The Casino Royale / Daniel Craig Thread

[undarrenworld]

I heard some rummours that Bond will not smoke in CR:eek:
What do you think of that?

[Winston]

will he still be drinking?
his wodka martini?

or will he end up as a vegetarian in this one?

[IsiliRunite]

Maybe his freshened lungs can help him chase down those bad guys!

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

He'll most like be eating the clam dish of the same name.

[stimpee]

He'll inject instead or just snort.

[ffolkes]

It's not getting easy for him:

www.craignotbond.com (http://www.craignotbond.com)

I feel sorry for the man, but can't help seeing the evident backlash already for Casino Royale.
In the worst case scenario the movie will bomb commercially (nevermind if it's a good film or not) and Craig will be out after one try.

PS. sorry for another 007 thread :D

[big screen satellite]

no, these idiots need highlighting, while i agree that Craig might not be the right choice for the role, i do think we need to give the man a chance, afterall - its too late to start a campaign to stop Craig being Bond, he is the next Bond like it or not, and while i think making Casino Royal was a shite cop out, too, i think we should give the movie a chance before it gets slated...he's in a no win situation really, and i would like to see him in a 'new' Bond adventure, but thats at least a couple of years away...so we have and old story to judge him by.

All these 'craignotbond' idiots will have to see the movie to judge it...so the whole boycott thing is bollocks...

give the movie and the man a chance...afterall, its still gonna have the feel and flavour of the usual Bonds, just with a different man at the helm...who at least is British

[ffolkes]

I'm agreeing with you 100%, but i was mostly surprised with just how much animosity Craig is getting. I mean the whole site is insane, not to mention that petition to "boycott Casino Royale" etc.

I'd say give the man a break... i always knew that it'd be an uphill struggle for him, but this is ridiuculous. I wonder how EON's taking this?
They'll definitely go along with making the film, but i'm sure they are worried with the reaction as well.

[lukeyd]

yer there's a site, but is that really the true feeling of fans? just because its bond it'll be a box office hit anyway, i mean die another day was complete toilet and it still took $400 million

[big screen satellite]

yer there's a site, but is that really the true feeling of fans? just because its bond it'll be a box office hit anyway, i mean die another day was complete toilet and it still took $400 million


exactly, in fact this may take more $$ because of the fact that people will want to see it...to see if its shite or not

we all know that the last three Star Wars movies arn't a patch on the first three but they are three of the highest grossing movies of all time, fans who slated TPM when it came out didn't do much to dampen fans enthusiasm for AOTC...and this is the same...Bond is stronger as a worldwide franchise than a piss poor site having a dig at the lead actor...

we will have to see if the film is any good, but by then it'll have taken big box office dollar, and it'll be deemed a BO success..

[ffolkes]

exactly, in fact this may take more $$ because of the fact that people will want to see it...to see if its shite or not


That depends entirely on what kind of a movie they end up making. If it's going to be an edgier bond it might be offputting for all the morons who loved Die Another Day.

Remember Dalton's bonds? He was closest to Fleming's original character and the movies were harder. Yet they still failed to ignite the boxoffice...
The initial motive of "people just want to see the new bond" won't carry too far.

And the star wars prequels were successors to the biggest movie trilogy of all time. So that alone, plus the years of fanboy waiting and massmarketing pushed the movie into huge heights. Lucas could've made all three movies by shooting at his own arse and it still would've made mad bucks.

Bond is not that bankable... It's only the later americanized Brosnan movies that have made billions. In fact the franchise was nearly dead until Goldeneye reinvegorated it.
As to the site: no question it is a crap dig at Daniel Craig, but there is a truth behind the concern over the lead of actor as 007. The diehard fans of Bond will surely see the new movie anyways, but what does that mean boxoffice-wise? Not much.

The money comes from the hordes of people who want to see easy entertainment, a "dark, handsome" lead as Bond and the same bullshit over & over. Seemingly as they will not be getting their usual meal, they might look elsewhere... And that's when EON is in trouble.

[dubman]

the internet??!
a site i've never heard of making it not easy?

ha! hahahahahaha...

they care about as much as a 3am waitress at denny's is supposed to care

[ffolkes]

the internet??!
a site i've never heard of making it not easy?


