No replies to this topic

[fulgentius]

So far I've only seen the film once, as such I'm not quite ready to write a full review yet because of my many conflincting feelings about the movie. Take this as a collection of my impressions. Overall "Casino" was what I expected it to be : it's a solid spy thriller, with some good action scenes, welcome doses of heavy violence and seriousness, a terrific performance by Craig and pleasing visuals. I didn't expect the movie to be as darkly humorous as it was, which was a very nice surprise. Luckily the movie wasn't too "Jason Bournized".

However this film has a LOT of problems !

First the movie is very uneven : one part is all action, while the other one concentrates on the Fleming novel... Unfortunately Campbell struggles with the admittedly difficult-to-film novel, and cannot manage to keep the poker game visually interesting. There's little to no tension during the game and as a result the romance and characters take a hit. You know they're doomed, you just don't feel it.

The reboot is the main problem, though. It's completely unnecessary, and actually detrimental. I understand they wanted a fresh feel for the new movie, and "Casino" definitely has the right tone. Why reboot, though ? The Bond films have never been known for their continuity in the first place, and the tones of the films have always been shifting anyway. Bond does not "begin". He is both undefined and absolute. Consistency is Bond's raison d'