RE: 007 Is Back!

Follow @empiremagazine

Forum Home

Register for Free!

Log In

Moderator Tickets

FAQ

Users Online

RE: 007 Is Back!

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: 007 Is Back!

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: 007 Is Back! - 18/11/2006 12:24:59 PM

FrenchMachine

Posts: 149
Joined: 1/5/2006

James Bond has returned.

Right, I've seen it now! I'm not gonna post a really in depth review because there are enough on here already. All I can say is Casino Royale is excellent.

Saw it with my bro who is also a big 007 fan and we both loved it. After the truly awful Die Another Day our hopes for a new Bond were not high.

Daniel Craig quite simply is James Bond. Through and through. My initial fears about him being cast were forgotten completely within the first 5 mins. Bond's dialogue is perfect for once. His attitude towards everything is spot on. I loved the part where he just runs straight through a studded wall, where as the guy he is chasing does a fancy up and over jump! Classic Bond moment. And particularly the cock ups he makes, rolling too far and falling off the roof, not shooting the security camera, losing his gun at a critical moment etc. All make him that little bit more believable. Up until now Bond has pretty much been invincible, which makes him a tad boring to watch, so it is a refreshing change.

The humour in the film is great, never too much as to throw the scene away which constantly happened in Brosnans movies. And people laugh at the "little finger" line because it is funny, not because its daft. Anyone who thinks that just aint got a good sense of humour.
And the torture scene is a real highlight. Any bloke watching knows what a punishment that would be, but the mocking lines that Bond delivers just make him even more arrogant and infuriating to his nemesis. Great scene.

Good story, not the best, but sufficient. Excellent action sequences. The building site chase seems to be popular with everyone but also the runway sequence is first rate, even though the tanker would blatantly have blown up because of the amount of fuel pouring out of it during the crashes!!!

The lack of gadgets and Q branch are a real benefit to the story. I really hope they leave that stuff out now. If they introduce it again it will completely undo what they have accomplished with Casino Royale. The only gadgety quibble I have with Casino Royale is the defibrilator that Bond just so happens to have in his Aston!!! Huh??? But I can live with that.

Product placement was a little OTT. Ford definitely had a big deal on this movie. Ford, Aston and Jaguar (All Ford owned) all used, everyone has Vaio Laptops and Bond even namechecks his Omega watch!!!

The titles were kind of weird but I liked them. Again, they are trying to be different. And I have no complaints about the theme. Modern, loud and briskly paced (Plus I like Soundgarden & Audioslave!). Different from the norm which is what 007 needs.

Anyway, I could go on. Not a perfect movie, there is no such thing, and we are all different and have our own opinions. But still excellent. However, I will say that after reading some of the posts on this thread that are slating Casino Royale, most of you people were never going to like it. You either don't like Bond full stop, or you have gone in to see it with the wrong frame of mind, looking to dislike it and point out plot holes and gripes.

I can't wait to see it again, and can't wait for Bond 22. Done with same attention as this movie, it will be a real treat.

Oh, and Bond movies are still British all the way!!!

< Message edited by FrenchMachine -- 18/11/2006 3:00:32 PM >

_____________________________

This stuff will make you a God damn sexual Tyrannosaurus..................Just like me!!!

(in reply to 02PARSIM)

Post #: 121

RE: 007 Is Back! - 18/11/2006 12:59:18 PM

Icarus_Fire

Posts: 1
Joined: 18/11/2006

It's a messy film, but that doesn't really matter. It feels a bit episodic and doesn't quite gel together, but there are loads of positives about it.

I was actually a bit worried following the trailer; I had faith in Dan Craig but it seemed like they hadn't really changed much despite continued promises. But then I saw it and halelujah! Bond's actually a real character! The Bond girl is required to do some acting! Not a gadget in sight! Even more impressively, he actually uses his brain once or twice. And Paul Haggis on script finishing duty is genius, the scrpit is arguably the most noticeable and drastic improvement on previous Bond movies, darkening the tone to a much grittier, intense and ironically therefore refreshing entry in the canon .

As said, it's messy, but Craig's performance overcomes all that. In as far as representing the Bond of the books goes, his is arguably the best showing thus far in the franchise. He doesn't come across as a noble connoisseur doing it all for queen and country, he's actually human - when he demands more money to beat Le Chiffre it isn't because he has a plan or wants to complete the mission, it's because his pride is hurt. He's naive and hotheaded and needs people to keep him in check. And he's the most brutal Bond yet, but killing still has a effect on him. It helps that his main battle with the villain is one of psychology and nerves, not brawn or gadgets. Added to this are the delightful support, Eva Green is the most engaging Bond girl in a long time and even the smaller parts like Mathis and Felix Leiter are a joy to behold. Finally, the action is bang up to scratch, and although it may sit awakwardly with the more ponderous nature of the rest of the film, pure entertainment value nullifies that.

