Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: RE:

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: RE: Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: RE: - 6/12/2006 4:26:52 AM   
lovebhadz

 

Posts: 20
Joined: 30/11/2006
After Casino Royale..watch another thriller movie that can make you SHAKE?? Go and watch London to Brighton..Excellent flick!

(in reply to Hartigan)
Post #: 361
RE: Casino Royale - 6/12/2006 8:42:16 AM   
dasboot17

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 6/12/2006
Hello, yesterday evening we went to see the latest Bond film. It is an excellent action-packed, well-made film, but we tried and tried and tried (and in the end failed) to see how it could be considered a valid part of the Bond film series. Quite by chance, there was an airing of Die Another Day on one of the channels later on. Admittedly the worst Brosnan effort, it still had most of the tried-and-tested parts of the recipe, which are sadly lacking in Casino Royale. By getting a double dose of Bond, we were able to pinpoint all the facets which made us stay loyal to the films for so long, through thick and thin, so to speak.
Mr Craig is a fine actor, but he is definitely NOT Bond. Trivial details matter in such a franchise: the hair colour is all wrong, the head is too small for his body, the ears protrude like batwings. Did anyone involved in casting actually bother to go back to the novels and read the Fleming descriptions of the main character? It is definitely a case where the film is made interesting through the bad guy and the supporting characters, M and Vesper being absolutely stellar in their respective roles.
Actually, as I kept mulling the problem of why this is a wonderfully action-packed spy movie but not a Bond film I had this flash of insight: could Ms Broccoli offer Sir Sean enough money to tempt him into playing the bad guy in the next 'Bond' film? It would be a wonderful full-circle and absolutely thrilling to see the famous craggy face with its modern beard and hear the rich, dark voice uttering threats and wiping the floor with the Liverpudlian-navvy before his eventual (and necessary) demise. Just a thought! Kindest regards all around

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 362
RE: Casino Royale - 6/12/2006 2:22:18 PM   
BobaJango


Posts: 7667
Joined: 31/12/2005
From: Mulder's basement
quote:

ORIGINAL: dasboot17

Hello, yesterday evening we went to see the latest Bond film. It is an excellent action-packed, well-made film, but we tried and tried and tried (and in the end failed) to see how it could be considered a valid part of the Bond film series. Quite by chance, there was an airing of Die Another Day on one of the channels later on. Admittedly the worst Brosnan effort, it still had most of the tried-and-tested parts of the recipe, which are sadly lacking in Casino Royale. By getting a double dose of Bond, we were able to pinpoint all the facets which made us stay loyal to the films for so long, through thick and thin, so to speak.
Mr Craig is a fine actor, but he is definitely NOT Bond. Trivial details matter in such a franchise: the hair colour is all wrong, the head is too small for his body, the ears protrude like batwings.


I didn't actually notice any of those things whilst watching the film. I spent most of the time thinking how stupid all those Craig-bashers must feel. To be honest, i'd have been a little disappointed if they'd gone the predictable route and cast someone like Clive Owen. Somebody like that would probably have done an ok job, but i doubt they'd be able to revive the franchise like Craig has. Brosnan was great but anyone who thinks he should have stayed on is living in a dreamworld!

_____________________________

"Don't worry. Won't insult legendary underworld solidarity by suggesting you surrender name without torture". - Rorschach (Watchmen).

(in reply to dasboot17)
Post #: 363
RE: Bloody WOW! - 6/12/2006 2:25:43 PM   
stargirl

 

Posts: 191
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Scotland
Ok, to start off i would like to say that i dont generally like bond films. this may be blasphemy, but i just dont care much for them and find them too formulaic. but i really liked this, so much i saw it twice.
craig was excellent - not only was he at times harsher and harder than the other bonds, but at times he was softer and likeable as he (shock horror) actually fell madly in love with someone. in short, he was no longer one dimensional, he was human.
and i really liked eva green as vesper lynd - an interesting, beautiful, witty, sharp and complex bond-woman (rather than girl) who didnt stand for any of bond's crap.
the action sequences were really well done, but didnt scarifice character development or story. and dame judi was great as always.
a solid 4 stars from me too.

