Jump to content


This is a read only archive of the old forums
The new CBn forums are located at https://quarterdeck.commanderbond.net/

 
Photo

Casino Royale - Overrated?


191 replies to this topic

#121 Ytadel

Ytadel

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 56 posts

Posted 20 March 2008 - 07:31 PM

I love Casino Royale, it's a fantastic film and possibly in my top 5 Bond films (definitely in my top 6), but I do think that while its value as far as the mainstream film criticism community goes is right on, it's probably a hint overrated among Bond fans, or at least on this forum.

For example, in "rank the Bond films" discussions, it's #1 on at least three-quarters of the lists (right after it came out, that probably peaked as high as 90%). As I said, I love it, but I can absolutely guarantee that in, say, five years after film history and Bond history have had time to settle a little bit, people will have a clear enough perspective to step back and reevaluate things with a less bandwagon-infused eye, and it will probably drop down to #1 on <25% of lists.

#122 Harry Fawkes

Harry Fawkes

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2229 posts
  • Location:Malta G.C

Posted 20 March 2008 - 07:35 PM

Right now I feel that Casino Royale is the best Bond film! Overrated? Not on your life!

#123 00Twelve

00Twelve

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7706 posts
  • Location:Kingsport, TN

Posted 20 March 2008 - 07:41 PM

That's the spirit, Harry. :tup::tup: That would be my short answer, too.

#124 HH007

HH007

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1833 posts
  • Location:U.S.A.

Posted 20 March 2008 - 07:43 PM

I love Casino Royale, it's a fantastic film and possibly in my top 5 Bond films (definitely in my top 6), but I do think that while its value as far as the mainstream film criticism community goes is right on, it's probably a hint overrated among Bond fans, or at least on this forum.

For example, in "rank the Bond films" discussions, it's #1 on at least three-quarters of the lists (right after it came out, that probably peaked as high as 90%). As I said, I love it, but I can absolutely guarantee that in, say, five years after film history and Bond history have had time to settle a little bit, people will have a clear enough perspective to step back and reevaluate things with a less bandwagon-infused eye, and it will probably drop down to #1 on <25% of lists.


As I said earlier, I never loved Casino Royale because of any bandwagon thing, just as I'm not bandwagon over anything else (I don't get why people loved Million Dollar Baby, Batman Begins, or The Hours, for example) I loved it because I loved it. It's my honest reaction. I've lost count of how many times I've watched it and it has held up. It, in my most humble opinion, is far superior to most films on the Bond roster in all areas; story, script, direction, acting, action scenes... I get annoyed when people write off Casino Royale's popularity to some kind of herd mentality.

#125 Mr. Blofeld

Mr. Blofeld

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9173 posts
  • Location:North Smithfield, RI, USA

Posted 20 March 2008 - 07:44 PM

It was my first Bond in theatres, so of course I love it. :tup:

#126 Harry Fawkes

Harry Fawkes

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2229 posts
  • Location:Malta G.C

Posted 20 March 2008 - 07:48 PM

That's the spirit, Harry. :):tup: That would be my short answer, too.


:tup: :(

#127 HH007

HH007

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1833 posts
  • Location:U.S.A.

Posted 20 March 2008 - 07:49 PM

It was my first Bond in theatres, so of course I love it. :tup:


Really? Mine was License To Kill, which I went to see when I was eight... and I love it.

Wow... post 1,000.

#128 Harry Fawkes

Harry Fawkes

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2229 posts
  • Location:Malta G.C

Posted 20 March 2008 - 07:53 PM

Happy 1000th HH007 :tup:

#129 HH007

HH007

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1833 posts
  • Location:U.S.A.

Posted 20 March 2008 - 07:55 PM

Thank you, Harry. :tup:

#130 Mr. Blofeld

Mr. Blofeld

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9173 posts
  • Location:North Smithfield, RI, USA

Posted 20 March 2008 - 08:09 PM

It was my first Bond in theatres, so of course I love it. :tup:


Really? Mine was License To Kill, which I went to see when I was eight... and I love it.

Wow... post 1,000.

And you've been here long than I have, so congrats! :tup:

#131 Harry Fawkes

Harry Fawkes

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2229 posts
  • Location:Malta G.C

Posted 20 March 2008 - 08:24 PM

Thank you, Harry. :tup:


:tup:

#132 Johnboy007

Johnboy007

    Commander CMG

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6990 posts
  • Location:Washington, D.C.