Just cos you didn't hear it doesn't mean it didn't get around.
The site caught enough attention to get mentioned in several entertainment news headlines... "fans boycott new bond movie".

That's already some damage for a site you never heard of.

[Deckard]

That site has also been mentioned on the BBC News homepage, and has received a fair amount of discussion across the airwaves. I can't see how EON could not have picked up on it. And given their own initial uncertainty in casting Craig (at least Michael Wilson's) and the now infamous lacklustre press conference, there's bound to be a few sleepless nights being had.

I'm really not sure what to expect from Craig. I remember people commenting on how Brosnan hadn't yet relaxed into the role in Goldeneye, despite it being an admirable film and performance. I can only imagine how nervous Craig must be feeling.

[dubman]

Just cos you didn't hear it doesn't mean it didn't get around.
The site caught enough attention to get mentioned in several entertainment news headlines... "fans boycott new bond movie".

That's already some damage for a site you never heard of.

noi ti's not, it's a news item within an entertainment industry that constantly laughs at little homemade petitions and websites that ALWAYS react too strongly and too pointlessly over this crap.

you're not convincing me that a c-grade designed site full of press photos and godawful bitching (blonde! aagh!) has enough of an audience to have any impact on how tough it is.

the internet doesn't exist.

[ffolkes]

the internet doesn't exist.

keep living in denial mate :)

[big screen satellite]

the internet doesn't exist.

try telling that to Harry Knowles

or the Artic Moneys....


i'm afraid that Eon will know about this, and they won't be laughing about it - it will be a mild concern, especially as it has had big publicity:

the headlines in one of the UK's papers was 'Fans Urged to Boycott Bond', now if they missed that they really are not keeping in touch with the world, and really won't care about anything.

I'm know for a fact that Eon or its parent company will employ a number of people who deliberatley scoure the web & news media for any mention of the word 'Bond', and they will 'cut' and 'clip' the articles for their press files, every major company does this, the company i work for does this, you HAVE to know what the world is saying about you and your business, good or bad, and often you have to react.

Eon won't be changing anything in the movie because of this, but i bet they Market the film in a way that counters the lead actor's bad press, they have to get people to this movie, because this is a make or break film, imo.

[Leon]

Doesn't anyone see? This is all just to hype up the new James Bond film. It wouldn't even surprise me if those "fans who are mad" get payed.

[big screen satellite]

Doesn't anyone see? This is all just to hype up the new James Bond film. It wouldn't even surprise me if those "fans who are mad" get payed.


nice theory, perhaps this is some kind of eon/sony offshoot website...??

[Deckard]

In public, he behaves with great dignity and endorses Craig's acting ability.

But working undercover, he's busy setting up websites to chip away at Craig's credibility.

Who is he?

The name's Brosnan.... Pierce Brosnan.... and this time, it's personal.

[undarrenworld]

Heh this movie must be big, cos here in Karlovy Vary, where its being filmed the government must rebuilt a part of the town. To look better in the movie...


All for James:D

[Deckard]

A whole raft of Bond news and features seem to have come out today.

This interview (http://www.superherohype.com/news/jamesbondnews.php?id=3951) with Broccoli and Craig is interesting... covering the bad press, the music, and Bond 22, among other things.

Also little bit of info on the black and white pre-title sequence (http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=18246) over at Empire.

[undarrenworld]

Have you ever seen this movie?

http://imdb.com/title/tt0061452/

[Deckard]

Have you ever seen this movie?

http://imdb.com/title/tt0061452/
Yes, a couple of times. A real curiosity piece.

Amazing cast. Great score. Apart from that, I thought it was dire!

(though it certainly has its fans who'll vehemently disagree with me)

It sure aint A Bond Film™ in any recognisable sense.

[big screen satellite]

the teaser trailer....

has this been posted before - couldn't find it....

http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/casinoroyale/

they also have a countdown to the official site launch...

but this is showing a lot of promise...

another one to look foward to

[negative1]

yet another rehashed property
brought back....

leave bond alone....sean connery
was pretty much it..

none of the others matched up
to him..

this one doesn't look like it will
either..

later
-1

[big screen satellite]

yet another rehashed property
brought back....

leave bond alone....sean connery
was pretty much it..

none of the others matched up
to him..

this one doesn't look like it will
either..

later
-1
owch...

