Casino Royale

[ZeTurbo]

The only Brosnan bond movie that was half good was Goldeneye. The world is not enough was somewhat average and Die another day was just plain stupid. ( i think CS sumed up why pretty well in his post above).

I have not seen it yet, but i have heard it is a pretty good movie, and the best bond in ages just because it is more realistic, less gadgetery and more about the human condition of the characters.

I am really looking forward to seeing it.

EDIT: I also dont get why there is so much HATE, towards daniel Craig... Its not like he is a bad actor. I mean people express PURE HATRED towards this guy...

[Blitz_]

It'd be the hair..he's a blondie.

[scottie300z]

I just saw it a few hours ago, and i think it is most def. one of the best yet. It is on the low tech side, but i think its good to take a step back, especially as far as they had taken it. I was waiting for the giant laser machine or whatever the villian was building but it never occurred, and while i liked that it never came, what the bad guys were up to wasnt really up to snuff. but that would be my main and just about only complain.

[ZeTurbo]

It'd be the hair..he's a blondie.

Lets burn him at the stake.

sean connery was scottish ... so what?

[whiteballz]

craig looks almost identical to a previous bond (i do not know which one).

brosnan used to be good IMHO, but the direction the movies were going in were just stupid. this is a revised bond.. that said, i havent even seen the movie yet

[IWantAnAudiRS6]

Yes, realistic villains such as a couple of Koreans, one who has some diamonds stuck in his face, another who has been "genetically mutated" to look like Tim Curry for some reason.

And their oh-so-believable sun-magnifier. Mmm-hmmm.

That's one film out of four.

Or an over-blown tabloid-hack who, despite Pryce's best efforts, is about as sinister as my milkman.

Take it as you will, I found Pryce very convincing- in this day and age of paranoia and corruption, it was one of the more realistic takes on the Bond series. Tomorrow Never Dies is very low-key compared to certain Bond films.

The World Is Not Enough is not that bad, GoldenEye is probably the best Brosnan film (directed by Martin Campbell, as is Casino Royale).

So you thought the boat chase was good? That's one unrealistic part I didn't like.

Brosnan wasn't that brilliant, I always think he often comes across as far too arrogant, and I never really identify with the character, or therefore particularly care if he succeeds or not.

So, if you had the ability to snare any woman you wanted, kill any person you needed to, drive like a God, and have a salary bigger than a phone number, you would be a self-deprecating shrinking violet?

Let's also take into consideration Bond's more human sides- genuinely grieving in Tomorrow Never Dies over the loss of Paris, watching him in turmoil over a former colleague and close friend turn deadly enemy, his pain in The World Is Not Enough. All these reveal a tender part of him that we didn't see with Roger Moore, Sean Connery, or Timothy Dalton.

The genre has been moved on by the likes of Mission Impossible, Bourne Identity, etc. and Bond needed to adapt to succeed (doubly-so when you have Mike Myers ripping apart the "traditional" villains & plots for fun).

Mission: Impossible is a terrible analogy. Ethan Hunt/Hawke, whatever his damn name is, is one of the most arrogant, annoying tossers ever committed to film. And highly unrealistic, far too 'Hollywood' for my tastes. The Bourne Identity & Supremacy are frankly amazing films, but as the Bond franchise has done so well for itself using almost the same formula for so long, why change it? I can only watch Matt sodding Damon without vital parts of his mind for so long, and that's before we even get to the Bourne films.

Bond is a long-lasting franchise because it's mainly mindless and simple fun, with occasional inflections of character.

[Blitz_]

Read the novels, Bond was once a naval commander (bah someone check me up on this, all my novels are overseas). The character itself was never supremely suave nor an overly passionate womaniser. "self-deprecating shrinking violet" is such an extreme, un-needed statement, he was brutal, harsh and a killing machine with a knack for espionage. Brosnan's take on Bond really left me in awe...of how bad his acting sometimes is and how badly producers and directors alike took Bond in his following films.

On her majesty's secret service is possibly the most under-rated Bond film imho. Lazenby did a terrific job, his performance epitomized the real Bond in some degree and the movie itself was great. The Moore series were laughable, with the Connery lot being (for the most part) terrific. He added an extra notch to Bond's "sex appeal" than never really appeared in the books. It wasn't necesserily needed but he carried it off far better than Brosnan the ponce ever could.

The "tender" moments were nothing but fillers for the unbelievably unrealistic action scenes, you could practically see them coming, say 10 - 15mins before they arrived, the traditional formula wore off...fast.



p.s. staring a chopper in mid air, the moment I saw that, I really couldn't help myself but laugh

[Coventrysucks]

That's one film out of four.

Two and a half films out of four.

Take it as you will, I found Pryce very convincing- in this day and age of paranoia and corruption, it was one of the more realistic takes on the Bond series. Tomorrow Never Dies is very low-key compared to certain Bond films.

The general premise of the film wasn't bad, but I think the execution was poor.

On the one hand you have a rather weak villain who I didn't find to be very believable, or that sinister, and whose general scheme was sound, but the implementation was rather dull, so I wasn't bothered either way if he succeeded or not.

On the other hand I didn't really care if Bond defeated him or got killed in the opening sequence either.

So you thought the boat chase was good? That's one unrealistic part I didn't like.

