*** Official CASINO ROYALE Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

very suprised to see no one else chiming in on this. The midnight show I went to was about 25% full , but the film got some healthy applause at the end.
things that I didn'tmention in the review

*Spoilers Ahead*

- Really liked the opening credits. The song wasn't all that good, but I liked the saul Bass-like animation using the card suite motif- I thought it was a great way of eliciting the spirit of Binders work, while at the same time keeping on point that this film is its own animal, and not just the latest imitation of whats come before.

-I was surprised at how this one was paced. Its almost compeltely front loaded, with all the big action sequences seeming to happen in the first 40 minutes. That was one reason the movie threw me, and one reason I expect I will like it much more upon subsequent viewings (not that I didn't like it this time)

-Eva Greens Vesper- wow! My inital reaction now is that she totally smokes every other Bond girl I've ever seen. They all seem like colorless bimbos now (even though there are a few I've really liked). Very few of them seem like anything other than cartoons compared to this character though. so glad I already own a copy of The Dreamers now

-was amazed how much Craig looked like Steve McQueen often. In fact, I'm more stimulated to go back and watch Bulitt than I am any of the original Bonds. I expected him to be good, but I was suprised at just how much range they actually did give him- and Craig aced it- He sells this character really well (actually completely , imo). The problem that will remain for a lot of people is that this character is not Sean Connery or Pierce, or Timothy or Roger. Craig is playing a character that doesn't owe anything to any of the other actors who did it before him, and for me, that's exciting. For some people that may be a big stumbling block, and just compounded by the iconoclastic pacing of the entire movie.

-looks like we might , for the first time, get some really strong, direct continuity with the sequels. Bring It ON!

I have my tickets for tonight and I'm really looking forward to it.

Here's one line from today's New York Times review that I can't believe I read:

Two quotes from Anthony Lane's review have me officially excited for this movie:

First:



Since OHMSS is my favorite Bond movie (and in my top ten alltime) any comparisions to it are welcome (even though Casino Royale will still have to earn that status on repeat viewings).

I'm checking out until after I see it tonight.

if there was any film in the series CR most felt like to me, it would have been OHMSS. And I haven't seen Goldeneye since it was first released, by my impression is they are pretty far removed in texture and feel, as well as obviously content.

Looking forward to hearing what people think about this one.
a few more scattered thoughts
-liked the new Leiter. I'm not familiar with Jeffrey Wright, but he came across as a likable ally. I hope he comes back.
-I was worried from early reports there would have been a lot of Paul Greengrass handheld camera work and strobe editing- thankfully neither is the case. There is some handheld camera work, but it's used as punctuation, rather than as the whole sentence (or paragraph).
-There seemed to me a lack of really rousing bits. And that threw me. I expected several points where you want to pump your fist in the air and cheer, but those kinds of moments (for me anyway) happened more with the quiet character stuff, rather than the bombstic action material. Thats why I think this film is going to play very well with subsequent viewings. The character stuff has a real charge to it and seeing people interact is more fun for me that seeing choreographed mayhem ( though this film does get the latter right- a nice return to old school stunt work)
-The scene in the bathroom with Vesper is one of my favorite scenes ever in a Bond movie- probably because it doesn't play like a typical Bond scene.

Fact is, it seems wrong to be lumping this film in with the previous 20. This feels a lot like a 'do-over' and the films from here on out are going to be judged against this one. For some people thats not going to sit well.
I think it needed to be done. Thankfully this is soundly good work, and not just a gimmick tried after they did everything else.

And, unbelievably, its one of the more 'adult' action pictures I can remember in a long time (certainly one of, if not the, most adult Bond films) . I'm very impressed with that aspect.

I found it rather dull at times, between the big stunts.

The start felt like I was watching District B13 when Bond is chasing the small-time bomb maker/human rabbit.

Did anyone spot Sir Richard Branson cameo?

He's got his arms up during a airport search on the right side of the frame as Bond goes through the airport X-ray machine in Miami while chasing the would-be airplane bomber.

wow! 96% on rottentomatoes.com

one of my first thoughts upon leaving the theatewr last night, was that there will probably be a sizable chunk of the audience that will say this one was dull or boring. I liked and was intrigued by the characters and their relationships (with some minor exceptions*) so i was up and along for the ride the whole way. And it just felt like the ride was going off in much different directions than any of the other films so the view of new territory kept me alert as well.
I was pre-disposed to liking Craig too. I don't think people who have had a bad reaction to the guy (I don't know what Patricks feelings were) are going to warm up to the guy suddenly after seeing this. Probably just the opposite, since he clearly isn't playing the part as if he's trying to be 'the next Sean Connery'.




