Mentok
Avenger
- Joined
- May 1, 2003
- Messages
- 20,647
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
James"007"Bond said:Not only do I beg to differ but......
this single pic all by its lonesome whipes its ass with what you think
That is Bond
James"007"Bond said:Not only do I beg to differ but......
this single pic all by its lonesome whipes its ass with what you think
Uh, Craig as Bond has been on the cover of EMPIRE, TOTAL FILM, and now will be showcased on ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY. Hardly "no buzz." But then again, DIE ANOTHER DAY wasn't exactly one of the most anticipated films of the year, either, and that did excellently.Thot said:EON has really blown it. No one seems to care. Three months away and there's no buzz.
Not really (and there's only been one trailer, anyway). Just the other day a friend came up to me and said, "Have you seen the previews for CASINO ROYALE? Awesome."The trailers are embarrassing for all involved.
Only if you mean by that he looks so cool in it he makes Brosnan look laughable in comparison.Craig in the tux is hilarious.
Uh, how does the US teaser poster hide Craig's features at all, may I ask? Everything is absolutely, 100% visible.The current one sheets are also quite funny as it is painfully obvious they're trying to hide DC's ugly mug!
You've said it before, and the exact same words. We get that you think he doesn't work in the tux, even though you're clearly exaggerating (it's not as if he's an eyesore in the tux, no matter what you say).Two Face said:Sorry but Craig is ****e in the tux.
Umm, CASINO ROYALE is a pretty darn faithful adaptation of Fleming's novel.Renegade said:Regardless, though, I will not be seeing this movie. They already have 2 other Casino Royale movies, and this one won't be anything like the book, so why name it that? I don't know, but this movie just feels weird to me, like a tie game or kissing your sister.
Agentsands77 said:Umm, CASINO ROYALE is a pretty darn faithful adaptation of Fleming's novel.
Wrong. I've read the script. I'd say I have a pretty good idea of the faithfulness of the film to the novel. A far better idea than you do, at any rate.Renegade said:1st of all, you have no idea if that is true or not. You haven't seen the movie, and neither have I.
Well, take the book as the second half of the movie, and then add a new first half which sets-up the material taken from the book. The action sequences in the trailers fit into the first half of the film.2nd, my point is that the book is almost action-less. My father and I have both read it and have NO idea where all of the action in the trailers is coming from... no explosions or anything like that in the book. Not to mention, we both LOVED the book, but couldn't possibly imagine a movie made from it. It would be borderline boring. I mean, most of the book is subtle spy work and is not an explosive, action-oriented narrative.
You have yet to provide any reason for that beyond Craig's hair color.All I'm saying is that I have absolutely no interest in seeing this. Not only can't I imagine any sort of accuracy, if it WERE accurate, I wouldn't want to see the movie.
Renegade said:For the record: I am not bashing this movie!! It very well could be a good movie, that isn't my point. I was just simply saying I have little or no interest in seeing it, and that is coming from a huge Bond fan. There is just something about it that just... irks me.
I'll take Craig, thank you very much.super_fan said:For fans that imagine what a Pierce Brosnan Casino Royale would be like, here's the teaser poster....
"Shaken... not stirred."
Image 'enhanced' by yours truly.