148 replies to this topic

[00Twelve]

<slaps forehead>

I guess that's a "I don't know".

That's a "don't take the premise of the thread so seriously."

[RazorBlade]

I don't think a perfect movie exists. But for what it is, CR is damned close to perfect. I, too, felt the action scenes were overplayed. But I love DC and Eva in their roles. They brought depth and human emotion to their roles you don't see in actioners usually. In fact, compared to RUSSIAN HOUSE with Sean C and Michelle P which was supposed to be more character oriented, DC and Eva topped the players in RH! That means, for me, that DC was better in this role than Sean was in RH!

And there you have it.

[LadySylvia]

<slaps forehead>

I guess that's a "I don't know".

That's a "don't take the premise of the thread so seriously."

WTF? What the hell is this? Why on earth would you care whether I take a topic seriously or not? Please spare me these little "lectures", okay? And just allow me to respond in a way that I WANT TO.

[Jim]

<slaps forehead>

I guess that's a "I don't know".

That's a "don't take the premise of the thread so seriously."

WTF? What the hell is this? Why on earth would you care whether I take a topic seriously or not? Please spare me these little "lectures", okay? And just allow me to respond in a way that I WANT TO.

Calm down.

[Skudor]

Casino Royale is undoubtedly one of the very best Bond films of the past 25 years.

That said, it's far from perfect. The story telling, particularly with regard to the love story, is much better than in TWINE, but it still feels rushed [perhaps the time spent on the Venice finale could have been better spent on beefing up the Bond/Vesper relationship]. Some of the much praised Bond/Vesper dialogue doesn't sit well with me -> particularly the train scene and the 'armour' chat at the clinic. Peaople just don't talk like that.

The action is much more rewarding than in recent movies, paricularly the foot chase and the stairwell fight. I also quite like the Miami airport scene.

Daniel Craig is also without doubt the finest actor to portray Bond. Never have we seen so much depth in the character. Unfortunately, and this I feel guilty complaining about, he just doesn't have Connery's charisma, charm, screen presence (or whatever it is that makes Connery so bloody great to watch) nor Moore's pleasant charm.

The portrayal of Bond is great - but the charisma element just isn't there for me. Whatever it is that made me such a fan, made me want to be like Bond when I was younger, just isn't there with Daniel Craig. That said - that may well be true of any new Bond. It's a portrayal that feels more true, honest and transparent but in that it loses the mystery and suaveness that characterised the early Bond films. Again, maybe it's just because I'm an old bastard now.

I still can't figure out how the heck Vesper knew what to do with the little wires on the defibrilator. It should have taken her at least a minute to figure it out - it was hardly obvious. Unless operating defibrilators is standard training for Treasury employees.

Still - a fantastic step forward for the Bond movies.

[Byron]

I still can't figure out how the heck Vesper knew what to do with the little wires on the defibrilator. It should have taken her at least a minute to figure it out - it was hardly obvious. Unless operating defibrilators is standard training for Treasury employees.

Still - a fantastic step forward for the Bond movies.
[/quote]


The whole microchip, poisoning, resuscitation thing seemed unnecesary. It was totally redundant - take it out of the film and it makes no difference. Not to mention that it stretched credibility - how conveniant that the DBS would hold a defibrilator. It's like the writers started with the defibrilator and worked backwords when developing the story.
This time would have been better spent developing Bond and Vesper's relationship.

Edited by Byron, 27 September 2007 - 10:16 AM.

[Royal Dalton]

Perfect? No.

It's quite a good film. But a very overrated one, as well.

[dinovelvet]

The whole microchip, poisoning, resuscitation thing seemed unnecesary. It was totally redundant - take it out of the film and it makes no difference. Not to mention that it stretched credibility - how conveniant that the DBS would hold a defibrilator. It's like the writers started with the defibrilator and worked backwords when developing the story.