*I thought the contact Mathias wasn't a particularly memorable or impacting supporting character. I felt like there was something missing there

Patrick,

I thought that was him. It threw me out of the film for a moment. Wish he wasn't there actually.

My thoughts on the film as a whole are: all right. I definitely enjoyed it. But I really felt it was too convoluted. Unneccessarily so. There was much that could have been lifted and it would have been a tighter picture.

The character work was excellent and a much different feel from the other Bond flicks. And thus it stands on its own rather than be a replicant of 20 films before it. As was stated, this is an adult action film. But again, for my taste there were too many villians and too much going on. It was as if they wanted the film to go in many different directions and couldn't chose upon which. Could be a producer issue (as is usually the case - too many people pissing in the pot).

I would still recommend it, and unlike many other people - I loved the opening song and the orchestral version that popped up from time to time during the film. I found myself humming it for the rest of the day.

Cheers,

Jason

Oh, 2 more things: the lack of background music worked against this film because those scene are fairly lackluster and lifeless, and there were far too many of those types of scenes.

I didn't like the opening credits of Bond just showing off his license to kill over and over again, it was like they really tried to be too-PC in terms of not using the female shape in the opening credit sequence from so many of the other 007 films.

This was actually better than i thought it would be, another 10 minutes of action wouldnt have hurt but overall 1 of the better bond films.

I must have zoned out for a second, but how did Bond know something was up when Vesper got the text message to meet Mathis? In the book he knew it was a ruse since the handwritten note Vesper got was badly forged.

Loved the movie. This is the first Bond movie I saw after I'd read the book, so the experience was very enjoyable for me.

I never thought the title sequence was an attempt at being PC- rather, like the rest of the film, just being unique- while still trying to channel the spirit of the occasion- and not just another endless slight variation on the same theme.
I actually liked that the girls were a no show here. I thought the card designs were much classier, (and like the rest of the material), not as juvenile as having a bunch a bimbos prancing around.

Britton, I'm not clear on this, but didn't he already know or suspect at that point that it was Mathis who tipped off Le Chriffe?
I've got the book, but glad I didn't read it first as I was caught unaware by Vesper. I knew she would die, but not the ultimate nature. That really soldifies the character of Bond for me.

He not only has a license to kill, but one to be a complete cad now too

The action setpieces are spectacular, but what I really loved about this film was how it generated so much tension with the poker game. Really well crafted and edited(thanks, Stuart Baird!), and Craig is the best Bond since Connery. I would say that the tone of the piece is more like OHMSS and FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, just a taut thriller that doesn't overstay its welcome. I also loved the score and the main titles.

A three and a half to four star flick.

I just got in from seeing it and I loved it! I wasn't sure after the leaks about a PC Bond if it was going to be good, but I thought they hit the overall tone quite right. I was glad to see the film have a certain amount of quirk, without going over the top. I think it's doing strong box office, hopefully that will continue as the last time being serious was tried in Licence to Kill was a box office dud, and brought back silly over the top Bond.

Really liked it. Anyone out there saying they're boycotting it because of Daniel Craig, will change their mind before the weekend is out. Would I have preferred Clive Owen? Yeah. Daniel Craig was good though -- although, he had very little dialogue.

Eva Green -- geez, she is nice to look at. Did anyone notice Daniel Craig's "Blue Steel" through a lot of the movie. (Zoolander ref.)

Doug

I enjoyed it quite a bit, there will be some purist that don't like it, but they are purists from the Movie series, which quite frankly devolved into parody. This is as far from "The Beach Boys" Singing as Bond Ski's down a slope, as you can go. In fact it's alot closer to the Spy envisioned in Ian Fleming's Novels. Daniel Craig makes Bond his own with the Right balance of Charisma and Menace. The Main villian is a bit weak, but faithful to the novel, and the movie Goes on a bit long after it should be winding down, still it all comes down to those Final Five Words... and With them James Bond Returns.

I actually saw it twice today and I am glad I did. It is one of my favorite Bond movies and much better than I thought it would be.

Hell, even a girl that I went with who does not like Bond movies loved it and wants to see it again.

I felt like I was watching a Connery Bond and I cannot wait for the next one after all the disappointing Brosnan movies.

I went to the 1pm showing and it was 2/3rds full while a seat could not be found during the 7pm show. Both audiences loved every minute of it.

Wow, I am the exact opposite in almost every regard...The Home theater forum is a tough crowd for sure.

Other thoughts (just posted my review in that thread):

1. While I loved him in the role, I'm not sure Craig is going to be popular with the female half of the audience.

2. When Vesper said she was going to meet Mathis (after their celebratory dinner) what tipped Bond off that something was amiss?

3. Really didn't like the bombmaker/monkey man who seemed to have unnatural leaping power and dexterity. Seemed more fitting for a Roger Moore Bond that this picture.