(in reply to lovebhadz)
Post #: 364
RE: Bloody WOW! - 6/12/2006 5:19:03 PM   
BobaJango


Posts: 7667
Joined: 31/12/2005
From: Mulder's basement
quote:

ORIGINAL: stargirl

Ok, to start off i would like to say that i dont generally like bond films. this may be blasphemy, but i just dont care much for them and find them too formulaic. but i really liked this, so much i saw it twice.
craig was excellent - not only was he at times harsher and harder than the other bonds, but at times he was softer and likeable as he (shock horror) actually fell madly in love with someone. in short, he was no longer one dimensional, he was human.
and i really liked eva green as vesper lynd - an interesting, beautiful, witty, sharp and complex bond-woman (rather than girl) who didnt stand for any of bond's crap.
the action sequences were really well done, but didnt scarifice character development or story. and dame judi was great as always.
a solid 4 stars from me too.


I wouldn't go that far (despite being a fan myself). I agree with your point about Vesper Lynd, in my opinion the best Bond girl by a long-shot!

_____________________________

"Don't worry. Won't insult legendary underworld solidarity by suggesting you surrender name without torture". - Rorschach (Watchmen).

(in reply to stargirl)
Post #: 365
RE: Bloody WOW! - 6/12/2006 8:24:02 PM   
Sumintelligentguy


Posts: 3743
Joined: 31/8/2006
What about pussy galore

_____________________________

"Snake? Snaaaake? SNAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE!?"

R.I.P. Punchy

(in reply to BobaJango)
Post #: 366
RE: Bloody WOW! - 6/12/2006 8:39:37 PM   
TheManWithNoShame


Posts: 6767
Joined: 1/8/2006
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sumintelligentguy

What about pussy galore


To be honest, the only thing memorable about her is her name.
In my opinion, Honey Ryder, Tatiana Romanova and Domino are far sexier. And of course Diana Rigg's Tracy DiVicenzo is probably the best Bond girl of them all.

_____________________________

sorry jbg :( i promise to stop being such a silly boy.

(in reply to Sumintelligentguy)
Post #: 367
The best action movie of the year - 6/12/2006 11:35:56 PM   
britesparc


Posts: 2058
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Manchester
Casino Royale begins in tremendously exciting fashion and, for at least the next two hours, doesn’t let up. It is, simply put, a roller coaster ride; and frankly that is what a good Bond film should be. Even when the plots were ropy, the least you could say about Brosnan’s stint in the tux was that his movies were exciting. Well, Casino Royale is about double-oh-seven times more exciting than pretty much any Bond film ever, certainly any in the last few years. From a suave yet brutal opening documenting Bond’s first kills, it hooks you from the get go with its combination of noir-ish sensibilities and brutal action. But it’s when Bond starts free-running around a building site, chasing his suspect up cranes across scaffold, that the movie transcends its spy-yarn origins, and becomes something more. This is a blinding, brilliant piece of action cinema, easily the best scene this year; in fact, it’s difficult to think of a more surprising, refreshing, and alarming action movie of recent years apart from the Bourne Identity, which this superficially resembles in style if not in plot. Even when the action takes a back seat to the poker, the film remains tense and thrilling, without resorting to standard Western poker-match clichés. What’s even more surprising is that it’s not only exciting and action packed, but it gets under your skin, too – and most of the credit for that is down to Daniel Craig. His is a Bond like no other – suave and quick-witted, sure, and a fine action hero, but he’s also a crafty, bitter little bugger, and his fights are taught, brutal affairs where the audience feels every punch, kick and fall. It’s a very visceral experience, and one you’re not likely to forget. However, Craig goes deeper, much deeper, in fact than any Bond before him: for this is as much a psychological experience as a physical one. The roots of Bond’s cool exterior, as well as his penchant for misogyny, are explored; we also get to see a little inside his head, feel what he feels after he’s just killed a man with his bare hands. Like many of the characters in the film, Bond constantly wears a mask; his is a poker face, protecting his psyche from the world. He layers up his armour, disguising himself as a brutal field agent, until Vesper comes along to take it all away, make him vulnerable and human again. It’s a terrific performance, and one which bodes well for the future of the franchise. Overall, these elements combine to produce a truly terrific film; unfortunately, it’s all let down somewhat by an ending that goes on far too long, after the meat of the narrative has been seen, after the plot has, for the most part, climaxed. It’s a pity it couldn’t have been a tidier, neater, quicker ending, because the film isn’t too long, as such – it’s just a wee bit messy around the tail end. It doesn’t make the film any less great in the long run, it just denies it that extra star, puts a dent in its glossy finish. But make no mistakes – not only is Bond back, but he’s looking sprightlier and more exciting than he has since, ooh, the early sixties.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 368
RE: The best action movie of the year - 7/12/2006 11:39:30 AM  1 votes
MR T's GOLD CHAINS

 

Posts: 262
Joined: 9/10/2005
Casino Royale rocked hard! Great freakin Bond movie man! I love the
chase scene where Bond is chasing the African dude thru the city using
parkour style moves and that crane scene was straight out of True Lies
I swear! haha! No I loved it, Daniel Craig was awesome and so was the
girl who played Vespa. Now this is what the Brosnan films shoulda been
like! We've been treated to the world of  more 'realistic' spies with 24,
Jack Ryan and the Splinter Cell games and this is closer to anything a real
spy might actually be like! F**king great movie mate! Best Bond movie
for at least 20 years.