Bond is a franchise and what you are saying is that after Connery, Bond was ruined, which is entirely not true...

unfortunately we needed new actors ever so often and its a case of different strokes for different folks, i loved Moore, because i grew up with him as Bond, but now I would say Brosnan is how i expect a Bond to act these days, and perhaps with Craig, we've got a Bond for the 21st Century

i'm not sure its a good idea to (re)make a film of the past, although this Bond movie was never made by the original production company, so its not really a rehash...its just the original story told how Flemming imagined, with a modern up to date twist...

Fans will always clamour for Bond movies, and the franchise has to keep moving and changing with the times, and despite the last movie's over use of CGI and crappy story lines, it was still a classic Bond, and this trailer leads me to believe that this will be one of the better recent Bonds - its probably back to how Flemming wanted him to be...a no nonsense spy

you're either a fan of Bond as a franchise of all Bonds or just one, which i know a lot of people are... its not a matter of matching up to Connery, its a matter of matching up to Bond

[ffolkes]

the teaser trailer....
http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/casinoroyale/


saw this a couple of days ago...

must say that i still have mixed feelings about it.
the trailer wasn't really excellent, so it might just be a case of "good film, dud trailer". Then again it could be the old "dud trailer, crap film" as well.

naturally i'm hoping for the best.

[big screen satellite]

stimpee - any chance a moderate this post ^^^^

[big screen satellite]

http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/casinoroyale/site/

the official site is now up and running

worth checking out

[koisk]

I must say I'm crazy excited for this movie. I thought Brosnan was great but the prospect of another Brosnan bond film sounds flat out boring. After seeing the black and white part of the trailer I kind of wish the whole thing was shot in black and white.

[spacefish]

Nice to see Mads Mikkelsen in a major role outside of Denmark. Definitely looking forward to this. :)

[Renze]

Aston Martin DBS will debut in new Bond movie (http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/cars/astonmartin_dbs.asp)

*droooool* :cool:

[cured]

Aston Martin DBS will debut in new Bond movie (http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/cars/astonmartin_dbs.asp)

*droooool* :cool:

God I wish I was rich. That car is beautiful.

Can't wait for the movie, too...I hope the stunts don't make my eyes roll too much.

[lukeyd]

http://www.apple.com/trailers/sony_pictures/casinoroyale/

looking good :)

[dubman]

yeah, all that fuss about daniel craig on the internet is REALLY affecting peope's descisions on whether they would see it or not now.

ahahahahahahaha...

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

Never been a James Bond fan, but this guy works as far as smooth goes.

And he's sexy too.


(fuuuuuckin' faaag, there, I said it for you)

[Caprice]

i am so dissapointed that they chose this guy.

[Sarcasmo]

Explain? I think Craig's a bit more cro-magnon, which is right for the part.

[Jason Roth]

After seeing Layer Cake I think Craig can pull it off.

[Deckard]

Another trailer has just been released, and boy this one's really whetting my appetite...
http://movies.aol.com/casino-royale-james-bond/exclusive-video-features

I just hope the hype and expectation don't make it too much of a disappointment.

[Deckard]

Oh god, I've just heard the Chris Cornell theme tune (http://www.tiffanyastone.com/blog/2006/09/music_to_bond_to.php). :confused:

From the first few listens, I'm thinking cheesy 80's American action - Airwolf, the A Team, Baywatch even.

Perhaps they should have got the great Hoffmeister himself to play 007.



Actually............

[big screen satellite]

Oh god, I've just heard the Chris Cornell theme tune (http://www.tiffanyastone.com/blog/2006/09/music_to_bond_to.php). :confused:

From the first few listens, I'm thinking cheesy 80's American action - Airwolf, the A Team, Baywatch even.

Perhaps they should have got the great Hoffmeister himself to play 007.



