54 replies to this topic

[Righty007]

I missed SMERSH though.. wtf, no scar on the hand?????

He may have a scar on his wrist from having the homing device cut out. That's close enough to the SMERSH scar.

[Matt_13]

Craigs screaming really made you feel the pain, that was brutal. Haha the whole theater was laughing when he was shouting "to the right!" though, that was pretty funny. It was a terrific scene, a classic for sure.

[doubler83]

I might sound weird, but I would have liked the scene to run on a bit longer. Possibly, like somebody else said, with LeChiffre getting so pissed off at Bond's humour, and giving Bond three or four lashes, one right after the other, and having Bond come in and out of consciousness.

[DamnCoffee]

blame the BBFC

[doubler83]

For those that read the script, how much longer did the torture scene go on for compared to what we got in the film?

[DamnCoffee]

I would think a few minutes Valenka was in the scene in the script, she wasn't in the movie.

[doubler83]

Bring on the uncut DVD!

[db077]

(and Le Chiffre's death was so sudden that it almost didn't matter)..

I said the same thing to some friends, I thought they would have made it a bit more dramatic or put even a little emphasis on it. But it was one shot to the head, a quick glimpse of him dead on the floor and then on to the next scene. Guess that's a way to show that Le Chiffre was not as important as he thought he was, he was as dispensable as the rest of them.

AS for the rest of it, I thought Bond's humor was a form of defiance, a way to show he would not yield, that he didn't care what was done to him. I didn't find the comments hilarious, though I admit I did give a bit of a chuckle, the screaming turned into somewhat hysterical laughter I thought was chilling and well done on Mr. Craig's part.

[ckoch]

Deth

I am entirely in agreement with you in your thoughts and views on this scene. For those that have read the book, I believe that the torture scene there was written with a terrific sense of suspense and tone. I really was disappointed at how it turned out in the movie. I too expected it to be longer and drawn out with Bond drifting in and out of consciousness. I think that would have helped sell the immense amount of pain that he was in and the need for an extended recovery period at the hospital following better than the film portrayed it.

If the producers and Campbell wanted to stay faithful with Fleming's novel (and I am quite surprised in that they did not utilize as much of this terrific literary classic as they should have), I would have liked the tone of this scene to be much darker and certainly less humourous with lines like "Now everyone will know you died scratching my balls."

Remember Bond is a junior 00 agent in this film and we are supposed to see him making mistakes and not showing the best sense of judgement that we have come to expect in later Bond adventures. In the book, Bond doesn't use humour as a way of pissing off Le Chiffre in hope that he might speed up the torture and bring death upon him sooner. That is what he does in the film, but to me, this is something that a inexperience agent wouldn't do just as in the novel.

Bond also seemed pretty conscious when Mr. White came in to kill Le Chiffre and then he later told Mathis that he did not see the shooter. It may have helped show Bond drifting in and out of consciousness to better convey the fact that he was unable to id the shooter.

Just my thoughts and I realize they may not be too popular with many of you who loved the scene however, I just felt that this scene should not have been played for laughs and could have been an absolute jewel if taken in the other direction and played for the intensity, grit, and suspensfulness that Fleming conveyed in the novel.

[Harmsway]

Since I had seen it last Monday already, when they sat down I wondered if they knew what was coming and sure enough when the torture scene came on the screen the three got up and left in disgust.

Yeah... I don't think most moviegoers are prepared for that scene. Still, I think it'll fly for a lot of people. Just not the kiddie crowd.

[deth]

ckoch... yeah, that's what I'm saying... it should have been a bit longer.. and the in and out of consciousness is essential in my book. That's what Fleming does to make the torture seem so grotesque... LeChiffre toys with Bond in a sense.


to sum up, I think the defining difference is that in the book, LeChiffre not only hurts him physically... but almost destroys him mentally as well.... neither really came across too well in the film, imo.

In the film, Bond keeps ALL of his wits about him...

[ckoch]

Glad to see that I wasn't the only one who thought that the book portrayed this scene a lot more effectively and with the right tone and mood deth.

The falling in and out of consciousness is essential as it really shows Bond is not a superman in the book and would respond to the torture as any mortal man would. Agreed that the film was not able to adequately convey this message of both physical and mental infliction of pain.

To me, imo, this was the pivotal scene that made it just an okay Bond film for me. Better than DAD and TND, but because of this scene's portrayl of the torture scene in the book, it didn't reach legendary status as it had the potential to do as a film.

For those of you who may not have read Casino Royale the novel by Fleming, I would certainly encourage you to do so and then share your thoughts upon whether the torture scene (and others) were portrayed better in the film or in the book.

[Harmsway]

For those of you who may not have read Casino Royale the novel by Fleming, I would certainly encourage you to do so and then share your thoughts upon whether the torture scene (and others) were portrayed better in the film or in the book.