If I have a minor gripe it's that Mads Mikkelson doesn't get enough screen time. He is so good as Le Chiffre it's just a shame we don't see more of him, although I could wax lyrical about the torture scene and his crackling chemistry with Craig all day.

The film itself is rather like it's main character, not quite the polished article but so engaging it's pointless complaining.

(in reply to FrenchMachine)

Post #: 122

RE: 007 Is Back! - 18/11/2006 1:11:15 PM

ollie_jones

Posts: 245
Joined: 31/12/2005
From: Birmingham, Uk

Heres my two cents...

I loved Goldeneye, but I thought the last three were awful. I was so pleased when Martin Campbell was announced to direct... and thank Christ he didn't let me down.

Great restart to the franchise, Craig could well be one of the best Bonds; he has it all going for him. He has the charm, the humour and god damn is he bastard. There�s a few one liners thought, but Craig doesn�t really play them too much for laughs so they are pretty subtle, but funny none the less. Bond also shows a compassionate side as well, and it�s from this in which his anger comes from. Also something worth pointing out is how much bond gets fucked around.... lots of his own blood is shed. For once Bond is a human!

I loved how they introduced everything into the movie, from the gun pov /blood shot, the Austin martin and the tux etc. The action was great, of course it was over the top as with every bond film but didn�t involve bond having to suddenly develop a new skill in which to him having to use a unique skill he just does it his own way. For example he chases one of those free jumpers earlier in the film, with bond in hot pursuit, only a lot less graceful!

The story and script are solid. Nothing to spectacular or mind blowing, but it�s told incredibly well, however it does start to drag in the last act but thats only a small gripe. Visually it�s a hell of a lot more gritty, and has some really nice camera work. All in all a very successful reboot!

_____________________________

http://www.betterfeelingfilms.com

(in reply to Icarus_Fire)

Post #: 123

RE: 007 Is Back! - 18/11/2006 2:20:01 PM

Private Hudson

Posts: 1720
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: FrenchMachine

However, I will say that after reading some of the posts on this thread that are slating Casino Royale, you people were never going to like it. You either don't like Bond full stop, or you have gone in to see it with the wrong frame of mind, looking to dislike it and point out plot holes and gripes.

I think your above comment displays immaturity.

I thought the film was merely okay, not the brilliant return of GoldenEye.

I am as big a Bond fan as you will find and I went in with the same frame of mind I did when Living Daylights and GoldenEye came out. A new James Bond!

Daniel Craig was good as Bond (not the best since Connery as people are saying, because I am very much a fan of dear old Roger Moore, who for a whole generation WAS James Bond!).

Le Chiffre was wasted, in my opinion. Mads was an excellent choice.

Eva Green was beautiful also, and the poker scenes were the best bits in the movie.

GRIPES
There was a lack of humour
No thrilling climax
Crap music (what I have come to expect from David Arnold)
a fecked up timeline (Judi Dench is M? The first Bond mission?)
and I actually didn't like the way we saw him getting the DB5 or the tux. Surely a man like Bond would either already have these traits or they would develop in time, not in the space of a few weeks?

Plus the whole dumping of his Royal Navy/WW2 heroics is a bit sad. I know the biography on the net show that he was in the Navy, but why no mention?

No Q, no Moneypenny....

In this case perhaps they followed the book (for the second half at least) far too closely.

Here's the rub:

The James Bond we know and love is NOT Fleming's Bond of the novels. It is the Bond of the screen: suave, debonair, a know-it-all, loyal and ruthless.

It is a risky thing to reboot the franchise in this way, and I hope it works. But I wonder how someone like Christopher Nolan would have approached it?

I just feel it was a missed opportunity.

It should have been set in the 50s or 60s.

_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0

(in reply to FrenchMachine)

Post #: 124

Casino Royale - 18/11/2006 2:49:58 PM

JACK M14

Posts: 52
Joined: 25/7/2006

After waiting a year to watch this film, I decided to watch it on the night of it's release and I'm glad I did. Never before have I gave a Bond film 5 stars, but this deserved it. Craig has taken the series by storm and is now on par with Sean Connery. I won't ruin it for you if you haven't seen it, but I will say that it is one of if not the greatest Bond movie.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 125

RE: 007 Is Back! - 18/11/2006 2:53:37 PM

FrenchMachine

Posts: 149
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson

quote:

ORIGINAL: FrenchMachine

However, I will say that after reading some of the posts on this thread that are slating Casino Royale, you people were never going to like it. You either don't like Bond full stop, or you have gone in to see it with the wrong frame of mind, looking to dislike it and point out plot holes and gripes.

I think your above comment displays immaturity.

I thought the film was merely okay, not the brilliant return of GoldenEye.

I am as big a Bond fan as you will find and I went in with the same frame of mind I did when Living Daylights and GoldenEye came out. A new James Bond!

Daniel Craig was good as Bond (not the best since Connery as people are saying, because I am very much a fan of dear old Roger Moore, who for a whole generation WAS James Bond!).