Actually............


omg that sucks ass

thats surely not the bond theme.... no please

that just makes the trailer look really weak...

with the usual bond music over the top - the trailer looks awesome, this somehow make it look really cheap and nasty - its amazing how such a porr piece of music can make pictures look bad

[spacefish]

Yep, it's the main title theme (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_James_Bond_Theme), like the Goldfinger theme, and the Live and Let Die theme, only bad. That's okay, I haven't really cared for too many of the newer film themes. I think Tina Turner's GoldenEye was the last one I could really dig. I guess Madonna's Die Another Day might have been okay but since I really can't remember it, it can't have been all that good.

[Deckard]

Not as gut-wrenchingly hideous as Madonna's juddering monstrosity thankfully (no random mention of Sigmund Freud for one thing), but still... this could and should have been so much classier for Casino Royale.

Now I've heard it, I'm half expecting Patrick Swayze to turn up during the title sequence and start gyrating his hips...

[ffolkes]

Oh god, I've just heard the Chris Cornell theme tune (http://www.tiffanyastone.com/blog/2006/09/music_to_bond_to.php). :confused:

From the first few listens, I'm thinking cheesy 80's American action - Airwolf, the A Team, Baywatch even.

Perhaps they should have got the great Hoffmeister himself to play 007.

Actually............

sorry that it took me forever to hear that tune, but jesus christ it was bad. so shit in fact that the less said about it the better.

the movie itself on the otherhand is something i'm looking forward to a lot. the trailer made the film look more interesting, and i read a good piece on craig on the latest premiere magazine. however the film turns out i doubt that any fault will be craig's. but then again, who knows

POSSIBLE SPOILER: i also ran into this image of the already infamous torture scene from casino royale. here's bond gettting ready to receive major punishment on his nether regions...

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/3941/tortureuh6600x585mh3.jpg

can you say ouch?

[Deckard]

Now try and picture Roger Moore in that situation.







It's just not happening is it? :D

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

Looks like fun.

Possibly Best Wallpaper 2006.

[big screen satellite]

thought that some of you who don't usually read the headset forum might want to check me out later tonight ...



this week as a tribute to the silver screen's greatest film franchise - my Big Screen Satellite show on Tuesday 14th November (8-10pm UK) will be dedicated to James Bond...007

with many a Bond theme being played as well as the usual mix of classics from the 80's and 90's (not all Bond Related) and some other dubious links to James Bond along the way...

join me its gonna be another great show...

http://www.dirtyradio.net click on the listen in button

Tuesday 14th November 2006 - UK: 8-10pm (GMT) / US: Pacific Time: 12-2pm / Europe: 9-11pm (CET)

i have a Licence to Ill and i'm gonna use it ;)

see you then

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

Go See It.

[cured]

This was a fantastic movie. Gone are the eye-rolling pyrotechnics and the new Bond actually looks like he can win a streetfight.

The first half was what everyone wants in a Bond film. The second half really sets up the Bond character as we've known him. It was a bit long and even I wondered why there seemed to be no ending in sight but it was rewarded with some closure and by the end of the film, the Bond you see is the Bond shaped by everything he's gone through.

Daniel Craig is right up there with Connery. I wasn't sure what I'd thought about the casting when I first heard it but he has the badassness none of the Bonds have had and is slightly less smooth than Connery but that still says a lot.

Thank God they saved this franchise...watching Bond movies was like watching those awful, terrible Schumacher Batman movies.

I highly recommend this movie...it's probably the best action movie I've seen since Batman Begins and it is better than that, IMO.

[Dirty0900]

We were rammed last night with this film, out of our 11 screens, we had 5 showing it. Everyone was sold out! Some showings had people waiting in line an hour and a quarter in advance to get a good seat!

Though when i was pretending to clean one of the halls, some guy and his kid left 15 minutes early. He said it was the worst Bond he'd ever seen!

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

It is appropriately rated PG-13. Parents be warned.

[ffolkes]

can't wait to see this.

[big screen satellite]

seen it

it rocks!!!

only a couple of things to mention - not spoilers, for those who haven't seen it...