Oh, it's way better in the book. But that's irrelevant, because the book's scene would make the film an easy "R" and unenjoyable for most audiences. I was hardly expecting that - I was expecting a scene that retained its basic concept, but did it as edgy as possible while still not being so horrifically offensive that Bond would lose it's chances of being a hit.

[deth]

For those of you who may not have read Casino Royale the novel by Fleming, I would certainly encourage you to do so and then share your thoughts upon whether the torture scene (and others) were portrayed better in the film or in the book.

Oh, it's way better in the book. But that's irrelevant, because the book's scene would make the film an easy "R" and unenjoyable for most audiences. I was hardly expecting that - I was expecting a scene that retained its basic concept, but did it as edgy as possible while still not being so horrifically offensive that Bond would lose it's chances of being a hit.

that is a good point though... one has to consider the rating it might have gotten... it's just... I don't know... disappointing...

[ckoch]

Harmsway - I understand your point regarding the rating and it is a good one. We must be aware of how the scene will play out in front of the sensors, but I do believe that it would have been possible to have it darker and without the humour but also inject the passing in and out of consciousness as well as draw out the torture duration without changing the rating of the film. I have a friend whose mother works for the Film Classification Board here in Canada and she sees all the movies before they are release and assigns them their rating. I will have to ask her her thoughts on the film and in particular this scene. It would be interesting to note how far Campbell and the filmmakers could have pushed it before getting an R rating.

I am confused and fusterated too like you deth. It is simply stated . . . very disappointing imo.

[deth]

what city do you live in ckoch?

[HildebrandRarity]

absolutely.... I get why he did it... but I just don't think a scene like that should have been played for jokes... of course, maybe that's how the film got the rating it did from the censors...


to me, the scene in the book is SO much more powerful... I was expecting something powerful and instead got a laugh

It was going to very interesting how they were going to film and handle that scene.

The humour, which even made Le Chiffre smile in amusement, was needed to, in my view, take the horror element out of it for audiences...and secondly to show, as Jimmybond says, Bond's defiance. A you attitude without using Tarantino expletives.

You have to remember, people like me are taking 10 year olds to see this movie. I myself was taken to see Bond movies as a 6 and an 8 year old.


I can't imagine the scene working any other way for a "Bond" movie.

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 18 November 2006 - 06:40 PM.

[ckoch]

I live in Vancouer, Canada deth.

[bond_girl_double07]

I am, as you may have noticed, a Bond girl, but wouldn't that kind of errr torture create more of a response than a scream? I expected some vomiting or passing out.. he was really flinging that rope around

I liked the humor, I didn't want it to go anywhere.. I just wish the scene would have been longer.. it was really hardly a torture scene at all as it was.. not that I wanted to see that beautiful body get any more beat up than it already was, but one does have an obligation to the text

[Publius]

While everyone was shocked by the torture, I (having read the book) was shocked by the humor. It was very well done, and I was amazed at how I could simultaneously feel horrified by Bond's pain and bloodcurdling screams and laugh with and admire him for his defiant joking. Although part of me still wishes it had been more intense, as Double-Oh Agent suggested, I do appreciate that they were able to make it work commercially (well, insofar as the rating goes) and juggle more than one emotional extreme. Creative, if nothing else.

[ckoch]

Publius

I understand your viewpoint but do you not think (having read the book too) that the filmmakers gave in to the public and rewrote that scene with some humour injected to get a laugh or two rather than staying true to Fleming's original description and tone of that scene?

Campbell himself said in an interview leading up to CR that they had a real opportunity to reinvent Bond by going back to the original portrayl as imagined by Fleming. This was the perfect scene, imo, for them to show that they wanted to stay true to Fleming and the original character and also for Daniel Craig to really show his acting chops as first rate.

[Bondian]

Thanks to Righty, I've just watched this scene on YouTube.

I'll be crossing my legs when I watch this at the cinema.

[Publius]

I understand your viewpoint but do you not think (having read the book too) that the filmmakers gave in to the public and rewrote that scene with some humour injected to get a laugh or two rather than staying true to Fleming's original description and tone of that scene?

Yes, I do think that's what happened, but I never expected it to be anything more severe than what we got, simply because the novel's version would have netted the film an "R" rating and consequently killed it at the box office. So rather than just giving us a watered down sequence, I think they managed to get away with more violence than they otherwise could have by incorporating the humor, which I do think worked well.

In other words, while I still would love to see a truly faithful adaptation of the novel, perhaps it'd be better if such a thing were, say, made as an HBO special where they could get away with it and have none of the cinematic baggage. For movie Bond, I think this was a respectable alternative that kept much of the literary spirit while still shaking up people's expectations and redefining, if not shredding, the formula. I completely understand your perspective, however.

[Harmsway]

Precisely, Publius. I felt the film was already very edgy for PG-13, and to push it any darker than it was would push it right into R territory.

[ckoch]

Publius

Thanks for you thoughts. I do value your opinion and views on this scene. Thanks for taking the time out to express it.