'Casino Royale' Final Cut Review

I say, the less it feels like a Bond film the better.
 
TheVileOne said:
I say, the less it feels like a Bond film the better.
exactly......

though no offense to the other bond films...... i love them to death
 
I love it that we're going to hear the Bond theme at the end. One of my complaints (of many) of Exorcist: The Beginning was that the main fanfare was missing -- and they had an opportune moment at the end, with Father Merrin at the end, where it could've been utilized brilliantly...

I'm glad Campbell Broccoli aren't making the same mistake here. I think having the Bond theme at the very end will be very cool.
 
That was an awsome review. I never had a doubt that this flic would flop, it sounds like they are on track to bringing bond back the way he was made to. Bring it on :up:
 
No. This film is a Bond film, period. It brings back the quality and class of the 60s Bond movies. The correct term is, the less it feels like a crappby Bond movie ala the last couple of Brosnan movies the better.

As for the last line, the entire set up sounds incredible.
 
Exactly. As long as they have translated the character from the book in a faithful manner then i am happy. And aslong as they get as far away as possible to the Brosnan films.
owever, i don't think they should be making such a big deal of the fact this is some sort of re-boot or new direction. It's like ok, we get it.

But Craig, i am assured, is brilliant
 
AWESOME!!! One of the, if not best, scripts I have ever read. Glad to hear that it's been perfectly (or near perfectly) brought to life on the silver screen.
 
Nice review, CR sounds like it won't dissapoint.
 
Other than the "Bond, James Bond" line, what's the other line involving "*****" that everyone's looking forward to?
 
I'm actually looking forward to the conversation with Bond and vesper having dinner,

"It doesn't bother you?, killing all those people?"

"Well i wouldn't be very good at my job if it did"
 
Hmm a Bond film without it actually being anything like a Bond film

Interesting
 
The more and see and hear of Casino Royale, the more I'm convinced it's a return to the classy, restrained style of the 60's movies (sans the sci-fi elements like lasers and secret bases full of technology).

Which is wonderful.

However, these things go in cycles, and scaling Bond down in 1974 with The Man with the Golden Gun almost ended the series, so The Spy Who Loved Me was a return to the You Only Love Twice style epic Bond extravaganza. Don't for a minute believe we won't see that style again.
 
Kevin Roegele said:
However, these things go in cycles, and scaling Bond down in 1974 with The Man with the Golden Gun almost ended the series, so The Spy Who Loved Me was a return to the You Only Love Twice style epic Bond extravaganza. Don't for a minute believe we won't see that style again.

But at least The Spy Who Loved Me was a good movie...
 
Kevin Roegele said:
The more and see and hear of Casino Royale, the more I'm convinced it's a return to the classy, restrained style of the 60's movies (sans the sci-fi elements like lasers and secret bases full of technology).

Which is wonderful.

However, these things go in cycles, and scaling Bond down in 1974 with The Man with the Golden Gun almost ended the series, so The Spy Who Loved Me was a return to the You Only Love Twice style epic Bond extravaganza. Don't for a minute believe we won't see that style again.

There's nothing particularly wrong with the style other than going to far, becoming excessive with it ala DAD. Moderation is the key word here. I'm all for outrageous gadgets and gizmos and whatnot but within moderation and not to the point where it becomes horendously absurd.:up:
 
After reading this "review" and the other one of the rough cut over at Ain't it Cool, I'm afraid the anti-Craig crowd (myself included) is right. This ain't no Bond film. Certainly not in the classic sense anyway. If this is what EON wishes to morph "James Bond" into, then that's their business. However, for those of us who like him just the way he is, this is the death knell. It'll be interesting to see if Joe-movie-goer embraces it. I doubt it'll fly.
 
Thot said:
This ain't no Bond film. Certainly not in the classic sense anyway.
Well, wasn't the goal to do something different? We've had 20 films of nearly the same-old cardboard Bond, so why not actually do something a little more unique?

And what makes it "not Bondian" (aside from Craig's casting, as you would undoubtedly cite as reason #1)?

If this is what EON wishes to morph "James Bond" into, then that's their business.
Ever read Ian Fleming's Bond - the one that started it all? That was the precedent for this version of 007, and thus has all the credibility in the world as being a legitimate interpretation of the character.
 
Agentsands77 said:
Well, wasn't the goal to do something different? We've had 20 films of nearly the same-old cardboard Bond, so why not actually do something a little more unique?

And what makes it "not Bondian" (aside from Craig's casting, as you would undoubtedly cite as reason #1)?


Ever read Ian Fleming's Bond - the one that started it all? That was the precedent for this version of 007, and thus has all the credibility in the world as being a legitimate interpretation of the character.

Well, we'll see how Craig-faced Bond compares box-office wise with "cardboard Bond". It all boils down to the dollars. That alone will determine whether DC succeeds or fails as JB.
 
Thot said:
Well, we'll see how Craig-faced Bond compares box-office wise with "cardboard Bond". It all boils down to the dollars. That alone will determine whether DC succeeds or fails as JB.
Of course it's the ticket sales that determine whether the venture was a success, but that doesn't determine whether CASINO ROYALE is a legitimate interpretation of James Bond as a character.
 
Maybe those who are concerned with thinking Craig can't be Bond because they do not feel he is attractive enough, maybe they don't care so much about the character as they do with being ATTRACTED to the men who play him. Kind of worries me a little bit that this might be the reason behind their negative comments.
 
I'm very curious to see the final product. Judging from the pictures and trailer, I'm very impressed by the overall visual perspective and how it appears to have more a gritty tone to it.

I feel(with the exception of GoldenEye) the next James Bonds after GoldenEye began to get very stupid, cliche, campy, and more about the wicked action instead of the stealthy espionage aspect that makes James Bond unique.

GoldenEye is my favorite James Bond with Bronsan. Afterwards as I said, it just began to get predictable, boring, and stupid.

I believe Craig will do an amazing job. Give him a chance at least.
 
Thot said:
After reading this "review" and the other one of the rough cut over at Ain't it Cool, I'm afraid the anti-Craig crowd (myself included) is right. This ain't no Bond film. Certainly not in the classic sense anyway. If this is what EON wishes to morph "James Bond" into, then that's their business. However, for those of us who like him just the way he is, this is the death knell. It'll be interesting to see if Joe-movie-goer embraces it. I doubt it'll fly.

Your missing the point. CR is doing exactly what you said it isn't doing and thats, a return to classic Bond. The last few Bond movies have been absoloute crap and a huge departure from anything remotely related to classic Bond. CR is the Bond series' redemption movie
 
Jack Napier said:
Other than the "Bond, James Bond" line, what's the other line involving "*****" that everyone's looking forward to?

The last line of the book:

The ***** is dead.
 
Based on this review the movie sounds great. I hope it can live up to my expectations.
 
Well Felix Leiter you old fraud.

in my opinion...so far so good..
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"