so it seems its flashback movie / past time for Bond as this is supposed to be the 1st story
Lets see how the new guy can do it since Pierce was one of the best
Nov 17th
it shall be interesting
so it seems its flashback movie / past time for Bond as this is supposed to be the 1st story
Lets see how the new guy can do it since Pierce was one of the best
Nov 17th
it shall be interesting
Sean connery, has, and always will be James bond..
Pierce comes in a close second
but this guy just doesn't have the "Bondish" feel about em ya know?
since Goldeneye I feel that the Bond series has been getting worse and worse, although I'll check out this one I aint expecting anything great.
This new dude is fairly close to Ian Fleming's description of Bond from the novels, but I dunno, I'll see it because it's Bond, I've always been a great fan of Bond.
lol, on a side note, they had to stop the filming of this movie so thjat the actor could learn to drive stick. I guess I should overlook that though… I can't drive a stick either...
A blonde James Bond… Not really what I had in mind, but he looks pretty sharp that way.
I grew up with Pierce Brosnan as Bond, and in my opinion he'll always be the best Bond.
I was hesitant at first but after reading an article in Premiere magazine, I'm definetely looking forward to it. (Though being a lifelong Bond Fan, I would have seen the movie anyway) I liked all the actors who played Bond to a certain degree
Casino Royale is the first Ian Fleming Book, so its only right to make it sort of an orgin movie. Its going to be more gritty and close to Ian's work.
gonna see it with a friend the day it comes out
All right just got back from watching the movie. They basically hit the reset button on the series; bringing the character back to basics as he starts his career as a "00". Few gadgetry, no mega-plot for world domination, etc, but it has lots of action, drama and some humor. It's the most plausible Bond Movie ever. Daniel Craig plays a good Bond. Sadly, no "Q" or Miss Moneypenny; though I hope they bring her back in the next movie scheduled to start shooting next spring. Overall I think its a very good start since the film is basically a "pilot" movie
There's something I always wondered. Storyline wise, is James Bond just a codename? Does a new guy take on the name every so often, or is it the same guy played by different actors? I wish I could explain what I'm saying better.
I'm fairly sure it's the same guy played by different actors, 007 is his alias.
My dad and I are huge Bond fans, and will definetly going to see this one. I thought Pierce Brosnan did an okay job at Bond, but no one will ever compare to Sean Connery in my eyes. No Q makes me sad, he was hilarious.
What I miss is humour. Newer Bond movies has been so serious and this one looks like it will be too. I like the actor though.
What I miss is humour. Newer Bond movies has been so serious and this one looks like it will be too. I like the actor though.
If you like humor, watch the original "Casino Royale"
yeah, this is a remake of the old bond movie. IT should be good, I am going to check it out next week.
@Ein:
If you like humor, watch the original "Casino Royale"
No, dont do that. That movie was awful.
Casino Royale is not a remake. The other movie was done by another studio who had the rights to book before the current series began. The people who have done all the other Bond movies finally got rights to make a movie adaptation.
One disappointing thing about the movie was they didn't show fully how spectacular Casino Royale, I assuming, suppose to be.
This is supposed to be a "new beginning" for the Bond series to escape the crappiness of the past few years.
But I don't think James Bond's face looking like an ass will help that much.
I wanted to go see this movie last night, alas I have no money to do that.
I figured that the movie would be interesting enough, mainly since my father, who is a huge James Bond fan, called me after he seen the movie and said that he loved it.
Still Sean Connery was the best Bond.
@Ein:
If you like humor, watch the original "Casino Royale"
I might have seen it. But it wasn't good enough to be remembered - I can't recall a single thing about it.
Connery's best performance is still in Zardoz though. Which reminds me… time to change my signature.
ok the actore doesn't look like our good old james, but at least the movie can't be has bad as the 2 last ones, the story being from fleming.
…..
Bondman Begins?
(well someone had to say it)
just saw the movie yesterday
! the movie was good,the bond just wasn't cutting it.Too old in my opinion, he could barly keep up with the those youngter in the movie lol.
It looks fairly good, but there's not an Bondish feeling about it. Haven't had that since before Roger Moore, though. Eventually I'm going to watch it, but there's something weird about it. I smell cliche…
Never liked Pierce's version. Too young when watching Connery's to remember.