(in reply to britesparc)
Post #: 369
What the?? - 7/12/2006 2:40:42 PM   
ddude700

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 4/12/2006
Is everyone blind? This is one of the worst films I have ever seen. Die another day was bad, but this is worse. Gritty? Bond is pathetic, the "torture" scene, great in the book, is so weak it is unspeakable, and the plot is about a card game. A CARD GAME. Not so much a "battle of the minds ", but a staring contest from an actor with all the emotional intesity of a dead chipmunk. The villan is useless, the girls weak and the last half an hour awful. Brosnan is sitting at home laughing, as we endure this. Overrated.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 370
RE: Casino Royale - 8/12/2006 7:06:03 PM   
spidie

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 8/12/2006
i loved it and i fancy the new james bond and i want tosleep with him and have sex

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 371
RE: What the?? - 8/12/2006 7:22:22 PM   
BobM70


Posts: 958
Joined: 29/12/2005
possible spoilers)
I went in with mixed feelings about this. I have always loved the Bond films, even the ones with Roger Moore. It has something to do with growing up with these films, them appealing to a 12 year old boy, but also to a 36 year old. The series has proved itself to be a constant succes for over more then 40 years.
But... with Die Another Day I became worried and sceptical. This was becoming almost as silly as Moonraker and I just didn't believe Brosnan as Bond anymore. It was becoming a farcical affair. I think it was the worst Bond film of em all.
So I was relieved and curious when a new Bond-actor was announced and with it a new spin on the formula. It would become grittier, faster, and less gimmicky. Knowing this I went to the cinema yesterday hoping the best, expecting the worst....

But how wrong I was... this is easily the best Bond in years and maybe even the best so far.
that's saying something, I know. I am very critical concerning films and I don't get carried awy this easily.
But here they did almost everything right.

You have to realise we are watching the Birth of Bond here. He kills his first man, he is accepting his firt 00 status assignment. When we are introduced, Bond is a blind projectile, a man with no name, no past. Just a man on his mission. They way the movie starts is phenomenal. The chase on the cranes and around the embassy is instant classic stuff. Imagine Moore or Brosnan trying to pull this off, No Way. This is the modern style Bond, more athletic, physical and relentless.
The way they worked the original novel is very good. There's no cold war, but we still have terrorists.
The Bondgirls are fine, but a lot less important to the story, James is shagging a lot less here. But Vesper is vital to the story here, and is presented with intelligence (watch the psycho-analytic dialogue in the train: superb scene).
Bond starts off reckless and blunt, he still has to be formed into the real 007. The scene with the defibrilator (actually the only real "gimmick" in it!) has Bond actually dying and being born again. This is a rather obvious symbolic tool, but very effective.
There may be some minor quibles like the corny dialogue in the shower (but wasn't this lifted straight from the novel?) and the Venice setpiece (rather ubelievable, but okay, it's still Bond; so...)
This is a superb new life injection to the series like Goldeneye was. let's hope they can keep it on level a lot longer...


Bob

_____________________________

It's not how long it takes, it's who's taking you...

(in reply to ddude700)
Post #: 372
RE: What the?? - 8/12/2006 8:43:17 PM   
Filmfan 2


Posts: 1049
Joined: 30/9/2005
Well, you can colour me converted.

I wasn't sure what to expect from Casino Royale, given that the bond franchise was going down the toilet fast - the less said about Brosnan's last effort the better!

However, what a breath of fresh air Casino Royale has injected back into the series!

This is what Bond was meant to be, not the hammy camp-fest that it had become. The film is brutally true depiction of Flemming's original character, and this was truly a joy to watch.

Sure, there was still far too much in the way of product placement (though some it was rather niftily done - surely Richard Branson deserves some kind of honourary oscar for all of the cameo's he's putting in?!), and the bad guy did lack a real sense of menace, but Casino Royale has streamlined the series, and got rid of everything that was beginning to weigh it down.