Le Chiffre was wasted, in my opinion. Mads was an excellent choice.

Eva Green was beautiful also, and the poker scenes were the best bits in the movie.

GRIPES
There was a lack of humour
No thrilling climax
Crap music (what I have come to expect from David Arnold)
a fecked up timeline (Judi Dench is M? The first Bond mission?)
and I actually didn't like the way we saw him getting the DB5 or the tux. Surely a man like Bond would either already have these traits or they would develop in time, not in the space of a few weeks?

Plus the whole dumping of his Royal Navy/WW2 heroics is a bit sad. I know the biography on the net show that he was in the Navy, but why no mention?

No Q, no Moneypenny....

In this case perhaps they followed the book (for the second half at least) far too closely.

Here's the rub:

The James Bond we know and love is NOT Fleming's Bond of the novels. It is the Bond of the screen: suave, debonair, a know-it-all, loyal and ruthless.

It is a risky thing to reboot the franchise in this way, and I hope it works. But I wonder how someone like Christopher Nolan would have approached it?

I just feel it was a missed opportunity.

It should have been set in the 50s or 60s.

Edited: Please refrain from making personal attacks.

< Message edited by darkcloud -- 27/11/2006 1:32:52 PM >

_____________________________

This stuff will make you a God damn sexual Tyrannosaurus..................Just like me!!!

(in reply to Private Hudson)

Post #: 126

RE: 007 Is Back! - 18/11/2006 2:56:22 PM

TheManWithNoShame

Posts: 6767
Joined: 1/8/2006

I agree with bits of what you are saying Private Hudson, but I think the point of this film is that Craig isnt playing him as the Bond we know until the end of the film when he has finally learnt his lessons and become the Bond we love.
I think there should have been a bit more Le Chiffre, although when he was on screen with Bond, those scenes were excellent. There was a very good chemistry between Craig and Mikkelson.
I thought Craig was excellent, different to Brosnan (who I believe has come under some unfair bashing in the last few months), but in a good way. Having watched FYEO yesterday, I believe he is a much superior Bond to Roger Moore, who looked as if he could be no threat to anyone.
Now for your gripes:

-I thought that there was quite a bit of humour, not the obvious bad one liners, but some more clever touches. The finger line, and the scratching line brought the house down. There was also some good banter between M and Bond, Eva and Bond and Le chiffre and Bond, something else that has been missing for a while.

-The music wasnt great, but it wasnt awful either. I was glad that they didnt feel the need to put music over everything. One thing that is startling about DN AND FRWL is that there are lots of silent periods which works well.

-The timeline means nothing really. I was glad they brought Judi Dench back as M, who cares if it clashes with Goldeneye, Bond has never really placed much on continuity. Plus this is a reboot, not a prequel.

-Whats wrong with him getting the DB5? Plus I dont think a DB5 is a trait. How would you have wanted him to get it? Buying it? Q? Stealing it?
I thought winning it in a poker match was much more Bond-like. Also the tuxedo you can get anywhere, I dont see how that is a problem,

-Since when do the movies mention a lot of his Navy stuff, probably about 4 or 5. Its not really a big part of what he does. Him getting the double 0 staus is much more important.

-Q and Moneypenny probably wouldnt have fitted the film. Now Bond is a fully matured agent, they may appear in the next film. Possibly the 2 best Bond films didnt feature Q at all (DN AND FRWL)

I do have some of my own gripes with the film. I thought that they could have spread out the action. The parkour bit and the airport bit shouldnt have been noth right at the start. Also they could have explained a bit more about why he was chasing them before hand.
It did suffer from some lack of focus in the third act once Le Chiffre was gone, but it made up for it at the very end. The film was also 20 minutes too long, although I liked the poker scene and thought it was just the right length.
All in all, I thought it was the best Bond film since The Spy Who Loved Me, or at least since Goldeneye.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Private Hudson)

Post #: 127

RE: 007 Is Back! - 18/11/2006 2:59:27 PM

The Todge

Posts: 588
Joined: 30/9/2005

Nice to see you're still mixing things up around here Hudson.

First thing that struck me is that Craig is a Bond we can really believe in. He's not playing it as a superhero, he's playing it as a man. He gets hurt (quite severely too), he displays emotion and he's got the physique to pull off the action stuff, you really could see that this guy could take a few knocks and still keep going. He delivers and I really hope this shuts up his critcs. And the action btw, is first rate. Brutal and bloody with an intensity not seen since the days of Connery, in particular that stair well fight. The finale is a little bit of a let down, but only because the lead up to it was so bloody good. The poker tournament is really well handled a well, they managed to wring a lot of tension out of it. And Mads was superb, at last another really great Bond villain. And the end scene is great. I was grining all the way through this. It's exactly what I wanted, they've managed to bring back some spy elements and some intrigue as well, thank fuck for that. It's not all explained within the first few minutes so that we as an audience are waiting for Bond to catch up. And I didnt bemoan the abscence of Q or Moneypenny, the gadgets do have their own place in the Bond canon and should probably be reintroduced in soeme form later on, but even you Hudson must admit they just took it too far. From that point, there was nowhere to go but to strip the franchise back to it's basics. And for me, it works.