! Saw it several weeks ago. I like the realistic approach that they took, and the chase scene (both the first and the airport) was awesome~ Le Schiffre's torture method busts balls XD looks and sounds so painful
! It's nice to see a Bond that's smart, calm and doesn't really rely on gadgets.
Anyone can be Gadget-Bond >_>
Am I the only one who wanted to bash Le chiffre's face in each time I saw him?
Also his ball buster looked very…phallic... >_>
Eva Green was hot man!! HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT!! Waaaaa!! . One more time!! Eva Green was hot man!! HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT!! Waaaaa!! One last time!! Eva Green was hot man!! HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT!! Waaaaa!!
Neways
! Ian Fleming was okay for a Bond if you'd ask me. He could do some stunts of his own. But I really missed the gadgets. What I liked best about the movie was the storyline. It was romantic and spine chilling in a way.
Neways
! Ian Fleming was okay for a Bond if you'd ask me. He could do some stunts of his own. But I really missed the gadgets. What I liked best about the movie was the storyline. It was romantic and spine chilling in a way.
…didn't Ian Fleming write the books?
Gadgetry is overrated.
Yeah if that be the case then to me the new James Bond right now is the best Bond actor ever. Can't say anything about Sean Connery though. I wasn't a fan of Bond that times. The new Bond ryt now has something very rugged and mysterious inside his personality.
But most of all:
! Eva Green was hot man!! HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT!! Waaaaa!! . One more time!! Eva Green was hot man!! HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT!! Waaaaa!! One last time!! Eva Green was hot man!! HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT!! Waaaaa!! I just can't stop Eva Green was hot man!! HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT HOT!! Waaaaa!!
The movie was AWESOME, that's all I can say. They've really done a great job with this one.
And Daniel Craig, I knew he'd be a great Bond. I've been a fan of his for a while now, and he definately came through as Bond. His performance was so beleivable…..but still Bond. He felt like a new Bond, but still the same old Bond if that makes any sense. In any case he did a great job, and I hope he stays for longer than 3 films (and he's not too old either, so who knows maybe he will)
The thing I cared most about the show was Eva Green. Hasn't anybody noticed how beautiful and hot the leading lady was? Oh man, those visions come at me in the night everytime I play with my skin.
I saw it a few weeks ago. It's far and away the single most faithful rendition of Ian Fleming's Bond character I've ever seen and is much, much more like the Bond of the book series in attitude. The Bond of the books was close to being a sociopath.
The movie is fairly close to the book's storyline as well, though I think Le Chiffre used a tennis racket (or an equivalent instrument, a rug beater perhaps) in the torture scene rather than a knotted rope. The "the bitch is dead" line was how the book closed with everything after it being totally new.
Well, I'll be very interested in seeing how the write their future movies. They no longer have any more books to work from which means they are going to have to write it themselves which could be disastrous
@OP:
Well, I'll be very interested in seeing how the write their future movies. They no longer have any more books to work from which means they are going to have to write it themselves which could be disastrous
They ran out of Fleming books decades ago though, all of the Dalton films and the last few Moore films were loosely based (very, very loosely in some cases) on short stories by Fleming. All of the Brosnan films were brand new material.
Considering that Casino Royale was a reboot of the series, they may go and make new versions of books that have already had films based on them. Some of the books share titles with films that have little, if anything to do with them other than the name while others have the same basic premise, but the film is still wildly different in portraying that story than the book it's based on. If nothing else, they all pretty much toned down how much of a complete bastard Bond was most of the time and his total nervous breakdown after the events of On Her Majesty's Secret Service wasn't covered at all in You Only Live Twice, which was a major plot point in the second book. Though, to be fair, YOLT came first as a film, but that's one of the ways that the original films deviate from the novels.
Based on this one film, elements might be updated (the Organization in this, possibly a new SPECTRE, though it wouldn't be called that for rights' reasons, was originally a Russian agency known as SMERSH), but the films would be much more faithful to the actual books than the Connery, Moore, or Dalton films. Especially the Moore films. It's been a while since I sat down and watched them all, but Lazenby's appearance in On Her Majesty's Secret Service was probably the most like the source material up until Casino Royale came along.
So, if they announce a new Doctor No, think less King Kong and more Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.
I haven't seen Casino Royale yet but I'm actually looking forward for it. Mostly because of my curiosity. Even tough I think Craig doesn't look like Bond, I won't judge him before I see him in action. Looks doesn't matter so much after all if he's otherwise good.