But you can say that about any of the gadgets Bond has used in the past. How convenient that Bond was given a glass-shattering ring in DAD, that proves to be incredibly useful not once but twice on his very first mission after getting it. I mean, what are the odds! Even going back to FRWL, Bond manages to find a use for every single gadget in his briefcase on the same mission - the tear gas, money, sniper rifle, and knife.
I think the defibrillator holds up reasonably well precisely because we weren't informed about it in advance. I can buy it as a 'standard kit' item in the same way as the incredibly useful briefcase in FRWL. If it was any other Bond film, we would have had a Q scene to point it out with John Cleese holding up a bright neon sign saying "THIS WILL COME IN HANDY LATER ON IN THE FILM, EVERYBODY!". But I had no problem with the whole scene in CR.

[Skudor]

I don't have a big problem with the defibrilator being in the car - although it does not really gel with the tone of the movie. It's a gadget in a Bond movie, fair enough.

What I just can't understand is how Vesper figures out so quickly what she needs to do to save Bond.

Personally I would have done away with the defibrilator and just stuck with a syringe (adrenaline or whatever) and the problem being that Bond couldn't get the needle onto the syringe. This is something that anyone would be able to grasp pretty quickly. A tiny little wire not being attached to some gadget isn't as obvious.

[Byron]

The whole microchip, poisoning, resuscitation thing seemed unnecesary. It was totally redundant - take it out of the film and it makes no difference. Not to mention that it stretched credibility - how conveniant that the DBS would hold a defibrilator. It's like the writers started with the defibrilator and worked backwords when developing the story.

But you can say that about any of the gadgets Bond has used in the past. How convenient that Bond was given a glass-shattering ring in DAD, that proves to be incredibly useful not once but twice on his very first mission after getting it. I mean, what are the odds! Even going back to FRWL, Bond manages to find a use for every single gadget in his briefcase on the same mission - the tear gas, money, sniper rifle, and knife.
I think the defibrillator holds up reasonably well precisely because we weren't informed about it in advance. I can buy it as a 'standard kit' item in the same way as the incredibly useful briefcase in FRWL. If it was any other Bond film, we would have had a Q scene to point it out with John Cleese holding up a bright neon sign saying "THIS WILL COME IN HANDY LATER ON IN THE FILM, EVERYBODY!". But I had no problem with the whole scene in CR.

Hmmm like Skudor said it just doesn't gel with the tone of the film. I am convinced this whole microchip / defibrillator setup is a Brosnan era leftover.

In any other Bond film it would have been fine, but not this gritty reboot. Especially since the emphasis was on realism.

[00Twelve]

I thought the poisoning was one of the best and most tense parts of the film, myself. Brosnan-era Bond, or even further back, would have gone off on some chase to "get" the person who did it (who would 1) be obvious and 2) be carrying the antidote), struggling not to succumb to the effects while running, jumping, and all that.

Maybe just me, but that's how I see it going down pre-reboot. As it was, I actually found myself doing something in the moment that I hadn't done in I don't know how long: Feared that he might not make it (even halfway through the movie). Sorry to have to disagree, but I just loved the entire sequence, especially his first instinct (so old-school and Flemingesque) to drink the salt water and vomit. The camera work was creative, too.

[Skudor]

I agree the poisoning was fantastic. Great performance by DC, nicely filmed, well put together (the salt and vomiting). It really added something worthwhile to the movie.

I just don't like the defibrilator, or to be more precise, Vespers uncanny ability to spot what was wrong with it within a couple of seconds of her arrival.

[Judo chop]

I thought the poisoning was one of the best and most tense parts of the film, myself. Brosnan-era Bond, or even further back, would have gone off on some chase to "get" the person who did it (who would 1) be obvious and 2) be carrying the antidote), struggling not to succumb to the effects while running, jumping, and all that.

Nonsense, 00Twelve. If this had been BrozzaBond, he

[00Twelve]

Ah, what was I thinking?

Make it Moore. After all, if he can duke it out with a bullet stuck in his esophagus, why not a bit of poison in the bloodstream?

