts. Such as the fact that a lowly accountant actually tells James Bond how to dress for a night in the casino. When you explain to me how that Purvis and Wade little addition is what the Fleming Bond is about, well, hell will freeze over.

Love to see you try and explain how Bond is sophisticated in this film when a young girl has to tell Bond what is appropriate to wear for a night in a casino.

Look, you lot seem to enjoy the words of Pervert and Wade. That's fine. Enjoy them. I don't. I look to Bond as Fleming wrote him and for films the Fleming/Bond that Terence Young and Richard Maibaum brought to the screen. Bond would certainly know what to wear at a casino in both the books and Maibaum screenplays. You really want to take the other side of that point? Go ahead, make yourself look foolish arguing that Pervert and Wade know Bond better than Fleming.

[marktmurphy]

I never shy from a good debate. I have answered all thrown at me (do some reading) and it is actually the others who can't seem to digest facts.

No- you've ignored every point levelled at you. Do some reading. All of the points you've made have already been answered, including the dinner suit one. You just replied by saying the same thing over and over. You even repeated your dinner suit point twice in that one post alone. Broken record.

[dinovelvet]

Go ahead, make yourself look foolish arguing that Pervert and Wade know Bond better than Fleming.

Nobody can make themselves look more foolish than you just did, referring to Neal Purvis as "Pervert" while claiming he wants sophistication.

[HildebrandRarity]

Chula was the dumb, mute lowlife from that ballet dancing school in Thailand, right?


As an aside, i've seen CR twice. I was under the impression that Bond refers to his own dinner jacket as being tailored (whilst holding up Vesper's...hence confusing people.)

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 18 November 2006 - 09:37 PM.

[JCRendle]

Is it me, or has the point about Connery only ordering a Martini shaken, not stirred once and Moore never ordering one not been answered?

[Chula]

To Hildebrand Rarity

A. Hidebrand Rarity, you actually think Bond's utterance of "shaken not stirred" is meant to demonstrate he likes to keep things flawed? You really think audiences say to themselves, "Whoa, the ice will actually weaken the drink when one orders a Vodka Martini that way." You really think that is why Bond says that, so audiences can see Bond as flawed? Come on, your writing skills demonstrate a sharper mind than that?

B. I'll buy your take that a Bond closer to his military background is a colder, harsher, more indifferent Bond.

C. The "Do I look like I care" line about shaken not stirred seems to have you confused, too. You are another that gives "the job is getting under his skin" reason for uttering that line. So let's get this straight: Bond faced with losing a card game (this isn't exactly Miami getting blown up by a nuke) disrupts him so much that he can't even order a drink the way he wants it? That's what you actually believe? No. I'll say Purvis and Wade stupidly stripped Bond of his steadfast sophistication simply to get a cheap laugh from the audience. You bit. I rolled my eyes and said, "What are they doing to Bond?"

(Recall the scene in GOLDFINGER for how steadfast Bond is in his sophistication. Here he is a laser beam was seconds from cutting him in half, shot point blank in the chest by something, captured, held prisoner aboard his enemy's plane, flying to wherever his enemy takes him...and Bond shaves, showers, and makes sure he comes off that plane wearing the most spectacular suit on God's Earth. You really think that losing a hand in cards can rattle Bond's particualar tastes? If that GOLDFINGER situation couldn't shake his sophistication, then Purvis and Wade are clueless as to what Bond is.)

C. I agree about the tailored dinner jacket is more about Bond getting a little touchy about a girl getting too close. However, it still stands that basically a clerk would tell Bond what is suitable for a casino in Montenegro. Don't give me Bond's "personal budget" prohibits him (he was supplied with the latest Aston Martin, for Christ's sake!). No, when Vesper offers the better jacket it's a case of again Purvis and Wade stripping Bond of his inherent sophistication and giving us a scene where Bond doesn't know what is right when it comes to simply dressing appropriately. He doesn't know! This girl knows better than JAMES BOND what to wear in a casino! That is not Fleming/Bond. That is Purvis Wade/Bond. Not mine.