Daniel Craig was a real revelation in the role, and I hope it's put all of the nay-sayers remarks about him to rest.

The action was very well paced, and the stunts excellent. The film may have sagged a little as Bond seemed to 'retire', but it was an otherwise engaging watch throughout.

If they keep making them like this, Bond has a rosy future ahead of it.

4/5.



< Message edited by Filmfan 2 -- 8/12/2006 8:54:17 PM >


_____________________________

I am not drinkin' any fuckin' Merlot!

"All I wanted me was a piece of cornbread, you motherfuckers!"

Defender of all things Batman Begins


(in reply to BobM70)
Post #: 373
RE: Bloody WOW! - 9/12/2006 2:40:07 PM   
Benjamin Dover


Posts: 1798
Joined: 1/2/2006
Finally got the pick working...

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/4670/bondposter01ed4.jpg

< Message edited by Benjamin Dover -- 9/12/2006 2:41:20 PM >


_____________________________

6 Waffles now!!! (Thx Uncle Jun)

"Everyones dying to be a Zombie!"-Ted Striker

Keira Knightley talked to me! To me, by my name!!! (Yes online, but still, closest I'll ever get...)

(in reply to jimoakley666)
Post #: 374
People who bitch about Casino Royale... - 9/12/2006 2:52:36 PM   
mebbetheywasinjuns

 

Posts: 55
Joined: 20/9/2006
I know everyone's entitled to their opinion and all, and I also have great suspicion that people will post negative reviews just to bate sensible folk into an argument. But at the end of the day, anyone arguing that Royale is anything other than a huge step forward is quite probably retarded, and should go hang out with the other retards at danielcraigisnotbond.com, where you will no doubt find a brotherhood of retards and hope to crowned king of retards when you talk about Roger Moore being super-awesome and way cooler than Craig.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 375
RE: People who bitch about Casino Royale... - 9/12/2006 3:37:09 PM   
muse_nut18


Posts: 38
Joined: 7/9/2006
From: South Wales, Merthyr
Well to reply to something lil from the previous message...Roger Moore was a good Bond, I thought he did a good job.

Danial Craig was AWESOME! and the movie was f**king GREAT!!
See it now people, for those who havent yet...and yeah Danial Craig is the best Bond.

(in reply to mebbetheywasinjuns)
Post #: 376
RE: People who bitch about Casino Royale... - 9/12/2006 3:37:49 PM   
muse_nut18


Posts: 38
Joined: 7/9/2006
From: South Wales, Merthyr
Well to reply to something lil from the previous message...Roger Moore was a good Bond, I thought he did a good job.

Danial Craig was AWESOME! and the movie was f**king GREAT!!
See it now people, for those who havent yet...and yeah Danial Craig is the best Bond.

(in reply to mebbetheywasinjuns)
Post #: 377
RE: People who bitch about Casino Royale... - 9/12/2006 3:38:29 PM   
muse_nut18


Posts: 38
Joined: 7/9/2006
From: South Wales, Merthyr
Well to reply to something lil from the previous message...Roger Moore was a good Bond, I thought he did a good job.

Danial Craig was AWESOME! and the movie was f**king GREAT!!
See it now people, for those who havent yet...and yeah Danial Craig is the best Bond.

(in reply to mebbetheywasinjuns)
Post #: 378
RE: People who bitch about Casino Royale... - 9/12/2006 9:04:27 PM   
Sumintelligentguy


Posts: 3743
Joined: 31/8/2006
Muse_nut, i SAW MUSE LIVE THE OTHER WEEK!!! they were awesome!!!

_____________________________

"Snake? Snaaaake? SNAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE!?"

R.I.P. Punchy

(in reply to muse_nut18)
Post #: 379
RE: People who bitch about Casino Royale... - 9/12/2006 11:55:35 PM   
MattTheBadger

 

Posts: 108
Joined: 23/4/2006
I'm sure this has been covered somewhere in the last 13 pages or so, so won't kid myself that this is a new addition to the debate. In the main, I thought this was terrific - Daniel Craig is the best bond since Connery, which is normally the kind of hyperbole I steer clear from (but then I thought Brosnan was a bit over-rated, mainly because of the ever-present and increasinlgy ludicrous bouffant 'do). The first hour and a half also represented the best Bond since "Live and Let Die" - I wasn't convinced by the whole "Batman Begins"-style reinvention that was promised but the series seemed totally revitalised, real taut "feel-it-in-the-pit-of-your-stomach" action scenes and probably the first time in my lifetime (I'm 32) that Bond has seemed an actual character rather than a conduit for admittedly marvellous stunts, gadgets, one-liners, and babes (but also doing all that as well). God, I was happy. And then...