Connery will always be the best Bond for me, but Craig is a very strong contender. I just hope that they capitalise on this now and kick it up a level as the set up for the next one is superb. But in short, I was really pleased. Bond delivers.

_____________________________

THIS..............is God.

(in reply to Private Hudson)

Post #: 128

RE: 007 Is Back! - 18/11/2006 3:01:55 PM

FrenchMachine

Posts: 149
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: FrenchMachine

James Bond has returned.

Right, I've seen it now! I'm not gonna post a really in depth review because there are enough on here already. All I can say is Casino Royale is excellent.

Saw it with my bro who is also a big 007 fan and we both loved it. After the truly awful Die Another Day our hopes for a new Bond were not high.

Daniel Craig quite simply is James Bond. Through and through. My initial fears about him being cast were forgotten completely within the first 5 mins. Bond's dialogue is perfect for once. His attitude towards everything is spot on. I loved the part where he just runs straight through a studded wall, where as the guy he is chasing does a fancy up and over jump! Classic Bond moment. And particularly the cock ups he makes, rolling too far and falling off the roof, not shooting the security camera, losing his gun at a critical moment etc. All make him that little bit more believable. Up until now Bond has pretty much been invincible, which makes him a tad boring to watch, so it is a refreshing change.

The humour in the film is great, never too much as to throw the scene away which constantly happened in Brosnans movies. And people laugh at the "little finger" line because it is funny, not because its daft. Anyone who thinks that just aint got a good sense of humour.
And the torture scene is a real highlight. Any bloke watching knows what a punishment that would be, but the mocking lines that Bond delivers just make him even more arrogant and infuriating to his nemesis. Great scene.

Good story, not the best, but sufficient. Excellent action sequences. The building site chase seems to be popular with everyone but also the runway sequence is first rate, even though the tanker would blatantly have blown up because of the amount of fuel pouring out of it during the crashes!!!

The lack of gadgets and Q branch are a real benefit to the story. I really hope they leave that stuff out now. If they introduce it again it will completely undo what they have accomplished with Casino Royale. The only gadgety quibble I have with Casino Royale is the defibrilator that Bond just so happens to have in his Aston!!! Huh??? But I can live with that.

Product placement was a little OTT. Ford definitely had a big deal on this movie. Ford, Aston and Jaguar (All Ford owned) all used, everyone has Vaio Laptops and Bond even namechecks his Omega watch!!!

The titles were kind of weird but I liked them. Again, they are trying to be different. And I have no complaints about the theme. Modern, loud and briskly paced (Plus I like Soundgarden & Audioslave!). Different from the norm which is what 007 needs.

Anyway, I could go on. Not a perfect movie, there is no such thing, and we are all different and have our own opinions. But still excellent. However, I will say that after reading some of the posts on this thread that are slating Casino Royale, I think most of you people were never going to like it. You either don't like Bond full stop, or you have gone in to see it with the wrong frame of mind, looking to dislike it and point out plot holes and gripes.

I can't wait to see it again, and can't wait for Bond 22. Done with same attention as this movie, it will be a real treat.

Oh, and Bond movies are still British all the way!!!

Edited very slightly because of certain people.

< Message edited by FrenchMachine -- 18/11/2006 3:04:03 PM >

_____________________________

This stuff will make you a God damn sexual Tyrannosaurus..................Just like me!!!

(in reply to FrenchMachine)

Post #: 129

Bond as you have never seen him before. - 18/11/2006 3:57:01 PM

mikekell

Posts: 8
Joined: 18/11/2006

For those of us indoctrinated with the Bond of old this is a surprising and extraordinarily pleasing change of tack by the team behind one of cinemas most iconic characters.

From the very outset it is clear that Bond has undergone a transformation that is fundamentally at odds with the popcorn escapism of previous entries in the franchise.

The film opens with scenes that make it quite clear that Bond is in essence a diamond in the rough. An undisciplined thug and 007 wannabe, who has a gift for mayhem that has yet to translate into homicidal excess. He has little respect for authority and is prone to egotistical errors that come perilously close to self sabotage.

Daniel Craig is an outstanding choice for this change in direction. Handsome, edgy and animalistic, he has the physical presence and dramatic ability to deliver Bond on every level. His gravitas exudes from the screen and provides an acting pedigree previously unseen in the role.

In the early scenes his brutality and obvious unease with aspects of his own persona, in addition to the requirements of his chosen occupation are perfectly conveyed. His interplay with Eva Green (a well rounded female role that crackles with sexual frisson) is electric.

Indeed, it is her character that buys Bond his first fitted tux and begins his transformation from undisciplined hardman into the suave super spy that he will become.