D. I actually think Craig will be a top Bond. I also think Purvis and Wade are horrible screenwriters. Why you on this board put so much faith and love into everything they do is absurd. A clerk knows better than Bond how to dress in a casino? Bond snaps at a bartender to just give him a drink anyway he makes it! Good lord.

[Publius]

Chula, if you want to continue to ignore people when they point out the flaws in your argument, fine, but I'd suggest you drop the (not even creative) XXX strawman and step down from your "I know Fleming" pedestal. You've more than crossed the line for what constitutes trolling, however cultured you may be.

[Chula]

Chula was the dumb, mute lowlife from that ballet dancing school in Thailand, right?

Oh, God, if you can't even recall who Chula was, what business do you have being here?

Chula was that sharp martial arts fighter who was the best character to ever grace a Bond film....even better than Bond! Name one other character who has others chant his name in admiration. "Chu -la! Chu-la! Chu-la! Chu-la!" Fantastically absurd scene...made most absurd by the fact that Roger Moore actually bests this guy in a martial arts fight!

Chula, if you want to continue to ignore people....

Ignore people? Publius, I actually take many posters posts and answer their points point by point (see my post directly above yours). I certainly can't entertain all these posts fired my way. If you want to call that ignoring, so be it.

I am fascinated by the fact that Purvis and Wade, the men who brought us invisible cars, are held in such high esteem by people on this thread. Invisible cars, a young girl telling Bond how to dress for a night in the casino, Bond snapping at a bartender for offering him a fine drink....this meets approval with hard-core Bond fans?

[00Twelve]

Hey, OK, so hang on. Now that I've actually seen the film, where in the world does it seem apparent that this Bond isn't cultured? He wears fine clothing (note the final scene), eats Beluga caviar, gave the impression that he knows plenty about spirits, has a tux (albeit not taliored ), puts gel in his hair, and wears an Omega watch. An explanation (which echoes Fleming extremely well, if you know Bond's background) as to why he's not always comfortable in fancy dress is also given to justify his not being totally "cultured" yet. So, I don't see where anyone could get the impression that he's not well-cultured for this point in his life. He's got to develop some of his tastes during his tenure as a 00. Anyway, that pretty much does it for me. I'm done with this debate.

[Harmsway]

I am fascinated by the fact that Purvis and Wade, the men who brought us invisible cars, are held in such high esteem by people on this thread.

It's not P&W that are held in esteem. It's Paul Haggis. And no, we don't know which part of the script belongs to which writer, so it's useless attributing all this stuff to P&W.

[Publius]

Ignore people? Publius, I actually take many posters posts and answer their points point by point (see my post directly above yours).

I don't expect you to. But when your rebuttals regurgitate an argument that has been countered by several unaddressed posters and then you ask us yet again to explain ourselves, you're running in circles and I have to question why you bother continuing the debate, and with as much attitude as you have (I presume you've decided to drop it, though).

I am fascinated by the fact that Purvis and Wade, the men who brought us invisible cars, are held in such high esteem by people on this thread. Invisible cars, a young girl telling Bond how to dress for a night in the casino, Bond snapping at a bartender for offering him a fine drink....this meets approval with hard-core Bond fans?

I don't bother to keep tabs on who's been praising P&W, but I know I haven't, and I frankly don't care who's responsible for Casino Royale, because it was great. Whether and how much that was the work of P&W only matters to me to the extent Bond 22 and beyond are concerned. Given that Cubby Broccoli was responsible for everything from Moonraker to Licence to Kill, I've learned that the blame game (and it's inverse) isn't worth the sweat.

Anyway, the "telling Bond how to dress" and "Bond snapping" have already been addressed. And I'm still surprised you survived the Bond series since 1969.

[DaltonCraig]

Chula, if you're the Fleming loyalist you claim to be...surely you would have at least enjoyed the fact that this is the first Bond movie in over thirty years to actually use the plot and pulled portions of the script right out of the novel "Casino Royale"...

I did enjoy that immensely. To hear lines taken verbatim from the novel definitely brought a smile to my face.