Less gagdets and more character. What I've always wanted from the movies. Oh, and far less flashy than they seemed to become 'till Casino Royale, which was bordering on terrible.
Gadgets are what made James Bond part of James Bond though, it was disheartening when he didn't have as many weapons.
The first guy he was chasing was insane though, he jumped off buildings like it was nothing, and shot with crazy accuracy. Sure he was just being chased but he gave Bond a run for his money.
Also the Bond movie seemed more funnier than usual. When he was tortured…they made that hilarious.
Now everyone will know you died scratching my balls! lol
I feel like being shot considering i NEVER SAW A SINGLE CONNERY film….
Anyway excellent movie. Best Bond Iv'e seen.
The Brosnan's went bad right after Goldeneye, and the Moores....jesus...fucking Moonraker.
This Bond was above and beyond the coolest though. As was said more character less flashy bullshit.
Best Scene: When that asshole rich guy thought he was a valet, threw Bond his keys and walked away. And than Bond calmly gets in the mans car, and smashs it into a bunch of parked cars, car alarms blazings all over the place, gets out, and walks away without blinking an eye.
This guy isn't Bond, he's Captain America. The man has no suave bone in his body, everything about his personality and physique scream "I'm bigger than u are and I can kill you."
That's not Bond, Bond is an assassin, he looks like a typical bumm that plays poker well, then you take him to the back to cut off his hands and take ur money back and "WHAPAAAAAHHH" Bruce Lee on your asses faster than you can say Daniel Craig's a whore.
The movie was great, it wasn't Bond imo, no crazy submarines, no crazy sci fi stuff; and the story goes against half the movies where he falls in love with women, not making this movie cannon in my opinion, but as far as movies go it was all right.
But come on… a 20 minute parkour scene... in a Bond film? Talk about cheap gadgetry, I didn't even feel compelled to go out and purchase an Aston Martin DBS V12 and isn't that what Bond films boil down to in the end? One big subliminal marketing scam to purchase fine suave British goods? Hugs his sony ericson P800 awww, what's that girl, you've frozen up again? You're a cheap piece of trash? Aww nono baby come on, you know I love you and I don't care that you're handicapped, I'd never cheat on you with another electronic device..
The Brosnan's went bad right after Goldeneye, and the Moores….jesus...fucking Moonraker.
Blame bad directing and shitty writing.
I saw Casino Royale a few weeks ago. As a long time James Bond fan I must say this is the best Bond movie sense Goldfinger. Daniel Craig was almost as great as Connery.
Am I the only one who thought this movie was meh. Yes that chick was REALLY REALLY REALLY hot,but overall it still was meh.
The new bond was ok. I think his hair should have been black, it doesnt seem right blonde. Also he needed gagets, sure he was more realistic which was cool, but he needs them. Like all the other bonds did, why not him?
Also I found the overall plot of the villians stupid. They were trying to get money so they could repay their debt???
Also which guy was the tratior: the black guy or the white guy with the beard. It was the bearded guy right?
Though overall:
2 1-2/5 stars
This guy isn't Bond, he's Captain America.
And yet he's the most like the book Bond. I.E he's very Bondy.
That's not Bond, Bond is an assassin, he looks like a typical bumm that plays poker well, then you take him to the back to cut off his hands and take ur money back and "WHAPAAAAAHHH" Bruce Lee on your asses faster than you can say Daniel Craig's a whore.
What? Have you ever seen a Bond movie?
The movie was great, it wasn't Bond imo, no crazy submarines, no crazy sci fi stuff; and the story goes against half the movies where he falls in love with women, not making this movie cannon in my opinion, but as far as movies go it was all right.
Book….
But come on… a 20 minute parkour scene... in a Bond film?
Book…
Book…
I didn't read the book, I'm not denying this. Tell me though, was there a scene asking the characters to run up a wall using a stylized street art/war tactic created within the last 7 years, despite this being the "first book," which I assume means it predates parkour and all that stylized John Woo stuff they used during the scene?
Also you must realize, whether this movie was close to the book or not, it doesn't mean much to the average bond watcher.. the movies have created a certain persona for the bond character which doesn't match the "soldier" persona I felt Daniel Craig portrayed. I mean honestly, other than the "I can tell everyone you've scratched my left nut" line, and the very end, I didn't feel like that was Bond.. I am jaded because I'm used to the way Connery created his version of bond. When I look at Connery (or Brosnan), I don't expect someone that can kill an army and blow up an entire military compound with a friggin pistol and his brains, I see some regular guy that's good with his words and a little sly, but a killing machine.. definitely not.