1. there are no nudey ladies in opening titles!!!

and talking of the titles... i originally hated the theme tune by Chris Cornell on its own, but somehow it really suited the titles... and when you listen to the lyrics over them it really fits... the title sequence was really nice...

2. Craig really suits the role - a ballsy hard man Bond - although I kinda think its action sequences are a bit too similar to the likes of The Transporter (which ain't a bad film, but...)

3. Its a Bond movie, but not as you know it... and i kinda missed the cheesy one liners...although there are a couple of quips... which are smile worthy... (look out for the 'money & penny' reference when Bond first meets up with Vespa) ...

its a nice filmic way to set up the next movies i think - this is kinda like how Batman Begins has re-ignited the Batman Franchise, and this is almost a 'wipe the slate clean' Bond relaunch - the real proof will be in Bond 22 i think...

still one of the best action movies i've seen in a while - even if there are a couple of 'down' periods in it - its very well done and worthy of 4/5 of anyone's points

Matt

[ffolkes]

cheers matt for the review, i was interested in hearing how you liked the film.

i'm actually very excited to see craig as bond, and everything in this film sounds good... minus maybe the chris cornell song. (it might fit the titles but as a song itself: ehhh no thanks) then again bond songs have been duds ever since TWINE so that's not really a shocker anymore.

i'm also interested in seeing how casino royale's directing is. i know campbell did a good job on goldeneye, but his resume lately has been a bit crap tbh. that's why i always thought that if EON needed to reboot the series they'd need a serious director with a strong style. but apparently they pulled it off with campbell, cos the reviews are so positive.

yeah i still can't wait to see this movie :)

[big screen satellite]

i'm also interested in seeing how casino royale's directing is. i know campbell did a good job on goldeneye, but his resume lately has been a bit crap tbh. that's why i always thought that if EON needed to reboot the series they'd need a serious director with a strong style. but apparently they pulled it off with campbell, cos the reviews are so positive.


yeah, the direction is very good, although because its basically a card game and a drawn out love scene in the original story, they have boosted the action inbetween but when you get to see the game and the smooching it does slow the pace... and leave you wanting more action, thats not to say its not well done, its just well... oddly paced - which is probably the directors doing (fault?) (and partly the story)

yeah you can pick a few holes in any Bond movie, but this one is certainly a good reboot and will definately leave you wanting Bond 22... there is no reason why DC isn't now Bond...you feel by the end that he's the man, and every time you see him (outside of this movie) Craig WILL be Bond (well to me anyway)...

although as a Roger Moore (as Bond) fan - its far cry from the Safari suited eyebrowraising one line quips of the master... but Craig is so far so good...

job done i think.

[ffolkes]

although as a Roger Moore (as Bond) fan - its far cry from the Safari suited eyebrowraising one line quips of the master... but Craig is so far so good...

funny you say that, cos moore is also my favorite. grew up with his bonds and i think he's just about the coolest man out there.

but i still try to remain open minded about 007.
daniel craig sounds like a great choice for the role, given that fleming's original character of james bond was always a killer first - lover second.

plus craig's a charismatic bloke imo. after watching layer cake, munich and enduring love it's obvious he's an intense actor too.

[Deckard]

Moore is my favourite too, even though i recognise all the same flaws in him that other people do. Like you say, "growing up with him" probably has a lot to do with it.

He's a really nice guy in real life too (according to my b/f anyway). Polite and completely lacking in attitude.

[big screen satellite]

its funny really how peoples fav Bonds tend to be from their own era...

in the most recent Channel 4 poll of the best Bond theme songs, which was won by Goldfinger btw, the 14-25 year old's fav theme was Madonna's 'Dies Another Day', whereas the 25-44 year olds fav theme is 'Live and Let Die'... (which is coincidentally mine) and i think if you poll by Actor the same would be true, with Connery fav amongst 45+, Moore 25-44's and Brosnan the Choice of the youngsters....

[undarrenworld]

I finally seen it!

I like this movie for several reasons.