Dude, you say this and then you say the movie made you want to vommit???

I do believe we have a Troll on our boards....

[HildebrandRarity]

To Hildebrand Rarity

A. Hidebrand Rarity, you actually think Bond's utterance of "shaken not stirred" is meant to demonstrate he likes to keep things flawed? You really think audiences say to themselves, "Whoa, the ice will actually weaken the drink when one orders a Vodka Martini that way." You really think that is why Bond says that, so audiences can see Bond as flawed? Come on, your writing skills demonstrate a sharper mind than that?

B. I'll buy your take that a Bond closer to his military background is a colder, harsher, more indifferent Bond.

C. The "Do I look like I care" line about shaken not stirred seems to have you confused, too. You are another that gives "the job is getting under his skin" reason for uttering that line. So let's get this straight: Bond faced with losing a card game (this isn't exactly Miami getting blown up by a nuke) disrupts him so much that he can't even order a drink the way he wants it? That's what you actually believe? No. I'll say Purvis and Wade stupidly stripped Bond of his steadfast sophistication simply to get a cheap laugh from the audience. You bit. I rolled my eyes and said, "What are they doing to Bond?"

(Recall the scene in GOLDFINGER for how steadfast Bond is in his sophistication. Here he is a laser beam was seconds from cutting him in half, shot point blank in the chest by something, captured, held prisoner aboard his enemy's plane, flying to wherever his enemy takes him...and Bond shaves, showers, and makes sure he comes off that plane wearing the most spectacular suit on God's Earth. You really think that losing a hand in cards can rattle Bond's particualar tastes? If that GOLDFINGER situation couldn't shake his sophistication, then Purvis and Wade are clueless as to what Bond is.)

C. I agree about the tailored dinner jacket is more about Bond getting a little touchy about a girl getting too close. However, it still stands that basically a clerk would tell Bond what is suitable for a casino in Montenegro. Don't give me Bond's "personal budget" prohibits him (he was supplied with the latest Aston Martin, for Christ's sake!). No, when Vesper offers the better jacket it's a case of again Purvis and Wade stripping Bond of his inherent sophistication and giving us a scene where Bond doesn't know what is right when it comes to simply dressing appropriately. He doesn't know! This girl knows better than JAMES BOND what to wear in a casino! That is not Fleming/Bond. That is Purvis Wade/Bond. Not mine.

D. I actually think Craig will be a top Bond. I also think Purvis and Wade are horrible screenwriters. Why you on this board put so much faith and love into everything they do is absurd. A clerk knows better than Bond how to dress in a casino? Bond snaps at a bartender to just give him a drink anyway he makes it! Good lord.

Why are you directing this comment towards me?

What the did I do to deserve you?

LOL!

Chula was the dumb, mute lowlife from that ballet dancing school in Thailand, right?

Oh, God, if you can't even recall who Chula was...

Chula was that ... martial arts fighter...Roger Moore actually bests this guy

As i said...the dumb mute from that ballet dancing school funded by Mr Fat.


I suggest you invite those two girls that kicked your colleages' to teach you a thing or two at the ballet school of yours. I know that you're a dumb mute who can't speak...the two girls will be able to vocalize on your behalf.


LOL.

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 18 November 2006 - 10:55 PM.

[sorking]

To Hildebrand Rarity

You mean me, right? For someone who prides themselves on being trollish towards anyone who can't remember details, that's pretty impressive.

A. Hidebrand Rarity, you actually think Bond's utterance of "shaken not stirred" is meant to demonstrate he likes to keep things flawed? You really think audiences say to themselves, "Whoa, the ice will actually weaken the drink when one orders a Vodka Martini that way." You really think that is why Bond says that, so audiences can see Bond as flawed? Come on, your writing skills demonstrate a sharper mind than that?

I love the way you ignore details in the current film almost as much as I love the way you've ignored the entire point of that discussion.

Let me try again.

IT'S A THEORY. If it were designed to communicate directly to the audience, it wouldn't be a theory, it would be directly discernable FACT. I didn't say it was anything to do with audience communication. I said I liked it as a notion.