In many ways this minor scene sums up the franchise itself and epitomises all that Craig brings to the mix.

In a wordless scene he simply puts on the tux for the first time and admires himself in the mirror. Physically he strikes an imposing figure. Every inch of him looks like a coiled spring ready to bust loose at any moment, and yet simultaneously he embodies a charm and savoir faire immediately at odds with his inner self.

A master class in the suffusion of the old Bond that we knew, and the reinvigorated Bond that we will come to adore.

What has been retained you may

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 130

Bond as you have never seen him before. (Pt 2) - 18/11/2006 4:05:34 PM

mikekell

Posts: 8
Joined: 18/11/2006

ask, or is this a new beast entirely?

Well, the good news is that it is the tone of the character rather than the ingredients of the movie itself that have changed.

The big stunts and set pieces are still largely intact, but tinged with a realism and danger that was sadly lacking from the CGI inspired stunts of some recent films from the Bond canon. The opening sequence in a building site has to be seen to be believed.

He still delivers a one liner (and yes I counted only one), but again this is delivered in a manner and situation that makes it seem like a statement of defiance, rather than a cheesy interjection of humour.

M (played by the excellent Judi Dench) is all present and correct, displaying much of the disdain for Bond that she brought to the role in her first outing, but adding an historical flesh to the bones of this dislike/admiration.

What is missing however is an over abundance of gadgets (the closest being the Aston Martin, which itself is destroyed in another example of a lack respect to the Bond of the past) or pointless flirtations with moneypenny.

Consequently, there is no Q either, and one has to wonder if this film is the death knell for John Cleese in the role. His reputation and legendary comedic status would seem irretrievably at odds with this new, darker interpretation of Fleming�s creation.

No naked silhouettes on the opening titles (which did seem strange I admit) or big thumping tune from the latest pop sensation are in evidence here. Instead, just an understated and one has to say somewhat boring intro to the worlds most famous spy.

In essence this is a new Bond movie experience. Many comparisons have been made with the Bourne movies (and rightly so as they are very similar in tone and execution).

However, that does not mean that it is a clone or carbon copy of Damon�s excellent movie franchise.

Indeed, to sum up I would say that if you took all of the best aspects of Bourne, and mixed them with all that we love about Bond, this movie is what you would end up with.

Go see it, you will not be disappointed.

< Message edited by mikekell -- 18/11/2006 4:09:08 PM >

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 131

RE: 007 Is Back! - 18/11/2006 4:10:19 PM

The Todge

Posts: 588
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: FrenchMachine

quote:

ORIGINAL: FrenchMachine

James Bond has returned.

Right, I've seen it now! I'm not gonna post a really in depth review because there are enough on here already. All I can say is Casino Royale is excellent.

Saw it with my bro who is also a big 007 fan and we both loved it. After the truly awful Die Another Day our hopes for a new Bond were not high.

Daniel Craig quite simply is James Bond. Through and through. My initial fears about him being cast were forgotten completely within the first 5 mins. Bond's dialogue is perfect for once. His attitude towards everything is spot on. I loved the part where he just runs straight through a studded wall, where as the guy he is chasing does a fancy up and over jump! Classic Bond moment. And particularly the cock ups he makes, rolling too far and falling off the roof, not shooting the security camera, losing his gun at a critical moment etc. All make him that little bit more believable. Up until now Bond has pretty much been invincible, which makes him a tad boring to watch, so it is a refreshing change.

The humour in the film is great, never too much as to throw the scene away which constantly happened in Brosnans movies. And people laugh at the "little finger" line because it is funny, not because its daft. Anyone who thinks that just aint got a good sense of humour.
And the torture scene is a real highlight. Any bloke watching knows what a punishment that would be, but the mocking lines that Bond delivers just make him even more arrogant and infuriating to his nemesis. Great scene.

Good story, not the best, but sufficient. Excellent action sequences. The building site chase seems to be popular with everyone but also the runway sequence is first rate, even though the tanker would blatantly have blown up because of the amount of fuel pouring out of it during the crashes!!!

The lack of gadgets and Q branch are a real benefit to the story. I really hope they leave that stuff out now. If they introduce it again it will completely undo what they have accomplished with Casino Royale. The only gadgety quibble I have with Casino Royale is the defibrilator that Bond just so happens to have in his Aston!!! Huh??? But I can live with that.

Product placement was a little OTT. Ford definitely had a big deal on this movie. Ford, Aston and Jaguar (All Ford owned) all used, everyone has Vaio Laptops and Bond even namechecks his Omega watch!!!

The titles were kind of weird but I liked them. Again, they are trying to be different. And I have no complaints about the theme. Modern, loud and briskly paced (Plus I like Soundgarden & Audioslave!). Different from the norm which is what 007 needs.