1) Poker game
2) Bond driving in car in the dark amd his blue eyes in the night...awesome! Thats my idea of Bond, this is Bond!
3) No technical stuff, like rockets in the car etc., its Bond on his own:)

So I can recommend it:)

[Winston]

saw it last night, i think it sucked

soundtrack doesen't fit, the coolest dude of them all isn't even in the movie
a little spark is, that the one liners are good
and that chair thing, not bond imho

just my thought

[ffolkes]

i saw this last weekend, and i must say i enjoyed casino royale thoroughly. it was such a pleasant surprise that the movie succeeded so well in capturing the bond magic (especially after the terrible DAD) despite of all the much-touted talk of überbrutal realism. it was a gritty film, but it stayed true to its legacy & subject matter.

as to daniel craig: imo he was terrific as 007. what he maybe lacks in poster-boy appearance, he obviously makes up in depth and intensity. physically he looks like a man who he can give damage and take it as well (which he did)... and this comes from a roger moore fan.

what comes to his charm, i think he showed it best with vesper. the dialogue they exchange really reveals his wit and humour superbly, it's something that contrasts his rough exterior very well. true, craig maybe seemed a bit tense in some scenes: not perhaps as "laid back" as previous bonds. but the reason to this i think was how much more grounded the overall story was. it just felt like CR dealt with both physical and mental pain with much more realism than previous bonds. POSSIBLE SPOILER: the scene after bond's "revival" during the poker game stands as a testament to this... wouldn't anyone be a bit tense and on the edge after being practically dead? and he still landed a great oneliner for that, which was simply brilliant. SPOILER END

in fact after all the hearsay i was surprised to see craig smiling so much in his role. granted, it still wasn't as quirky as sir moore etc, but it was much better than i had feared: he was serious, but not totally grim. and that's a good thing.

i was also surprisingly impressed with the score. david arnold hasn't really won me over with his previous bond scores, they've just felt far more generic than the genius work of john barry...then again barry is almost impossible to compete with. but in CR david arnold actually shines as the score has a very sweeping and classic feel to it. there are nice stabs at the key melody of "you know my name" as well, something that both nods to previous bond classics and also compliments cornell's song (which itself was just okay in my opinion).

speaking of the theme song, this reminds me of the titles. i had no problem with the cell-shaded visuals they used, but for some reason the colour scheme didn't work at times for me at all. beige as a background colour for the titles? it is a minor quibble, but something that distracted me anyways.

the rest of the cast was very good, eva green actually surprised me greatly by giving a much deeper impression as a bond lady than i would have thought. vesper really felt like an intelligent character, not just a carboard cutout. murino felt more like she was there just for eyecandy, but at least she did that part well. M was her usual self, it was odd in a way that dame dench was still playing her... but a blessing at the same time since introducing a new M plus a new bond would've probably distracted the audience too much. and then there's le chiffré. i thought le chiffré was a very interesting character, he came across as much more subtle rather than cartoony which was great. it might be because i was strangely hypnotised by mads mikkelsen's cold stare (he's a cool man), but i really thought he gave us a memorable bond "villain".

the direction in CR was solid from campbell, much tighter in terms of action and pacing (regardless of the film being long) that i had anticipated with sexier cinematography too. he did a good job in the 90s with goldeneye, but his past resumé with other projects hasn't really impressed me at all... so it was great relief to see him deliver such a classy bond film, something which surely was aided by a much greater script than the usual fare.

all in all i think the best thing about casino royale is that it reinvigorates a legendary and beloved franchise that was on its way to depressing idiocy. also i feel genuinely happy for daniel craig: here's a man who was nearly crucified for being casted as the next 007, proving the world wrong by giving us so much more than just empty model-boy looks.

so what else can i say?
long live 007, james bond will return :)

[King of Snake]

Saw this last night with Stimpee and had a great time. Nothing much to add to what has already been said. It was a long film but the action scenes were strategically placed to keep you excited through the whole thing. It was great to see them do away with most of the bond cliches but still remain true to the nature of Bond (for instance: there's still some gadgets but the obligatory scenes with Q in the laboratory have thankfully been eliminated). When the action heated up it was really intense and somehow Craig managed to make Bond just that little bit more human and vulnerable so that you actually cared for him (while at the same time running through walls and being totally badass ;))

"Wodka Martini" "Shaken or stirred sir?" "Do I look like a man who cares?!"