Still, remind me, oh great Fleming expert - why DOES he take his drink watered down this way? What's the logic there? And what, exactly, is wrong with interpreting Fleming's art with that theory?

B. I'll buy your take that a Bond closer to his military background is a colder, harsher, more indifferent Bond.

Good. Because pleasing you will give my life greater meaning.

C. The "Do I look like I care" line about shaken not stirred seems to have you confused, too. You are another that gives "the job is getting under his skin" reason for uttering that line. So let's get this straight: Bond faced with losing a card game (this isn't exactly Miami getting blown up by a nuke) disrupts him so much that he can't even order a drink the way he wants it? That's what you actually believe? No. I'll say Purvis and Wade stupidly stripped Bond of his steadfast sophistication simply to get a cheap laugh from the audience. You bit. I rolled my eyes and said, "What are they doing to Bond?"

Sorry, losing a card game? I thought it was about failing on his first mission, losing money to fund terrorism, and contributing to thousands of deaths. I also thought you'd seen the film - you know, the bit where it's his first mission and his ego's getting in the way? Cos, hey, check it out - Goldfinger is set AFTER Bond had been in the service for years. It's like saying 'he doesn't mention he was married'.

Also: "You are another that gives "the job is getting under his skin" reason for uttering that line" - I like this. Yeah, it's terrible that people keep using actual facts to contradict you. I appreciate that can be frustrating.

C. I agree about the tailored dinner jacket is more about Bond getting a little touchy about a girl getting too close. However, it still stands that basically a clerk would tell Bond what is suitable for a casino in Montenegro. Don't give me Bond's "personal budget" prohibits him (he was supplied with the latest Aston Martin, for Christ's sake!). No, when Vesper offers the better jacket it's a case of again Purvis and Wade stripping Bond of his inherent sophistication and giving us a scene where Bond doesn't know what is right when it comes to simply dressing appropriately. He doesn't know! This girl knows better than JAMES BOND what to wear in a casino! That is not Fleming/Bond. That is Purvis Wade/Bond. Not mine.

For crying out loud, you're saying these things yourself! "Don't give me Bond's "personal budget" prohibits him (he was supplied with the latest Aston Martin, for Christ's sake!"

"SUPPLIED WITH"! As in 'didn't have one of his own'. Which is just what we've been saying. And, for that matter, a direct Fleming implication we're choosing to take to the movies.

This moronic vendatta of yours against the screenwriters isn't just clouding your judgement, it's making you attack with sarcasm anyone who comes up with a reasonable point. Which, instead of thinking over, you bat aside.

Also he clearly does know what to wear. He brought his own damn suit. Which, by the way, nobody said WASN'T tailored. (The budget angle's a theory, and it works for me. If not, that's fine, too.)

So he turns up with the correct attire. And she's got an alternative...which, surprisingly, is made to measure. Which he finds odd, given that she never came at him with a tape measure.

By the way I notice you ignore some of the other points - like the fact that hold 'em IS a huge casino game; it does make for better cinema, but is also far more realistic in 2006. But by all means skip that and every other line of dialogue, costume decision and piece of dialogue that suggests you might be wrong if it helps you be mean to people.

D. I actually think Craig will be a top Bond. I also think Purvis and Wade are horrible screenwriters. Why you on this board put so much faith and love into everything they do is absurd. A clerk knows better than Bond how to dress in a casino? Bond snaps at a bartender to just give him a drink anyway he makes it! Good lord.

I love the way you credit people with opinions they didn't give, Or lambast them for disagreeing. I bet you're great fun a parties.

Still, fair play to you - you can't argue with someone who can't listen. You win, and I quit.

Edited by sorking, 18 November 2006 - 11:50 PM.

[JCRendle]

Ever heard of selective hearing? This is selective reading.

[marktmurphy]

So let's get this straight: Bond faced with losing a card game (this isn't exactly Miami getting blown up by a nuke) disrupts him so much that he can't even order a drink the way he wants it?

Grief- no wonder no-one agrees with; you actually didn't understand the plot of this film at all, did you?