Now with Craig, I just see Schwarzenegger.. and.. it feels off. Again, I haven't read the books, that may be what he's supposed to be, but based on what the movies have made him out to be, he's just not that, he's supposed to be suave.
It may not have felt "Bond-esque" because it looked so crude. Then again it's their first movie about the first bond-mission/movie so I'm gonna give them leeway for showing him off as a less than stylish and cool superagent with a million gagdets. You're not born suave :P
That's partly why I like the movie though :)
I thought this movie really kicked a lot of ass. By far the best Bond I've seen in a looong time.
The initial chase/fight scene was fricking awesome, and I loved the final battle in a sinking building.
Hottest chick in the movie by far was the indian looking girl. I can't believe Bond didn't lay some pipes with that one, but I loved the line when he calls for room service and they ask for two? and Bond goes, for one and next scene is in Miami. I had a good laugh at that one.
Anyway, Craig made a great Bond and with some more decnet scripts, this franchise could really get revitalized. Anybody else hear about Craig's suggestion that Bond get a gay scene in a future movie? I'm not sure what to think about that, but I have heard that Craig's Bond was very popular in the gay community. The producers might try to exploit that…
Anyway, Craig made a great Bond and with some more decnet scripts, this franchise could really get revitalized. Anybody else hear about Craig's suggestion that Bond get a gay scene in a future movie? I'm not sure what to think about that, but I have heard that Craig's Bond was very popular in the gay community. The producers might try to exploit that…
I think if they do that, they might as well make the next bond black…or female...
Really, I love Casino Royal, but not as a Bond movie, because it's no longer the movie bond I grew up with...(being close to book or not, like I care)
I don't recall hearing anything about a possible gay scene at all, and as much as I'd enjoy seeing Daniel Craig get busy with a man while playing James Bond…...ehh, doesn't seem like something Bond would do.
If they decided to include a gay love scene between 2 other characters then that's fine and dandy.....but Bond....I dunno if he'd go gay, even for the mission's sake.
Then again, they've already shaken up the series plenty with this new installment so who knows what they have planned.
In any case, while something like that WOULD market well to a gay, and partially female, audience.....we have to remember the REST of the movie going audience.
I doubt Producers would be making a big deal about a gay Bond scene when a blonde haired Bond caused so much controversy.
Yeah, it really makes a difference if you've read the books or not. That being said, however, you've got to realize is that this is James Bond first real piece of action. He's supposed to be rough around the edges a lil' bit and not have a ring that can shatter glass or a car that's a submarine.
Some movie critic from the NY Times (I think) stated that this Bond is almost like a 'Bond Begins' and I couldn't agree more. Instead of getting a completely unrealistic plot that's littered with CGI effects and gizmos, we get nitty gritty spy work. And that's O.K. by me. I just hope that they work off of the novels (Live and Let Die, Moonraker, Diamonds are Forever, etc. etc.) of Ian Fleming instead of creating yet another completely unrealistic Bond movie.
Snuck into this movie after Eragon.
Good for the most part (I didnt expect that ending)…..but:
1. I miss Pirce Brosnan (why wasnt he in this movie??????)
2. I DID NOT UNDERSTAND the card game AT ALL.
The movie was cool up untill the last 30 minutes. It sort of ran out steam. And I wish the villain would had been somehow fleshed out a bit more too. But it's probably the best Bond movie to ever hit the big screen though and Daniel Greg is Bond for me from now on.
@Natty:
2. I DID NOT UNDERSTAND the card game AT ALL.
Dont feel bad I dont understand poker either…
It was funny all the asian people were really admiring the way the poker game was played, it was the big climax for them. (Im asian too...i had to restrain my mom from saying anything during that part she was like "OMG! THATS A GOOD HAND! WAHHH!" )
Overall the movie was good, but I still like the Pierce Bronsan ones better
P.S no offense intended to other asians....
If you want to understand the card game… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_hold_'em
I saw the movie a few weeks ago, I really enjoyed it. Except for the guy sitting in front of us, who turned around and said rudely "Can you guys change seats?!" because we were making quiet comments during the PREVIEWS. Jeez, I understand his concern but don't be a dickhead about it.
Anyway...I liked the new guy better than Pierce Brosnan.