[koisk]

The only thing I didn't like was the title song. Everything else was awesome. Daniel Craig is bond.

[stimpee]

Coolest and best Bond for a long long time. Less cliches and more action.

[Eikman]

mediocre..

[adam]

1)I think Eik is right. For a film, it is mediocre.

2)For a bond movie, it is great. Bond movies are essentially low brow super stylized action movies. It's still one of those (hence mediocrity being about the best it can achieve), but it's pretty much as good as a low brow super stylized action movie can get.

3)Craig was great.

4)The opening song was amazingly awful. I can't believe no one had the balls to say, "You know, this song sucks, let's scrap it."

[kid cue]

this film was very 'meh', almost absent-minded in the way it was over-the-top, spectacle after spectacle. also, the poker segment could've been much more smart and suspenseful than it actually was; instead, it just became another backdrop. i have to admit i'm not too familiar with the whole Bond thing though.

[adam]

Yeah, I've really seen the high-suspense poker games done better. That Matt Damon movie did it better and that wasn't a very good movie itself. I thought that angle was underdeveloped.

[stimpee]

I agree that the poker could have been done better. At least they broke it up into sections to try and liven it up a bit. I did like how the special effects were less obvious than the last 4 Bond's tho.

[big screen satellite]

I agree that the poker could have been done better. At least they broke it up into sections to try and liven it up a bit. I did like how the special effects were less obvious than the last 4 Bond's tho.

i'll agree that the last two Bond's were special effects laden, but i think that the effects in Goldeneye and Tomorrow Never Dies were not any more or less 'special' than this movie...and lumping all of the last four together for this purpose is perhaps giving a disservice to, at least, the Goldeneye Movie, which after all is great...

and as for Eike's glowing review if that's his overall opinon then that's fair enough but compared to most of the movies of this ilk from the past 2 years its way better than that and compared to at least the last two Bond's it was better as well...

its not and never will be the best movie ever made, after all the plot and the premise behind the Bond franchise will always put paid to that

but if you like Bond as a series and as a character its a good fun film

i'm glad its out of the way, because i think the next one will be better and more 'Bond' than this one...

[adam]

I agree that the poker could have been done better.

I was just thinking about how it could have been done better, and I imagine this is one of the more difficult tasks in movie direction. I think it would be harder to make a really good poker scene than, say, a really good action sequence - and I don't consider well-executed action sequences to be easy.

What to show, and how to show it, to direct the audience's thoughts, create and build tension...it would be tough to do well.

[Strawman]

Just saw it - best Bond for at least a dacade and I think Craig is the best since Connery

[//\/\/]

Just saw it - best Bond for at least a dacade and I think Craig is the best since Connery

agreed - i even think he sounds like connery every now and then. could've done with being a bit shorter; but a good plot nontheless - shame to replace q with a bunch of faceless scientists back at mi5, and the car could've seen more action. good, good film though!

[Strawman]

shame to replace q with a bunch of faceless scientists back at mi5, and the car could've seen more action. good, good film though![/quote]

Good point - I didn't even think of q. Now that you mentioned it, we did miss q....the film was good enough for me not to notice.

[myrrh]

I am a little late on this one, but I just saw this last night, and thought it was the best Bond movie in a very very long time, possibly ever. The movie seemed much more realistic and more about espionage and subterfuge, then about having fancy gadgets and Bond doing super over the top things. If they continue to make more like this, it would be a very good thing.

[myrrh]

I am a little late on this one, but I just saw this last night, and thought it was the best Bond movie in a very very long time, possibly ever. The movie seemed much more realistic and more about espionage and subterfuge, then about having fancy gadgets and Bond doing super over the top things. If they continue to make more like this, it would be a very good thing.

[Deckard]

I also came at this one late - only managed to catch it last month (hard to believe for a so-called Bond fan, but it was worth the wait, and on Blu-ray too). Easily my favourite of the series thanks to some tight writing and great performances, and I agree with what you say about espionage. They've set the mark very high for the next film. And yes, Craig is IMO the best since Connery, even though I hold a soft spot for ol' Rog.

(EDIT: no, I don't mean "our Rog"!)