New Bond: Casino Royale
mannybolone
Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
mannybolone
Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
Comments
Pierce wasn't a bad Bond, but the films were just so bloated, synthetic and cold and lacked any of the charm and whimsy that frankly has been missing since the days of Moore.
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for a harder-edged Bond, as envisioned by Flemming, but give me one who won't bore the shit outta me either (cough * Dalton * cough).
Hopefully ths is just the kind of shake up the series needed.
I wasn't so much worried about Craig as other fans were, but far more so concerned about the producers potentially falling into the trap of trying to compete with the Bourne series.
From everything I'm hearing, that hasn't been the case.
So O, you peeped it?
Tell us more!
Personally, I thought Clive Owen would have made a decent Bond too but I'm def not mad at Craig, not mad at how they stripped this movie down to simpler basics instead of stupid gadgets and convoluted world domination plots (not that the plot isn't just a little convoluted). And I really like that the main "Bond girl" isn't all T&A (hello Denise Richards) but rather someone who comes off as smart and intriguing.
Also, Campbell (director) has clearly been watching some Asian action movies. There's an early foot chase scene that looks like it's out of "Ong Bak". Automatically, you just know - this is not the Bond of yore. And thank god. The franchise had been running on E for a minute.
Once again:
Craig = here to stay for a few more missions. All those anti-Craig hatteurs need to fall back.
yeah i like it too
It's interesting b/c while I was actually happy to see them dump all that gadgety gimmickry, it has been one big complaint by old Bond fans and I can't say I necessarily blame them. After all, they have a certain expectation and when the movie goes out of its way to avoid that, it's not surprising that people would be a little annoyed by that.
That said, I'm glad they're going to a more physical, more stripped down (literally and figuratively!) version. I always thought the Mission Impossible series also suffered from its techno-philia rather than focusing on stuff like better scripting, better acting and better action sequences that don't depend on some crazy laser watch or shit like that.
Oliver, take a cold shower.
O or Damn,
Was there an extended torture scene?
Casino Royale was the first Flemming novel I read as a teenager and while it's been a long time, I vividly recall a very long, drawn out, viscous torture session where they have Bond strapped to a chair.
I seem to remember that it went on for a while. Maybe a couple of chapters even.
Then again, I might even be thinking of the wrong book. Live and Let Die perhaps??
It's bugged how completely unrelated most of the books are from the films.
1. I'm a Bond fan
2. Unlike most others, I think Craig seems like a good choice (Owen would have been too)
3. To cheer for my countryman Mads Mikkelsen. He's one of my favorite local actors, and I hope he does a good job as Le Chiffre.
From another board.
I wrote this in response to someone's list of favorite Bonds in order, which I agreed with completely, then go on to explain why before degenerating into a pitifull fanboy rant...
ORIGINAL QUOTE:
"Here's the real list...
1 Roger Moore
2 Sean Connery
3 George Lazenby
4 Pierce Brosnan
5 Timothy Dalton"
My sentiments exactly.
I think much of what makes one decide who their favorite Bond is often depends on who was playing the character when they were growing up and first getting into the series.
For me that would definitely be Moore.
The first Bond film I saw at the cinemas as a kid was The Man With The Golden Gun.
Upon reflection years later, I concede that this paticular entry in the series is clunky and at times even cheap. So much of my love for this film is related to nostalgia.
I will say, that TMWTGG is still an extremely FUN Bond picture, and has a certain charm and whimsy that nearly all Bond films within the last 15 years have sorely lacked.
It also features perhaps one of the best Bond villains ever in Christopher Lee.
But back to Moore.
Knowing he could never try and compete with Connery, Moore correctly brought his own thing to the character and aside from a couple of clunkers (A View To a Kill, Moonraker), he remains my favorite Bond.
LIVE AND LET DIE:
Great fun. LOVE the pre credit sequence with all the agents getting killed.
Moore slides right into the role after bidding Connery adieu in Diamonds Are Forever.
Within minutes we believe he is Bond. And after a decade of Connery as 007, that's no small feat.
Nice homages to the blaxploitation films popular at the time.
