The Casino Royale / Daniel Craig Thread

[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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by stimpee

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

[//\/\/]

Originally Posted by Strawman

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"!)