I said the film wasn't that bad.

So, if you had the ability to snare any woman you wanted, kill any person you needed to, drive like a God, and have a salary bigger than a phone number, you would be a self-deprecating shrinking violet?

All of the Bonds have had those abilities, and have all had arrogance, but Brosnan misses it. He isn't glib, as Connery, or as convincingly arrogant as Moore. He just appears a bit of a tit, who everyone at MI6 slags off when his back is turned.

Let's also take into consideration Bond's more human sides

The stories develop his human sides - Brosnan doesn't - imagine Brosnan in Casino Royale - it wouldn't work.

Mission: Impossible is a terrible analogy. The Bourne Identity & Supremacy are frankly amazing films

I wasn't implying that Bond should copy either of those films, merely that they offer much more in the way of themes, style, content, editing - the physical cinematography side of things - they are much more "modern" than Bond was, that has clearly been addressed with Casino Royale, and I think it is very successful as a result.

As I said before - it is a good film in its own right, not just a good Bond film.

Remove the name Bond, and I think it would still be rated as a good film, would that be true of the previous four films?

[go.pawel]

Read the novels, Bond was once a naval commander (bah someone check me up on this, all my novels are overseas).

He was a commander of RNVR (Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve). He also was a Companion of The Most Distinguished Order of Saint Michael and Saint George

On her majesty's secret service is possibly the most under-rated Bond film imho. Lazenby did a terrific job, his performance epitomized the real Bond in some degree and the movie itself was great.

I agree. OHMSS is a great movie and even if Lazenby's not the best actor in the world, he does his part fairly well (especially considering that the only experience he hed was in modelling and commercials ). Interesting that until this year it was also the longest Bond movie (140 mins.)

p.s. staring a chopper in mid air, the moment I saw that, I really couldn't help myself but laugh

True, true. I've always found sky-diving after a falling plane, chasing it, getting inside and starting off much more believable

[IWantAnAudiRS6]

Two and a half films out of four.

I won't ask about the maths for that one...

The general premise of the film wasn't bad, but I think the execution was poor.

On the one hand you have a rather weak villain who I didn't find to be very believable, or that sinister, and whose general scheme was sound, but the implementation was rather dull, so I wasn't bothered either way if he succeeded or not.

Each to his own, this is probably my favourite Bond movie... just love the concept and execution. Though I do respect that other people may see it differently...

On the other hand I didn't really care if Bond defeated him or got killed in the opening sequence either.

Ah, but is this more about the film itself, or more to do with the fact that you know that Bond will succeed, whatever happens?

All of the Bonds have had those abilities, and have all had arrogance, but Brosnan misses it. He isn't glib, as Connery, or as convincingly arrogant as Moore. He just appears a bit of a tit, who everyone at MI6 slags off when his back is turned.

Different perspectives, I feel... M is really the only one who tears him to pieces, in one film, but even then she demands in a kind fashion for him to "come back alive". Q's job is to annoy him royally anyway, and Michael Kitchen (if that is his name) seems to support him.

The stories develop his human sides - Brosnan doesn't - imagine Brosnan in Casino Royale - it wouldn't work.

I can see where you are coming from here, as he does spend a grand total of 5 seconds mourning Paris' death... then continues to murder that nice German chap.

I wasn't implying that Bond should copy either of those films, merely that they offer much more in the way of themes, style, content, editing - the physical cinematography side of things - they are much more "modern" than Bond was, that has clearly been addressed with Casino Royale, and I think it is very successful as a result.

I just watched Mission: Impossible 3, and I have to say it had strong overtones of many Bond films, just with more stupid gadgets and baddies with crap accents. But that's just me. I agree that the Bourne films have amazing cinematography, and as a result are much better than any recent Bond films.

As I said before - it is a good film in its own right, not just a good Bond film.

I'll have to judge this after I watch the new one!

Remove the name Bond, and I think it would still be rated as a good film, would that be true of the previous four films?

After Tomorrow Never Dies... no. I thought that The World Is Not Enough and Die Another Day felt slightly contrived. I do like them, more than most Bond films, and I like Brosnan- but the films themselves irritate me beyond measure.

[Blitz_]

You know what I miss, the terrific action scenes where there is no music, and whereby the actors, setting etc. hold the film and that paticular scene

there was a glimmer of that in the Bourne identity with Bourne hunting down the other assasin in a field, brilliant little scene that was a good knock to the films of old.

[Blitz_]

True, true. I've always found sky-diving after a falling plane, chasing it, getting inside and starting off much more believable

dont we all


wait, i remember hurrying home from watching a bond movie, calling my mate and yelling "OMG Bond shot a chik...a hot one, wo00t!"

[Kooper]

Saw it 6 hours ago and I can confirm the positive.

Initially I thought they made a mistake getting rid of Brosnan, boy was I wrong!

This is the best Bond movie ever, even if it's played by a blue-eyed blonde.

[werty]

the movie was freakin dope

craig is a perfect Bond

[Mr.Tiv]

Having just gone to see the movie, I must say that I was dead wrong about Daniel Craig. An inspired performance all around. I could only really find two faults with it, Judi Dench makes a terrible M and the Aston got far too little screen-time. I have to say the Daniel Craig was fantastic, and that this one movie far outweighs all of his previous performances shittyness.