Casino Royale 3 disk Ultimate Edition on 06-03-08 (1 Viewer)

[brioni]

I haven't seen the UK R2 DVD, but it definitely wasn't there in the cinema print. perhaps it found its way back in on the restricted 12 certificate as opposed to 12A?

 

[MatthewLouwrens]

I'll agree with the "immitative of Bourne" comment, although that's not a criticism (I thought it was a great action sequence).

But surely it's not irrelevant. Wasn't the point of the scene that the bombing would have generated activity on the stockmarket that would have allowed Le Chiffre to make money and repay the investors. Bond stopped it, thus forcing Le Chiffre to go for the casino, and setting the rest of the film in motion.

 

[Richard--W]

Thank you for your comments.

The plot was already in motion. The point of CASINO ROYALE is that money should be lost and won at the gaming table with the consequences that arise from gambling, as well as to focus on the main action and to generate tension between the principal characters. It tortures the script to have Bond walk out on his tryst with Solange to carry out this distracting and unnecessary subplot. It's a kindergarten script in any case, but another stroke of the pen would make it more consistent than it is now.

 

[Mark Hawley]

My problem with the sequence, and I generally really like the film, is with an unveiling of an aircraft like that, wouldn't security be massively high.

And in this day and age, wouldn't a terrorist driving a truck full of explosives (or explosive material), be one of the first things they'd be looking out for.

 

[Richard--W]

You're right. Another inconsistency I didn't think of, and another reason why the scene is not believable.

CASINO ROYALE is a formula action film; to follow a formula is not in itself a bad thing. The producer reasoned that a big action sequence w/ explosion is needed at this interval, therefor put one in whether it belongs there or not, and adjust the script accordingly whether it makes sense or not.

The Miami airport scene is ridiculous and has no business being there.

 

[dailW]

it was a gas truck .the truck was to hit the plane and he stuck a bomb under the truck.boom.

 

[dailW]

thats like saying lawrence of arabia would be a great movie if it went from him blowing out the match to larry meeting up with the arab at the well.

 

[Mark Hawley]

Last time I checked, gasoline is considered explosive, or at least flammable, material.

 

[Richard--W]

Whew!!!
I have just edited my reaction to reading the above to Whew!!!
There's no comparing LAWRENCE OF ARABIA to an arbitrary piece of crap like CASINO ROYALE.

I reiterate:
CASINO ROYALE is a formula action film; to follow a formula is not in itself a bad thing. The producer reasoned that a big action sequence w/ explosion is needed at this interval, therefor put one in whether it belongs there or not, and adjust the script accordingly whether it makes sense or not.

The Miami airport scene is ridiculous and has no business being there.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Why not? They're both cinematic works released into the public dialogue. Lawrence of Arabia has had forty years and change to cement its reputation, to be sure, but it's still a film.
The scenes between the match and the arrival of Sheriff Ali serve little narrative purpose, but they do introduce us to Lawrence and the world he finds himself in.
Likewise, sequence at the airport showcases Bond being Bond. It gives him an early victory and establishes the stakes that the game will be played at. Le Chiffre is playing for big money that has big consequences. Bond's actions here force his hand later on. From that perspective, complaining that a Bond movie uses an action sequence to move its pieces into place is very much like complaining that David Lean uses majestic arid panoramas to establish his world.

 

[Mark Hawley]

Yeah, but the truck was clearly speeding towards the plane in question. I'd think in this day and age, people would be on the lookout for such a thing.

 

[Eric Chang]

what are you talking about? it's only because bond stopped the plane from blowing, did Le Chiffre have to set up a high-stakes poker game because he lost all of his investors money. why else would that african guerrila come to his hotel room and threaten to chop off his girlfriend's arm? doesn't bond at one point in the movie even say something like, "oh he spends his clients money...blah, blah, blah...they must not be happy about that?" (it's been a while since i've seen the movie)

 

[James Phillips]

The problem I have with that scene, is Bond allowing the bomb to go off at the end of it.

Not a very clever thing to do, with gasoline spewing out all over the place.

 

[Charles Ellis]

Getting back to the missing footage from OHMSS: has it been restored for the DVD release from last year?

 

[dailW]

Getting back to the missing footage from OHMSS: has it been restored for the DVD release from last year?[/QUOTE

yes.

 

[dailW]

james put the bomb on the bad guys belt loop and james was held by the police at the time and the bad guy was far enough away when he blew himself up.

 

[James Phillips]

Far enough away from the tanker. But there was fuel spilling out of that thing miles before it stopped. It only takes one stray spark...

Mind you, Bond did smash through a couple of police cars, and they blew up, but the tanker didn't. So, we can only assume it must have been carrying some kind of special non-flammable form of petrol.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Bond has a history of doing things that aren't very smart but do promise him a chuckle.

 

[Mark Hawley]

I don't know if it would take stingers, you'd just think security would be a little tighter for the unveiling of a major airplane. A security perimeter maybe, people on the lookout for anything out of the ordinary. It's not like they'd be, "oh, there's a crazy guy speeding towards us with a fuel truck, well then he must work here or he'd never got by initial security checks, let's do nothing."

 

[Tony J Case]

Which is a damn shame, tainting the series like that. I mean breaking a 21 movie streak of plots that are not ridiculous and filled with outlandish and gratuitous action scenes. What were they thinking!

If in the next 007 film we get gratuitous females in revealing clothing, I shall write a strongly worded letter of protest to my congressman!