Casino Royale

Post Reply New Topic

:::raises hand:::

Yes, I know they were based on books, but remember that the people who make these movies are after one thing: money. And if people respond favorably to something, the movie makers will cater to that desire, thereby gracing us all with more Bond films. Hopefully, however, they will stick to what they've done with Daniel Craig and shy away from the crazy stuff in the last few Brosnan movies. Besides, they have a new fan base now--kids who think the original Bond films were boring because of the lack of loud musical scores, bang-up car crashes (the one in Casino Royale earned a Guiness World Record for most spins by an air cannon), and whatnot.

And what was confusing about the movie? I am just curious.

Yeah, I think they've got Daniel Craig slated for at least two more movies so far.

Yeah I loved it! I thought the opening chase in Africa was totaley awesome. I loved how the film just felt more real and less Hollywood-like.

I've read the book, and while I do not intend to see the movie (having burnt myself out on Bond), I've read the synopsis. It's like an updated version of the novel, with BIG bookends. That's a good thing. But here's the rub:


(Spoiler Alert)

It is an updated version of the novel, and its too bad that you've burnt yourself out. This Bond is so much better than most of the other movies, especially the latest ones. I rather enjoyed the books, and am in the process of rebuilding my collection (the vast majority of things were conveniently "lost" when we moved across the country.) I especially like the dialogue taken from the book and incorporated into the movie, and the updating of the villain (since the Cold War is over--M mentions this, of course), and the torture sequence (taken right out of the book, practically page for page) (and I didn't like it in a masochistic kind of way, more of an appeciation of maintaining purity).

Even if you're burnt out on Bond, I still recommend watching it. At least rent it, although it is definitely a big screen, digital surround sound movie.

Ouch. Bond's first mission, and he gets it in the shorts, so to speak. To anyone who's seen the film, does Le Chiffre use a carpet beater, or something else? I was intrigued to find out about the fate of V.L

I'm just sick of the Bond flicks, although I don't mind the books. I just don't like the conflict and politics (I heard 007 gets a right drubbing from M early on because of him shooting some terrorist in circumstances similar to the Brazilian shooting in London, although the one in the movie was a real terrorist).

Le Chiffre uses a carpet beater. Vesper's fate is similar in outcome although the means used to achieve the end were different and far more exciting than Fleming penned. I wouldn't say this Bond film was political, just tying it into the 21st century. And I liked M in this movie. It really isn't your typical Bond movie.

From what I heard, this guy was the #2 pick for Bond.

[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=Y8vjnQDhhBI[/youtube]

I just finished watching "Royale" not more than an hour ago, after some consideration. An excellent Bond movie, one that hopefully defines a new era. The torture scene was actually amusing (the audience laughed when Bond mentioned the "itch", as well as his earlier quip to le Chiffre, about the last hand nearly killing him, due to

With one of the thumbs only slightly unerect. I'd say a 9 to 9.5 out of ten.