A bullet in Le Chiffre's forehead - and total carnage ensued. The last 30 minutes had the curse of post-test-screening re-write slapped all over it. The love/recuperation sequence was as bad as "Attack of the Clones" (I know, spot the 30-something desperate for his childhood favourites to reignite themselves); the collapsing house was a mess, and if M's speech revealing that Vesper actually wasn't such a bad old stick wasn't just tacked on after a bunch of MidWestern rednecks couldn't cope with the theory that Bond was getting shafted all along, I'll eat my defribillator.

But then I've theorised that most modern films are about 20 minutes too long ever since sleeping through "40-Year-Old Virgin". Am I thinking too much?

(in reply to Sumintelligentguy)
Post #: 380
RE: People who bitch about Casino Royale... - 10/12/2006 11:37:21 AM   
TheManWithNoShame


Posts: 6767
Joined: 1/8/2006
quote:

ORIGINAL: MattTheBadger

I'm sure this has been covered somewhere in the last 13 pages or so, so won't kid myself that this is a new addition to the debate. In the main, I thought this was terrific - Daniel Craig is the best bond since Connery, which is normally the kind of hyperbole I steer clear from (but then I thought Brosnan was a bit over-rated, mainly because of the ever-present and increasinlgy ludicrous bouffant 'do). The first hour and a half also represented the best Bond since "Live and Let Die" - I wasn't convinced by the whole "Batman Begins"-style reinvention that was promised but the series seemed totally revitalised, real taut "feel-it-in-the-pit-of-your-stomach" action scenes and probably the first time in my lifetime (I'm 32) that Bond has seemed an actual character rather than a conduit for admittedly marvellous stunts, gadgets, one-liners, and babes (but also doing all that as well). God, I was happy. And then...

A bullet in Le Chiffre's forehead - and total carnage ensued. The last 30 minutes had the curse of post-test-screening re-write slapped all over it. The love/recuperation sequence was as bad as "Attack of the Clones" (I know, spot the 30-something desperate for his childhood favourites to reignite themselves); the collapsing house was a mess, and if M's speech revealing that Vesper actually wasn't such a bad old stick wasn't just tacked on after a bunch of MidWestern rednecks couldn't cope with the theory that Bond was getting shafted all along, I'll eat my defribillator.

But then I've theorised that most modern films are about 20 minutes too long ever since sleeping through "40-Year-Old Virgin". Am I thinking too much?


I agree in part. Casino Royale could have definitely done with 20 minutes shaved off of it, and the whole ending was definitely too long, and it would have been better for Vesper to be a proper traitor.
I did however think the Venice scene was very good, and the special effects team in that really outdone themselves. Plus the last sequence in the film sort of made up for the overlong romance we had seen before, so Im not too bothered.

_____________________________

sorry jbg :( i promise to stop being such a silly boy.

(in reply to MattTheBadger)
Post #: 381
- 10/12/2006 8:14:08 PM   
solo77

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 12/9/2006

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 382
RE: Bloody WOW! - 12/12/2006 1:07:41 PM   
Flow_Forever


Posts: 241
Joined: 6/12/2005
From: Newcastle
I think 'Casino Royale' has many good moments and nice touches. I thought the Noir opening was particularly wonderful. But I think the filmmakers failed to really shape them into a streamlined, cohesive film. The film can be divided into three acts and none of them really sit well together. Bond goes through too many character shifts and, though the plot is enjoyably daft, it's presented seriously. Although Roger Moore is widely derided by Bond purists, I think he remains the only actor who understood you can only really perform this material with a wink and smile.

A decent attempt to modernize the franchise, but give me Rodge throwing a Chinaman into a piano, raising his eyebrow and quipping 'Play It Again San,' any day...

(in reply to lovebhadz)
Post #: 383
Bond 21 - 12/12/2006 7:21:33 PM   
A Man

 

Posts: 20
Joined: 1/11/2006
At last a Bond movie worth watching its been a few years but its here violent dark and explosive

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 384
disappointing - 13/12/2006 10:13:04 AM   
MOTH

 

Posts: 3479
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Sittin' on the dock of the bay
Disappointed with this latest Bond effort. If it weren't for the excellent Daniel Craig in the Bond role, this film would have died on its feet. As it is, his presence is just enough to carry the film, despite it being a badly structured, weakly plotted, generic actioner.