Anyway, I could go on. Not a perfect movie, there is no such thing, and we are all different and have our own opinions. But still excellent. However, I will say that after reading some of the posts on this thread that are slating Casino Royale, I think most of you people were never going to like it. You either don't like Bond full stop, or you have gone in to see it with the wrong frame of mind, looking to dislike it and point out plot holes and gripes.

I can't wait to see it again, and can't wait for Bond 22. Done with same attention as this movie, it will be a real treat.

Oh, and Bond movies are still British all the way!!!

Edited very slightly because of certain people.

Yeah, that'll teach 'im.

_____________________________

THIS..............is God.

(in reply to FrenchMachine)

Post #: 132

Bond as you have never seen him before. (Pt 2) - 18/11/2006 4:11:33 PM

mikekell

Posts: 8
Joined: 18/11/2006

ooops sorry ..posted that twice !!

< Message edited by mikekell -- 18/11/2006 4:15:52 PM >

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 133

RE: Best Bond since Goldeneye - 18/11/2006 4:45:17 PM

krudler

Posts: 7018
Joined: 30/9/2005

oh and by the way-"everyone will know you died scratching my balls!" BEST BOND LINE EVER!

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Squidward Hark Bugle

3D moving images are not films, they're holograms, and should be treated as a separate medium of storytelling, or artform.

(in reply to ArtDepartmentAlbert)

Post #: 134

RE: 007 Is Back! - 18/11/2006 5:02:32 PM

FrenchMachine

Posts: 149
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: The Todge

quote:

ORIGINAL: FrenchMachine

quote:

ORIGINAL: FrenchMachine

James Bond has returned.

Right, I've seen it now! I'm not gonna post a really in depth review because there are enough on here already. All I can say is Casino Royale is excellent.

Saw it with my bro who is also a big 007 fan and we both loved it. After the truly awful Die Another Day our hopes for a new Bond were not high.

Daniel Craig quite simply is James Bond. Through and through. My initial fears about him being cast were forgotten completely within the first 5 mins. Bond's dialogue is perfect for once. His attitude towards everything is spot on. I loved the part where he just runs straight through a studded wall, where as the guy he is chasing does a fancy up and over jump! Classic Bond moment. And particularly the cock ups he makes, rolling too far and falling off the roof, not shooting the security camera, losing his gun at a critical moment etc. All make him that little bit more believable. Up until now Bond has pretty much been invincible, which makes him a tad boring to watch, so it is a refreshing change.

The humour in the film is great, never too much as to throw the scene away which constantly happened in Brosnans movies. And people laugh at the "little finger" line because it is funny, not because its daft. Anyone who thinks that just aint got a good sense of humour.
And the torture scene is a real highlight. Any bloke watching knows what a punishment that would be, but the mocking lines that Bond delivers just make him even more arrogant and infuriating to his nemesis. Great scene.

Good story, not the best, but sufficient. Excellent action sequences. The building site chase seems to be popular with everyone but also the runway sequence is first rate, even though the tanker would blatantly have blown up because of the amount of fuel pouring out of it during the crashes!!!

The lack of gadgets and Q branch are a real benefit to the story. I really hope they leave that stuff out now. If they introduce it again it will completely undo what they have accomplished with Casino Royale. The only gadgety quibble I have with Casino Royale is the defibrilator that Bond just so happens to have in his Aston!!! Huh??? But I can live with that.

Product placement was a little OTT. Ford definitely had a big deal on this movie. Ford, Aston and Jaguar (All Ford owned) all used, everyone has Vaio Laptops and Bond even namechecks his Omega watch!!!

The titles were kind of weird but I liked them. Again, they are trying to be different. And I have no complaints about the theme. Modern, loud and briskly paced (Plus I like Soundgarden & Audioslave!). Different from the norm which is what 007 needs.

Anyway, I could go on. Not a perfect movie, there is no such thing, and we are all different and have our own opinions. But still excellent. However, I will say that after reading some of the posts on this thread that are slating Casino Royale, I think most of you people were never going to like it. You either don't like Bond full stop, or you have gone in to see it with the wrong frame of mind, looking to dislike it and point out plot holes and gripes.

I can't wait to see it again, and can't wait for Bond 22. Done with same attention as this movie, it will be a real treat.

Oh, and Bond movies are still British all the way!!!

Edited very slightly because of certain people.

Yeah, that'll teach 'im.

Not interested in teaching him anything. I just don't understand why people like him think it is necessary to trade insults on here? Just because he can't make everyone agree with him. If he wants to go down that road I will gladly oblige, but he should be grown up enough to not need to.

I don't agree with everything people on here say, but I don't go making comments about people I don't even know. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and should feel free to express it. But if all that does is provoke people like Private Hudson in to making insults about others, then this whole forum is a waste of time.

_____________________________

This stuff will make you a God damn sexual Tyrannosaurus..................Just like me!!!

