Originally posted by sithsaber408
You're forgiven your misguided opinion. 😛Seriously though, if he's so bad and the movie stunk, then you might want to explain that to the packed house that I saw it with who all LOVED the film.
Most critics and fans are saying that this one is far better than the last 2 or 3, and more closely in-line with the Connery films of old, but with a modern update to it.
Listen up folks: If you appreciate good pacing, character development, intrigue, and walloping action being in a James Bond film, then this is the one for you.
If Keanu Reeve's performance in Constantine blew you away, then you would have the same opinion as Rouge Jedi.
😛
didn't you say similar things about superman returns? 😛
Originally posted by sithsaber408
Yes, it appears that my hypocrisy knows no bounds.Or is it my wisdom? 😖hifty:
No. 😛
i liked casino royale, it was an enjoyable two hours and one of the best movies i've seen all year (and for several months i was going to the cinema once a week, so i saw alot of movies), but i don't see it as being the best bond movie ever (goldfinger and tomorrow never dies being my favourites). it looked to me like a more successful crack at what they were trying to do with the dalton movies, but i'll be honest, i missed q, moneypenny and the more fantastical (sp?) elements of the previous movies... it was a really good movie imo, i'm just not sure whether it was a good 'bond' movie... 😬
in my personal opinion...
great movie. daniel craig is the ballsiest james bond i've seen. "a little bit to the right" officially cemented that. "you died scratching my balls." dude... i would've caved in when le chifferferrfefereff (spelling?) hung the rope on my shoulder. it was refreshing to see james being very crass and unrefined. the opening sequence woudl've been better with a better song. the scene in madagascar was f*cking great. the shower scene was the most vulnerable james bond anybody would ever see. "you cold?" then turns the hot water knob... for those 3 seconds, james was totally pu$$y whipped. it was great that he ordered tha vodka martini down to the tee.
it was also nice to see james running around all beaten up... blooody all the time, scars everywhere. not only that, he didn't have his usual gadgets on him... the laser watch, the glass-shattering ring, the car with 2 machine gun turrets. all he had in casino royale was his fists, a silnced gun, a fast car and an ear piece.
Because Bond has no fancy gadgets doesn't mean the film sucked. The movie is about Bonds first mission, MI6 aren't going to invest millions of pounds on gadgets he needs for a POKER GAME! This was 007's first mission, you could call it a test. The movie was better without the gadgets, great action film.
Cool movie.
A modern review of Bond's beginning.
He wears casual or comfortable clothes, but keeping a bit of elegance, he has the body of a decent weight lifter, he can slug it out like a street thug, he is mercyless, but also got a emotional side hard to keep in check cause after all he's the cold hearted killer of the MI6.
It was good to see realistic gadgets and the Aston Martin which wasn't turned into a sort of Knight Rider.
Last bond movies were jumping the shark literally.Exoskeletons on the villains, cars with more weapons than a U.S. Army regiment and stealth systems, I mean come on, it's about a secret agent, but it was going too far.Also Brosnan hasn't got the physical conditon to be a secret agent.He looks like a golf player.Craig eyes look like those of a wild animal blood thirsted and changed to a pleased agent who can do anything he wants for accomplish his task meanwhile doing his personal business also.A perfectly reloaded franchise.
No one is gonna miss Brosnan series, cause the new Bond is gonna show us the agent, not the gadgets
Yes, but so are Batmans.
Batman Begins had a cool car, so did bond.
Batman Begins had a few weapons, so did bond.
Batman Begins had much more realistic, brutal type of fist-fighting.... so did Bond.
They are both successful reboots/re-tellings of the beginning of each character, focusing on character development and slowly weaving in all of the elements that make the character into what we know him as.
BOTH worked very well.
Not liking Casino Royale because it had very little in gadgets would be like not liking Batman Begins because the bat symbol on his suit was all black and not yellow and black.
And Craig had his tuxedo.
He had an Astin Martin, a vodka martini, a silenced pistol, and beautiful women.
You're welcome to say that Casino Royale wasn't a good film, or that you didn't like it or whatever, but saying that it sucks because of a lack of gadgets seems silly to me.
It was a begin, like Batman Begins, and Craig's James Bond had many of the things that the other Bonds did, and he'll get many more in the next film.
James Bond Will Return!!!
(in 2008 of course) 😛