The Ken Adams sets are noticably missing, but interestingly, the end set piece in the underground lair looks an awful lot like the end sequence in Enter The Dragon - even though that film didn't come out until another 2 years later).
Also, props to one of the best and most enduring Bond themes ever, courtesy of Sir Paul McCartney and Wings.
THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN:
Not much to add to what I already said about this film other than Brit Ekland is possibly the worst and most useless Bond girl next to Denice Richards.
The cheesy Lulu-sung title track is a guilty pleasure.
"He comes just before the kill...." Wow.
Some of THE best locales in ANY Bond film by the way.
The Phukket (sp?) islands that doubled as Scaramanga's hideout are simply breathtaking.
THE SPY WHO LOVED ME:
Hands down one of the best films in the series, right up there with From Russia With Love, On Her Majesty's Secret Service and Goldfinger.
I remember when this came out and how huge it was.
Brilliantly paced, expertly scripted, a gorgeous, smart AND formidable Bond girl in Barbara Bach, one of the greatest Bond henchman in Jaws, and a stunningly triumphant return of Ken Adams and the most massive Bond set ever produced.
"Nobody Does It Better" = Best Bond song ever? At least tied with Goldfinger.
This was gonna be hard to top.
And alas, they tried to do just that with...
MOONRAKER:
Among the silliest of the series, at times they went WAY overboard with the humor, not to mention just about everything else.
At this point the series became too bloated.
Even the welcome return of Jaws is ruined by making the character into a buffoonish, sympathetc clown.
Still, some nice locales, yet another great title song by Shirley Bassey and some geniunely great lines:
Bond (after watching Holly Goodhead dispose of some of Hugo Drax's henchman):
"Where'd you learn how to do that, NASA?"
Holly: "No. Vassar"
FOR YOUR EYES ONLY:
One could see the paralell between the transition of the series from Moonraker to For Your Eyes Only and from Die Another Day to Daniel Craig's Casino Royal.
Both former films were bloated, over-the-top affairs, while the latter films were clearly attempts to bring the series back to reality a bit.
For Your Eyes Only does just that and admiraby so.
It's been called a return to the days of From Russia With Love and it's emphasis on a straight-ahead spy adventure with a minimal reliance on gadgetry.
And ya gotta love Topol.
OCTOPUSSY:
My sister loves this one and to be honest, I didn't care for it initially. It is one that has definitely grown on me over time. To the point where I'm willing to concede it as one of the best in Moore's repertoire.
Another one in the series that puts an emphasis on what it is that Bond actually does... spy.
Also nice to see Maud Adams make a return to the series.
A VIEW TO A KILL:
This was quite obviously one too many films for Moore.
Shoulda went out with a bang in Octopussy.
Oh well.
Tanya Roberts is horrible. Just horrible.
Did I say Brit Ekland and Denice Richards were the worst?
Well please add Miss Roberts to the list.
So there it is. My films of my personal favorite Bond.
Aside from the Moore films, my fave Bond films would have to be From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, On Her Majesty's Secret Service and Diamonds Are Forever (sorry, but I LOVE this movie!).
On the other Bonds:
CONNERY:
Well... he's Connery. The epitome of 007.
Just the perfect mix of menace, mood, wry wit and sex appeal.
Though even he had a stinker or 2 in his cannon (the supremely boring Thunderball comes to mind).
LAZENBY:
Fans tend to give Lazenby a bad rap for his performance in OHMSS, but I thought he did quite well.
The film is easily one of the best in the series and to be quite honest, it's nearly IMPOSSIBLE for me to imagine Connery being able to pull off that last scene in the car with Terresa.
So George, if you're reading this... props to you!
DALTON:
One word: Dullton.
BROSNAN:
I thought he made an excellent Bond.
Too bad the films for the most part sucked.
Goldeneye was great and a promising start to his series.
But each film got progressively worse.
What I was saying before about the "charm" and "whimsy" of the Moore films lacking in the recent flicks? The last few Brosnan films in particular were just so cold and clinical that I felt I wasn't even watching a Bond film anymore.
Okay, rant over.
Yeah, he's a great actor, I thoroughly enjoyed the Pusher series and even that one Dogma picture he did. It's good to see him get some James Bond money.