[DaveBond21]

I think the defibrillator holds up reasonably well precisely because we weren't informed about it in advance

But we did see it in advance.

[mrsbonds_ppk]

No, I don't believe it's the perfect Bond movie. I would put CR in the category with FRWL, LTK, and FYEO. They are the down-to-earth Bond movies and they are fantastic to me. It just didn't have some elements that make a Bond film like a couple of characters who I won't name and another classic element. And while I appreciate the writers letting Bond put his emotions out in the open there are some things I didn't like in Craig's portrayal but that's just My Opinion.

[DaveBond21]

No, I don't believe it's the perfect Bond movie. I would put CR in the category with FRWL, LTK, and FYEO. They are the down-to-earth Bond movies and they are fantastic to me. It just didn't have some elements that make a Bond film like a couple of characters who I won't name and another classic element. And while I appreciate the writers letting Bond put his emotions out in the open there are some things I didn't like in Craig's portrayal but that's just My Opinion.

Always interesting to read views like this. I can't disagree with your points. I am also a big fan of FRWL, FYEO and LTK, and I agree this one fits that more realistic mold.

[007Bond]

Dangerous path ! For my personnal taste, yes...But if Craig had dyed his hair...It's only a detail (Connery has brown eyes...)but in France we have the habit to say "the devil is hide behind details...".

Edited by 007Bond, 08 October 2007 - 07:55 AM.

[Publius]

I still think it's the closest yet, aside from possibly FRWL. It's just that damn well-made.

However, I still think a few things could have been different, most notably the casting of M and Vesper. Yes, I have changed my tune on that last one (it's probably the only thing I feel much differently about a year later). My problem with Dench is still that she was basically doing a "oh, grow up 007" Desmond Llewelyn shtick, which might be tolerable if she wasn't M.

My problem with Vesper, for those wondering, is that Eva Green seemed to be forcing some 90s "girl power" attitude at first, and it came off annoying rather than endearing. She could have been cold and distant without being like that. However, to her credit, she got it together and did well later in the movie.

That said, the movie's length does grate on me now more than before, although mostly due to my inability to stomach the same romance more than a few times. I also don't find her as attractive as I used to, and sometimes wonder how, say, Rose Byrne would have been.

[Mr_Wint]

My opinion hasn't changed much. Its a decent film, but nothing special.

The really strange thing with CR is that I've only seen it 4 times... Normally, I watch a new Bondfilm at least 7-10 times

[HH007]

My problem with Vesper, for those wondering, is that Eva Green seemed to be forcing some 90s "girl power" attitude at first, and it came off annoying rather than endearing. She could have been cold and distant without being like that. However, to her credit, she got it together and did well later in the movie.

Well, keep in mind that whole "90's girl power" thing was written in the script, so Vesper would have been that way no matter who played her. And plus, it's not just a 90's thing. I encounter women in my job who are very much that way, they're attractive, but they're assertive, no nonsense, and distant so they'll be taken seriously (as Bond says). But if you really have a problem with that, blame the screenwriters and not Green. Personally, I liked that they gave us a realistically intelligent Bond girl (as opposed to Denise Richards) who doesn't go to bed with James within five minutes of meeting him. I am with you on Dench, though, she annoys the hell out of me. Always has, always will.

[00Twelve]

My opinion hasn't changed much. Its a decent film, but nothing special.

The really strange thing with CR is that I've only seen it 4 times... Normally, I watch a new Bondfilm at least 7-10 times

Well, you know, it's longer, more emotionally taxing, and just not one of those movies that you can watch over and over in rapid succession. At least, I find it to be that way. I could totally understand not having seen it as many times as the last new Bond films.
Not nearly as light and fluffy.