Posted 20 March 2008 - 08:59 PM

When I really think about it I am hard-pressed to find many that are better. Personally I can only rank From Russia With Love, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, and The Spy Who Loved Me higher. I would say that Casino Royale beats every Brosnan film and most of Moore's films because it is not impossibly stupid or cheesy. It is significantly less bloated than most of Connery's films, and at the same time Casino Royale has more spark than Dalton's.

It is hardly the perfect film and will never be so. All things considered it is difficult to find a Bond film, or any other film in the genre, that can match up with Casino Royale.

#133 Single-O-Seven

Single-O-Seven

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1323 posts
  • Location:Toronto, ON, Canada

Posted 21 March 2008 - 12:00 AM

Casino Royale overrated? But I thought it had Peter Sellers greatest performance!

#134 stamper

stamper

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2994 posts
  • Location:Under the sea

Posted 21 March 2008 - 07:00 AM

CASINO ROYALE is the best bond since OHMSS.

Anyone not agreeing is not a Bond fan, but a Gonzo Bond fan. Gonzo Bond is an alternate series of Bond movies which started with DAF, went on until AVTAK, then resumed from GE to DAD.

Gonzo bonds are the overrated circus movies, which remains unwatchable seriously to this day, unless you want to have a good laugh all the way, which is not what real, authentic Bonds are about.

I don't mind people loving their Bond dressed as a clown with a red nose amusing the kids.

Just don't come here to tell us that CR's Bond ain't Bond ! :tup:

#135 Colossus

Colossus

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1490 posts
  • Location:SPECTRE Island

Posted 21 March 2008 - 09:20 AM

Well the 60s/70s Bonds are still unbeatable to me.

But for the newer ones, call it nostalgia, but i like GoldenEye more than CR. :tup:

Edited by Colossus, 21 March 2008 - 09:21 AM.


#136 stamper

stamper

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2994 posts
  • Location:Under the sea

Posted 21 March 2008 - 12:11 PM

At least in Goldeneye, Bond didn't swing from tree to tree in the jungle screaming like Tarzan's, or got dressed as a clown with a red nose.

BOND. DRESSED. AS. A. CLOWN. WITH. A. RED. NOSE.

Think about how far we came back from.

#137 dodge

dodge

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5068 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 21 March 2008 - 01:24 PM

[quote name='Judo chop' post='852096' date='20 March 2008 - 16:21'][quote name='HH007' post='852082' date='20 March 2008 - 10:49'][quote name='Judo chop' post='852079' date='20 March 2008 - 15:37'][size=1](What if Quantum of Solace is better

#138 dee-bee-five

dee-bee-five

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2227 posts

Posted 21 March 2008 - 01:32 PM

At least in Goldeneye, Bond didn't swing from tree to tree in the jungle screaming like Tarzan's, or got dressed as a clown with a red nose.

BOND. DRESSED. AS. A. CLOWN. WITH. A. RED. NOSE.


IN. A. SEQUENCE. THAT. JUST. HAPPENED. TO. BE. ONE. OF. THE. BEST. AND MOST. EXCITING. FROM. THE. MOORE. BONDS.

And even allowing for the Tarzan yell, I found Octopussy a damned sight more fun than GoldenEye. Of course, by your reckoning that rules me out from being a proper Bond fan :tup: . Even though CR replaced OHMSS as my favourite Bond movie after, oh, thirty-odd years.

Edited by dee-bee-five, 21 March 2008 - 01:36 PM.


#139 bond 16.05.72

bond 16.05.72

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1068 posts
  • Location:Leeds, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom

Posted 21 March 2008 - 08:49 PM

Considering Copolla's Dracula is a seriously flawed movie it does include a superb performance from Gary Oldman, it's just nothing else matches up and it like he's a different film with some of the others sub standard and hammy acting, save maybe the fantastic epic score.

My point is that Oldman's take on Drac is probably the closest to Stoker's vision, although some people here believe the Lee take refined from Lugosi's iconic look the real Dracula.

The fact that some films have informed us what a character looks like but the literary version is a quite different creature, Oldman touched on what Stoker was doing better that Lee's most famous version ever could.

Although some will never see it and the same goes for Bond, some people think Bond is defined by Moore's or Brosnan's take because they have become such a cliche and they are expected to fit some criteria and when an actor comes along that shakes that up but actually reflects the original creator people still cry thats not Bond.

Well Craig's Bond went a good way to convincing the World he wasn't a smug Bank Manager looking type. People are becoming to come round and except Bond isn't just a cardboard device to get from one action scene to another, this is a living breathing 3 dimensional person with emotions who bleeds and that is what makes some people think their not looking at Bond that and he's blond.

I personally don't think CR is overrated but I do think GF is but thats me.