I agree with the "unraveling" part - what happens after this scene is where the film lags the most and really could have used an entire rewrite. That said, the scene is taken from the Fleming novel and I thought it was completely effective (unlike Martin). It doesn't make sense to me why you have to see dude actually getting his balls whacked to understand that he's getting his balls whacked.
So yeah, I thought the torture scene was viscerally painful to watch but again, I agree with Martin - the film flops around after this point.
I do find it extraordinary that Martin would put the film in the bottom 5 of the series but I suppose if what he wanted was a conventional Bond, then in that case, sure, CR is going to wildly disappoint since the film takes such great pains to reject the model of what we've seen and try to reboot from a different angle. However, this is precisely why I enjoyed the film so much: we've seen the "other" Bond for 20 movies up until this point and once the invisible cars become the necessary gimmick to get people to the theatres, then it's pretty clear the series has run out of creative steam.
Under other circumstances, I'd be wary of too dramatic a departure but to me, CR doesn't do violence to the Bond tradition and that opinion has largely been supported by both American and British critics.
For the benefit of people who haven't seen the movie yet, you might want to edit out the spoiliers you're including, namely what happens following the torture scene.
You remember correctly. The book is also noteworthy for Bond's misogynism and some great food scenes. I have yet to see the the new Bond, but i can tell you that to date, the Bond of the novels has been far removed from the Bond of the films.
Oh yeah, there's also a great cocktail called the Vesper, but all I can remember is that it includes lillet.
What part of getting hit in the balls can guys not imagine hurting? He could have sat their stone faced not reacting and I still would have cross my legs. Just even suggesting your getting you balls beat is enough. And did you really say you wanted to see a guys balls being beaten with a rope????? I think you have to special order that stuff from overseas. Complaining that a ball beating wasn't rough enough is
But seriously, this movie was great. I've always been a Bond fan and I thought this was a great return for the series. All this whining about not enough gagets and supercars is silly. It's his first mission as a 007 people! You can't expect everything. Plus he had a supercar full of gagets but didn't get to most of them. I thought that was a great teaser.
In fact (as Ms Damm observed) I think the movie did a great job creating this brash tough guys who actually get cuts and brused knuckles. Unlike the others who never had a hair out of place.
Yea, it's too long over all, to much card playing, too much love scene. But I didn't care. There was a reason for all this that I'd rather not get into because it's would involve spoilers.
And a clifhanger ending is way better than Bond ignoring another mission call from M while he bones some tart!!!!! I think it establishes that this Bond doesn't stop kicking ass for a little tang!
Bond movies have sucked ass since the one with Grace Jones and I've happy to see them making a great come back.
Invisible cars = weakest of
I would love it if they did a darker storyline, like an Iraqi update of Apocalypse Now with Bond (who is military after all) doing the Martin Sheen part, or just taking down drug cartels alongside Felix or whatever. No money in that though, I guess.
Wasn't that basically the plot of one of the Dalton films (sans the Middle East thing)?
I agree that (for me anyway) the Bond films stopped feeling like Bond films around the time Moore left in the 80's.
Go see the new movie. Report back.
HAHA!!!!
at one point it looked like Bond had made the dude give up torturing him...that is...until he said "now i am going to cut them off and feed them to you".
Great Bond flick. The best in a loooong time IMO.
Craig was very, very good. And the vibe of the film itself was pretty much pitch perfect too.
I agree w/you Oliver about the lag time but I was more involved/invested into this film than any other one in the series that I can remember so it wasn't that bad.
Only other quips, and they're very minor...
In the book they were playing chemin de fer / baccarat.
In the film they seemed to give in to current fads and made it Poker instead. Kinda
Also in the book it was KGB instead of terrorists. But oh, well.
Overall definitely
Oh yeah, great ending too!
Yea, the fact that they were playing Texas Hold Em was the one groaner for me. But (like you said) I just chalked it up to fad product placement which is another Bond trend.
Who that?
Can someone explained what happened at the end when Bond looks at the Vesper's phone on the boat...and then tracks down Mr. White and puts a slug in him? What was on the phone?
It said "To James" or "For James" and had the name "Mr. White" and his phone number. That's all James needs to track down a guy and put a slug in him.