[Publius]

Well, keep in mind that whole "90's girl power" thing was written in the script, so Vesper would have been that way no matter who played her. And plus, it's not just a 90's thing. I encounter women in my job who are very much that way, they're attractive, but they're assertive, no nonsense, and distant so they'll be taken seriously (as Bond says). But if you really have a problem with that, blame the screenwriters and not Green. Personally, I liked that they gave us a realistically intelligent Bond girl (as opposed to Denise Richards) who doesn't go to bed with James within five minutes of meeting him. I am with you on Dench, though, she annoys the hell out of me. Always has, always will.

True, but it felt like Green was adding some of her own sense of "girl power" to the role. Admittedly, the way she spoke in interviews may have also colored my perception of her performance.

Anyway, I'm all for a realistically intelligent Bond girl... but more in the style of Wai Lin than Jinx or Vesper. Maybe it's just me, but I think Michelle Yeoh was one of those actresses who exuded independence without appearing to force it. There have been others like that in Bond movies, and in the future I hope we'll see their approach instead of the "hammer to the head" variety of wannabe Bond equals.

[HH007]

Well, keep in mind that whole "90's girl power" thing was written in the script, so Vesper would have been that way no matter who played her. And plus, it's not just a 90's thing. I encounter women in my job who are very much that way, they're attractive, but they're assertive, no nonsense, and distant so they'll be taken seriously (as Bond says). But if you really have a problem with that, blame the screenwriters and not Green. Personally, I liked that they gave us a realistically intelligent Bond girl (as opposed to Denise Richards) who doesn't go to bed with James within five minutes of meeting him. I am with you on Dench, though, she annoys the hell out of me. Always has, always will.

True, but it felt like Green was adding some of her own sense of "girl power" to the role. Admittedly, the way she spoke in interviews may have also colored my perception of her performance.

Anyway, I'm all for a realistically intelligent Bond girl... but more in the style of Wai Lin than Jinx or Vesper. Maybe it's just me, but I think Michelle Yeoh was one of those actresses who exuded independence without appearing to force it. There have been others like that in Bond movies, and in the future I hope we'll see their approach instead of the "hammer to the head" variety of wannabe Bond equals.

Well, to each his own, my friend.

Wow, this is my 100th post.

[DamnCoffee]

Congratualtions HH007

Along with [film=99]On Her Majesty

[HH007]

Thank you!

[DaveBond21]

I prefer it to OHMSS. My one problem with OHMSS is Lazenby, who just doesn't quite cut it as his own Bond. He was obviously told to immitate Connery, as he certainly isn't using his own accent. Shame.

Still CR is one of the better ones, and is right up there with my favourites FRWL, FYEO and TSWLM.

[dinovelvet]

I think the defibrillator holds up reasonably well precisely because we weren't informed about it in advance

But we did see it in advance.

Did you know what it was in that two second shot where he gets his gun out of the compartment? I had no idea what it was. If they wanted us to know in advance that it was a defibrillator, they would have told us.
On another note, wouldn't it be cool if Bond gets given a gadget in Bond22, but doesn't use it until Bond23?

[DaveBond21]

I think the defibrillator holds up reasonably well precisely because we weren't informed about it in advance

But we did see it in advance.

Did you know what it was in that two second shot where he gets his gun out of the compartment? I had no idea what it was. If they wanted us to know in advance that it was a defibrillator, they would have told us.
On another note, wouldn't it be cool if Bond gets given a gadget in Bond22, but doesn't use it until Bond23?

I think I did know but it was a very quick shot.

But yes, I agree it would be cool to see a gadget in Bond 22 that gets used in Bond 23....

[Harmsway]

CASINO ROYALE is my favorite Bond film. Is it the best? Well, it's not the least-flawed (that goes to FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE), but it does reach heights that no other Bond film does. It's a fantastic ride.

Some minor gripes of mine:

-The section of the film from the Parkour chase to the M's apartment scene is somewhat too OTT for the rest of the film.
-Dench is doing her best work here, but it might have been nice to have someone else.
-Arnold delivers his finest work on Bond, but there are large stretches of absolutely forgettable underscore.
-I do wish that some of the Poker hands weren't so ludicrously epic.