(in reply to The Todge)

Post #: 135

SO corny! - 18/11/2006 5:18:17 PM

DaisyQ

Posts: 3
Joined: 6/10/2005

Just watched it, and while I loved the first half, and thought Craig was great, the dialogue between Bond and Vesper at the end was wretchedly overwrought and cheesy - and the scene with the first girl? With the rolling around on the floor? Looked about as sexy as eating cottage cheese in a public toilet. Hot girl, hot guy, NO HEAT. There was at least believable attraction between Vesper and Bond, even if their 'we're so lovey dovey' scenes should totally have been chopped.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 136

SO corny! - 18/11/2006 5:39:35 PM

DaisyQ

Posts: 3
Joined: 6/10/2005

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 137

RE: 007 Is Back! - 18/11/2006 5:53:23 PM

pettsy

Posts: 5969
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: FrenchMachine

quote:

ORIGINAL: The Todge

quote:

ORIGINAL: FrenchMachine

quote:

ORIGINAL: FrenchMachine

James Bond has returned.

Right, I've seen it now! I'm not gonna post a really in depth review because there are enough on here already. All I can say is Casino Royale is excellent.

Saw it with my bro who is also a big 007 fan and we both loved it. After the truly awful Die Another Day our hopes for a new Bond were not high.

Daniel Craig quite simply is James Bond. Through and through. My initial fears about him being cast were forgotten completely within the first 5 mins. Bond's dialogue is perfect for once. His attitude towards everything is spot on. I loved the part where he just runs straight through a studded wall, where as the guy he is chasing does a fancy up and over jump! Classic Bond moment. And particularly the cock ups he makes, rolling too far and falling off the roof, not shooting the security camera, losing his gun at a critical moment etc. All make him that little bit more believable. Up until now Bond has pretty much been invincible, which makes him a tad boring to watch, so it is a refreshing change.

The humour in the film is great, never too much as to throw the scene away which constantly happened in Brosnans movies. And people laugh at the "little finger" line because it is funny, not because its daft. Anyone who thinks that just aint got a good sense of humour.
And the torture scene is a real highlight. Any bloke watching knows what a punishment that would be, but the mocking lines that Bond delivers just make him even more arrogant and infuriating to his nemesis. Great scene.

Good story, not the best, but sufficient. Excellent action sequences. The building site chase seems to be popular with everyone but also the runway sequence is first rate, even though the tanker would blatantly have blown up because of the amount of fuel pouring out of it during the crashes!!!

The lack of gadgets and Q branch are a real benefit to the story. I really hope they leave that stuff out now. If they introduce it again it will completely undo what they have accomplished with Casino Royale. The only gadgety quibble I have with Casino Royale is the defibrilator that Bond just so happens to have in his Aston!!! Huh??? But I can live with that.

Product placement was a little OTT. Ford definitely had a big deal on this movie. Ford, Aston and Jaguar (All Ford owned) all used, everyone has Vaio Laptops and Bond even namechecks his Omega watch!!!

The titles were kind of weird but I liked them. Again, they are trying to be different. And I have no complaints about the theme. Modern, loud and briskly paced (Plus I like Soundgarden & Audioslave!). Different from the norm which is what 007 needs.

Anyway, I could go on. Not a perfect movie, there is no such thing, and we are all different and have our own opinions. But still excellent. However, I will say that after reading some of the posts on this thread that are slating Casino Royale, I think most of you people were never going to like it. You either don't like Bond full stop, or you have gone in to see it with the wrong frame of mind, looking to dislike it and point out plot holes and gripes.

I can't wait to see it again, and can't wait for Bond 22. Done with same attention as this movie, it will be a real treat.

Oh, and Bond movies are still British all the way!!!

Edited very slightly because of certain people.

Yeah, that'll teach 'im.

Not interested in teaching him anything. I just don't understand why people like him think it is necessary to trade insults on here? Just because he can't make everyone agree with him. If he wants to go down that road I will gladly oblige, but he should be grown up enough to not need to.

I don't agree with everything people on here say, but I don't go making comments about people I don't even know. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and should feel free to express it. But if all that does is provoke people like Private Hudson in to making insults about others, then this whole forum is a waste of time.

Don't worry about it too much FrenchMachine, I stopped taking him seriously at the point where he said Roger Moore was the best post-Connery Bond.

(in reply to FrenchMachine)

Post #: 138

- 18/11/2006 6:41:43 PM

Nodnol

Posts: 8
Joined: 20/5/2006

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 139

RE: - 18/11/2006 7:11:43 PM

24Dan

Posts: 2504
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Norwich

4/5 A great predictible film!

Yes it was predictible (that black guy is Felix now theres a surprise

, oh and his girlfriend is in cahoots with the baddies

)

Still a great film though

_____________________________

Professional Analrapist

(in reply to Nodnol)

Post #: 140

RE: RE: - 18/11/2006 7:18:54 PM

zombiemaster

Posts: 3496
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: Norwich

I thought it was ok the action in it was good. But the lovey dover stuff ruined it for me. Daniel craig is a good bond as well 4/5

_____________________________

When there's no more room in hell, the dead will walk the earth

(in reply to 24Dan)

Post #: 141

RE: RE: - 18/11/2006 7:59:40 PM

24Dan

Posts: 2504
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Norwich

Thank you.