#140 Royal Dalton

Royal Dalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4542 posts

Posted 21 March 2008 - 10:02 PM

My point is that Oldman's take on Drac is probably the closest to Stoker's vision, although some people here believe the Lee take refined from Lugosi's iconic look the real Dracula.

The fact that some films have informed us what a character looks like but the literary version is a quite different creature, Oldman touched on what Stoker was doing better that Lee's most famous version ever could.

I still wouldn't say Gary Oldman's Dracula was much like the character from the book, though. I'd say the closest is probably Christopher Lee in Jess Franco's otherwise dreadful non-Hammer film El Conde Dracula. And even he's not all that close to the character from the book.

As for Casino Royale, I'm not really much of a fan of it. But the new film looks like it'll be more my cup of tea.

#141 Eddie Burns

Eddie Burns

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 232 posts
  • Location:Somewhere on Planet Earth

Posted 21 March 2008 - 10:55 PM

Considering Copolla's Dracula is a seriously flawed movie it does include a superb performance from Gary Oldman, it's just nothing else matches up and it like he's a different film with some of the others sub standard and hammy acting, save maybe the fantastic epic score.

My point is that Oldman's take on Drac is probably the closest to Stoker's vision, although some people here believe the Lee take refined from Lugosi's iconic look the real Dracula.

The fact that some films have informed us what a character looks like but the literary version is a quite different creature, Oldman touched on what Stoker was doing better that Lee's most famous version ever could.

Although some will never see it and the same goes for Bond, some people think Bond is defined by Moore's or Brosnan's take because they have become such a cliche and they are expected to fit some criteria and when an actor comes along that shakes that up but actually reflects the original creator people still cry thats not Bond.

Well Craig's Bond went a good way to convincing the World he wasn't a smug Bank Manager looking type. People are becoming to come round and except Bond isn't just a cardboard device to get from one action scene to another, this is a living breathing 3 dimensional person with emotions who bleeds and that is what makes some people think their not looking at Bond that and he's blond.

I personally don't think CR is overrated but I do think GF is but thats me.


Great Post Bond 16!

Couldn't agree more. However its too bad the general movie-going public don't really know Flemings Bond. I feel Cubby really let the hardcore fans down in favor of money. I personally don't mind the light Bond movies but it would have been interesting to vary the films a little bit. That way the perception of the character remains multi-dimensional. I don't blame Connery for wanting out when he did because the character just became secondary to everything else.

Fair enough to those that didn't like it (I like Batman Forever more than Batman Begins) but it undeniably blows almost everything else out of the water. Whoever criticizes CR is nitpicking. It may not be your cup of tea, but its a great Bond movie.

#142 tdalton

tdalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 11680 posts

Posted 21 March 2008 - 11:06 PM

I personally don't think CR is overrated but I do think GF is but thats me.


While I do find CASINO ROYALE a little bit overrated (not much, but a bit), I completely agree with you on GOLDFINGER, which is not only the most overrated film in the franchise, but also amongst the worst (although it will never rival the absolute awfulness of THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN).

#143 craigbegins

craigbegins

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 114 posts

Posted 21 March 2008 - 11:10 PM

It's not perfect, and it's certainly no "Batman Begins" but compared to several Bond films it's a bloody classic.


Actually, it is no "Batman Begins", I think it's a much better movie than "Batman Begins". I thought BB just went dead in the second half, and the action scenes were horribly edited to boot.


I disagree, but we're all entitled to our own opinions :tup: Lets play nice.

#144 jaguar007

jaguar007

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5608 posts
  • Location:Portland OR

Posted 22 March 2008 - 01:05 AM

I love Casino Royale, it's a fantastic film and possibly in my top 5 Bond films (definitely in my top 6), but I do think that while its value as far as the mainstream film criticism community goes is right on, it's probably a hint overrated among Bond fans, or at least on this forum.

For example, in "rank the Bond films" discussions, it's #1 on at least three-quarters of the lists (right after it came out, that probably peaked as high as 90%). As I said, I love it, but I can absolutely guarantee that in, say, five years after film history and Bond history have had time to settle a little bit, people will have a clear enough perspective to step back and reevaluate things with a less bandwagon-infused eye, and it will probably drop down to #1 on <25% of lists.


True to a certain extent. I think it has probably dropped down a little on some lists since it opened (there has been almost 1 1/2 years for it to sink in), but not dramatically. DAD dropped on people's lists a couple months after it came out. I think this is normal for any movie (to drop once the movie is no longer "new").

In short, yes, I think CR dropped a bit on most peoples list, but I think it will stay toward the top of most lists for the long run.