Eva Green was also very good in the intriguing role of Vesper Lynd, whose relationship with Bond formed the most interesting part of the film until the plot completely undermines her character by making her act stupidly all of a sudden.

And most disappointing of all was the central card game which was utterly bereft of tension. Poker naturally lends itself to building tension as opponents pit their wits against one another. The Sting, The Cinninatti Kid and countless others managed it -even Only Fools and Horses generated a more exciting card game in the episode where Boycie and Del played poker. Sadly, director Campbell fails to recognise this to the extent that he even inserted an utterly needless action set piece in the middle of the game, seemingly under the impression that his audience might get bored by a simple card game. 

All in all, not the return to the glory days of Goldfinger, Thunderball etc. that everyone says it is.

_____________________________

I've only gone and set up a blog! This week I've been mostly reviewing The Lego Movie and Wadjda. Click: The Fast Picture Show

(in reply to Flow_Forever)
Post #: 385
RE: Bond 21 - 13/12/2006 1:04:38 PM   
Hemlock


Posts: 61
Joined: 30/9/2005
As an action movie 3/5. As the action sequences were good if ripped off from the likes of District 13 and the Transporter but looses two stars for being overlong, poorly edited and relatively plotless with chunky script and delivery.
As a Bond movie 2/5. I have had much more enjoyable evenings in the company of Mr. Bond.
I hope in Bond 22 they employ a better script, and a crisper editing style and that Craig is given the chance to play a more urbane and sophisticated Bond. 



_____________________________

Some people are like Slinkies . . . not really good for anything, but you still can't help but giggle when you see one tumble down the stairs.

(in reply to A Man)
Post #: 386
RE: Bond 21 - 13/12/2006 2:06:36 PM   
Alice Ayres

 

Posts: 167
Joined: 28/11/2006
From: Right here baby!
Not sure if this is necessary but SPOILERS.
 
Saw this film last week and as an action film I would give it a 4/5, but as a Bond film, 3/5. I understand that theyre taking bond down this edgy, gritty road now, but seeing  the attempts at a new bond makes me long for the days of goldfinger. Camp villans, straight forward bond girls and a plot that can be summed up on the back of a postage stamp. Don't get me wrong, I not saying bond films shouldnt have brains as well as balls, but this just didn't strike me as a James Bond film. It could have been any decent action film of the past 5 years.
I didn't like the fact that they made Vesper out to be a villan, only to then backtrack and reveal that she wasn't a proper one, it would have been so much better if she's stabbed him in the back good and proper, it would have given Bond a tougher edge for future films. I was also unimpressed with the lead villan, Le Chiffre. He just wasn't threatening enough.
However, the action (especially the scene with the free runner at the start) was excellent, Daniel Craig was fantastic in the role and I have to give the film makers credit for so successfully pulling off a complete change of style and tone.
Quibbles aside, I think peoples opinion of this film comes down to taste. The film itself was good enough but imo youll either appreciate the new james bond, or your pining after the days of 'sean connery' (insert your fav bond name here) 

_____________________________

"Dream as if you'll live forever, live as if you'll die tomorrow."

"Lying is the most fun a girl can have without taking her clothes off."

(in reply to Hemlock)
Post #: 387
RE: Casino Royale - 14/12/2006 6:38:02 PM   
rockerjo


Posts: 177
Joined: 7/12/2006
What a great movie! I really think Daniel Craig is a good actor but maybe he didnt suit the roll as James Bond.

_____________________________

Naruto 2 * * *
Talledaega Nights: Ballad Of Ricky Bobby * * * *
The End Of Evangelion * * * * *
Out Of Time * * * *


"If you were in your office we would be having this conversation face to face"

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 388
RE: Casino Royale - 15/12/2006 12:44:20 AM   
Paul2j

 

Posts: 107
Joined: 30/9/2005
Nay crap Empire 'timing out' thing.

< Message edited by Paul2j -- 15/12/2006 12:48:46 AM >

(in reply to rockerjo)
Post #: 389
RE: Casino Royale - 15/12/2006 12:47:29 AM   
Paul2j

 

Posts: 107
Joined: 30/9/2005
The best Bond film for a LONG time. Craig conveys grittiness, and actually looks like a bastard assassin who doesn't care - something Brosnan and Dalton really, really don't. It's clear that the Bourne films have really had an influence on this 'new' Bond - and it's for the better. The film is really varied, and kept my attention throughout.

8/10

(in reply to rockerjo)
Post #: 390
Page:   <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: RE: Page: <<   < prev  11 12 [13] 14 15   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.143