Zombiemaster,you said it was shit! now your giving it 4/5?

_____________________________

Professional Analrapist

Post #: 142

Your back baby! - 18/11/2006 8:01:05 PM

Deeznutz

Posts: 45
Joined: 18/10/2005

Rebootastic! Those naysayers should eat their words 'cause Craig is the man. I feel for Brosnan as he was never really served by those hacks Purvis & Wade as the franchise slowly descended into an exercise in ludicrousness. This should be the template to adopt for a reinvigorated series 'cause I am itching for the next installment now!

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 143

- 18/11/2006 8:01:29 PM

cluesy

Posts: 164
Joined: 11/10/2005

The film was too long with the casino bits and the love story being drawn out much longer than needed. Daniel Craig is a pretty good Bond, but I would rate Brosnan and Connery higher. The film didn't feel very Bond-like a lot of the time, only playing the theme tune at the end but as a n action spy film, it is incredible. The adrenalin is really high though, so it should be seen.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 144

Great! - 18/11/2006 8:07:48 PM

solid snake

Posts: 209
Joined: 18/10/2006

This is the best bond movie since gold finger!. Daniel Craig is an exellent Bond who delivers what a bond movie really should be. Finally a Bond movie that is not filled with silly gadjets and does not have Q to fuck things up.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 145

RE: - 18/11/2006 8:22:45 PM

Chris49

Posts: 17
Joined: 3/10/2005

anyone tell me who does the soundtrack to the film,

< Message edited by Chris49 -- 18/11/2006 8:23:03 PM >

(in reply to Emiwee)

Post #: 146

Wow! A fantastic and surprsing take on Bond! - 18/11/2006 10:06:34 PM

scarlett69

Posts: 1
Joined: 18/11/2006

A film that is genuinely gripping all the way through with Bond as full -on- action hero with a brain and a consceince. And, on a deeply personal female note,...a body to drool over! ( men have been ogling for years - this is seroius eye candy for the ladies!!)

Craig invests the role with gravitas and menace whilst mainintaing believability - thank god the lame jokes and crazy gadgets are gone - the film works well and the torture sequence was a bit too relistic for the 12A rating.

A must see movie that leaves you thinking the Brosnan films were merely bubblegum pap.

The new Bond is dARK, SEROIUS AND COMPLETELY COMPELLING.

Just one thing...where do I buy my lifesize poster of Daniel Craig emerigng from the sea in his Speedos!!!! Yeah baby yeah !!!

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 147

RE: RE: - 18/11/2006 10:20:01 PM

Hartigan

Posts: 441
Joined: 2/10/2005

David Arnold does the score, Chris Cornell performed the song

_____________________________

An old man dies, a little girl lives. Fair trade

Oh, I'm sorry, did I break your concentration?

(in reply to Chris49)

Post #: 148

RE: Bloody WOW! - 18/11/2006 10:46:19 PM

ArtDepartmentAlbert

Posts: 109
Joined: 26/2/2006

The reasons for...

No moneypenny- having Bond interract with such a familiar character in a 'will they won't they' scenario would've cheapened his relationship/love with Vesper.

No Q- Bond is still learning and needs to fall over and make mistakes, in order for the character to develop in the necessary way. What he doesn't need is a watch/belt/briefcase to save him from falling in this "first" installment.

And to those that suggest that the 'lovey' scenes with Vesper should've been left out... you've missed half the point of the story. She is essential to how Bond's attitude to life/women/his work develops.

(in reply to jimoakley666)

Post #: 149

Bond blonde - 19/11/2006 2:22:17 AM

Judiedenchinatrench

Posts: 50
Joined: 20/12/2005

I think most people would agree that the bond film series needs some rejuivination, but how far is too far? For the twenty odd films that 007 has been around fresh ideas and contributions have been added to the mix. Casino Royale, much like its bond actor cockily does it's own thing to an overhyped if slightly underwheming movie.

Daniel Craig is realistic and ruthless, but this is far away from what were used to.

This reboot for the bond franchise is supposed to match the current post 9/11 world we live in. Despite being brutally realistic, Casino Royale comes across something between License to Kill and the old S.M.E.R.C.H based films of the early days. Ouh he has an eyepatch...he's got to be a bad guy mentality.

Le Chiffe disapoints as the central villan , whilst un-inportant stock vilans dominate an out of place final climax.

The film iritaitingly stops and starts, whilst the crucial poker scenes drag in significance. The action sequence lift up the film if only slightly.

Q and Moneypenny are sadly missed, whilst the zingy guitar theme only makes an entrance towards the end of the film. Next time around i suspect that a stronger and more human bond will be pushed futher in to the realms of our expectations.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 150