#145 Colossus

Colossus

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1490 posts
  • Location:SPECTRE Island

Posted 22 March 2008 - 06:56 AM

Yes i agree with the dropping point, during the immediate post-CR hysteria around here, at the time some even asked if they would be able to even watch the 20 movies before it. LOL!

Edited by Colossus, 22 March 2008 - 06:56 AM.


#146 HH007

HH007

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1833 posts
  • Location:U.S.A.

Posted 22 March 2008 - 09:46 AM

It's not perfect, and it's certainly no "Batman Begins" but compared to several Bond films it's a bloody classic.


Actually, it is no "Batman Begins", I think it's a much better movie than "Batman Begins". I thought BB just went dead in the second half, and the action scenes were horribly edited to boot.


I disagree, but we're all entitled to our own opinions :tup: Lets play nice.


Hey, I wasn't slating you, I was just saying I thought ultimately Batman Begins was a big nothing. And I really wanted to like that movie, being that I am both a Batfan and a fan of Christopher Nolan's work in general. But hey, different strokes. It is superior to Batman & Robin, though. :tup:

(I'm still looking forward to The Dark Knight.)

#147 bond 16.05.72

bond 16.05.72

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1068 posts
  • Location:Leeds, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom

Posted 22 March 2008 - 10:45 AM

My point is that Oldman's take on Drac is probably the closest to Stoker's vision, although some people here believe the Lee take refined from Lugosi's iconic look the real Dracula.

The fact that some films have informed us what a character looks like but the literary version is a quite different creature, Oldman touched on what Stoker was doing better that Lee's most famous version ever could.

I still wouldn't say Gary Oldman's Dracula was much like the character from the book, though. I'd say the closest is probably Christopher Lee in Jess Franco's otherwise dreadful non-Hammer film El Conde Dracula. And even he's not all that close to the character from the book.

As for Casino Royale, I'm not really much of a fan of it. But the new film looks like it'll be more my cup of tea.



Maybe the script not being up to scratch although idea of making him a tortured soul actually appealed more to me than him being 1 dimensional outright evil like Lee played it but Lee never nailed like Oldman does in the opening section of the film with Harkers diary which easily is the best part of the book.

Reeves doesn't help but that Older more ancient Dracula is right on the nose for me, Oldman's Dracula is more likely how Dracula would have looked as opposed to that slicked back hair and cape look, never was a fan of Lee's take and I think Moore's & Brozzers interpretation has done the same damage to Bond, some people will never except Craig's take because of that fact alone.

#148 Royal Dalton

Royal Dalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4542 posts

Posted 22 March 2008 - 03:45 PM

I suppose these things are open to individual interpretation. But I don't see Oldman's Dracula as being particularly close to Stoker's original character, myself.

#149 bond 16.05.72

bond 16.05.72

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1068 posts
  • Location:Leeds, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom

Posted 22 March 2008 - 04:06 PM

No big thing, I guess we all see things differently I was really trying to draw a comparison with Bond really, that sometimes populist movie interpretation of a character can make people assume it's more faithful than the actual literary source, more people watch films than read books these days and their idea of Bond is informed by that.

It's only us fans who know the original interpretation and even some of us are more driven by the celluloid version. I don't make the assumption that Craig is the most Fleming like Bond of the series, it appears Dalton was the most Fleming driven he was just hampered by 2 entries which didn't quite know what tone tohit with both still suffering from hangovers from the Moore era.

Craig was definitely influenced by IF's creation but also elements of Connery, Laz, Dalton and even Moore were evident in his performance, it's just he was lucky to become Bond when the makers wanted a more 3 dimensional character. In that respect Dalton was handicapped I'm afraid, he wanted to push the character in the same direction but the producers and writers weren't willing to take it in that direction.

In the Case of Dracula, I'm much excited about this new Wolfman movie with Benicio in and the producers have talked about resurrecting some other classic Universal characters, maybe Dracula will one day get it's definitive take because I believe it's still to be made.

#150 HH007

HH007

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1833 posts
  • Location:U.S.A.

Posted 22 March 2008 - 04:07 PM

I personally don't think CR is overrated but I do think GF is but thats me.


While I do find CASINO ROYALE a little bit overrated (not much, but a bit), I completely agree with you on GOLDFINGER, which is not only the most overrated film in the franchise, but also amongst the worst (although it will never rival the absolute awfulness of THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN).


I think Goldfinger is somewhat overrated. I do like the movie, but I don't get why people think it's so great (and I really don't get why people tend to like Pussy Galore so much).


As far as Dracula goes, I've always been fond of the bald, rat-like appearance he had in Nosferatu. :tup: