Rewatching "Casino Royale (2006)" - Page 4

LCARS 24 · October 30 2008, 04:10 PM

I don't want to say that Casino Royale is any worse than any of the other non-Connery Bond flicks, but it is definitely one I never want to see again and the main reason I don't want to see Quantum of Solace.

Sci · October 30 2008, 09:12 PM

Stalkers wrote:

Sci wrote:

Satanica wrote:

Brosnan is your idea of camp?

I'm not sure how else to describe it when James Bond swims to shore after leaving MI-6, walks up to a hotel, gets a swanky room, gets himself all dressed up, and instantly determines that the mirror is two-way and there's an agent behind it.

Huh? He knows the manager is a Chinese agent who graciously gives him a lavish room, and then a beautiful woman turns up at his door. He is a spy for God's sake, he knows what a honey trap is. There are plenty of camp moments in DAD, but that really isn'ty one of them.

I think using Dench again for the Craig films was a mistake. They should have got a new actor.

What made it absurd was not the scenario of realizing that the manager is an agent and that there's a honeypot trap. What makes it absurd is that he gets a room at this big expensive place when he's just been swimming huge distances, doesn't look the least bit tired or worn out or anything, is just instantly sauve and in control and can afford the room (wasn't he cut off from MI6 at the time?), instantly starts with the seduction routine...

It's not the idea, it's the execution and the surrounding scenes.

Starkers · October 30 2008, 11:52 PM

Sci wrote:

Stalkers wrote:

Sci wrote:

I'm not sure how else to describe it when James Bond swims to shore after leaving MI-6, walks up to a hotel, gets a swanky room, gets himself all dressed up, and instantly determines that the mirror is two-way and there's an agent behind it.

Huh? He knows the manager is a Chinese agent who graciously gives him a lavish room, and then a beautiful woman turns up at his door. He is a spy for God's sake, he knows what a honey trap is. There are plenty of camp moments in DAD, but that really isn'ty one of them.

I think using Dench again for the Craig films was a mistake. They should have got a new actor.

What made it absurd was not the scenario of realizing that the manager is an agent and that there's a honeypot trap. What makes it absurd is that he gets a room at this big expensive place when he's just been swimming huge distances, doesn't look the least bit tired or worn out or anything, is just instantly sauve and in control and can afford the room (wasn't he cut off from MI6 at the time?), instantly starts with the seduction routine...

It's not the idea, it's the execution and the surrounding scenes.

Meanwhile Daniel Craig get's poisoned, difibrilated and goes back to win a huge card game and nobody says a thing about that being a tad unbelievable! Double standards?

I'd suggest rewatching DAD, I believe Mr Chang gives him the room because he knows his credit is good (and also likely because he wants to ensnare him) also when Bond seduces the massuse it's with the explicit intention of getting her gun off her. I'll give you the looking sauve bits, though he scrubs up well with just a razor and a haircut.

Personally I love the scene where he walks in soaking wet in his pyjamas with long hair and a beard because with the 007 music playing he is still so obviously Bond.

Level 2 Diagnostic · October 31 2008, 07:22 AM

Stalkers wrote:

Meanwhile Daniel Craig get's poisoned, difibrilated and goes back to win a huge card game and nobody says a thing about that being a tad unbelievable! Double standards?

I'll be the first to admit that was more than a tad bit unbelievable. Personally, I think that part could have easily been cut from the film.

Actually, looking over this recap of Die Another Day, it's even more ridiculous than what Sci described... Bond actually makes himself flatline, then he comes back to life, then he dives overboard and ends up in the hotel. It's just as ridiculous as the defibrilator scene in Casino Royale, but you can forgive CR because the rest of the movie makes up for it. The rest of DAD really... doesn't.

Sci · October 31 2008, 07:45 AM

Stalkers wrote:

Sci wrote:

Stalkers wrote:

Huh? He knows the manager is a Chinese agent who graciously gives him a lavish room, and then a beautiful woman turns up at his door. He is a spy for God's sake, he knows what a honey trap is. There are plenty of camp moments in DAD, but that really isn'ty one of them.

I think using Dench again for the Craig films was a mistake. They should have got a new actor.

What made it absurd was not the scenario of realizing that the manager is an agent and that there's a honeypot trap. What makes it absurd is that he gets a room at this big expensive place when he's just been swimming huge distances, doesn't look the least bit tired or worn out or anything, is just instantly sauve and in control and can afford the room (wasn't he cut off from MI6 at the time?), instantly starts with the seduction routine...

It's not the idea, it's the execution and the surrounding scenes.

Meanwhile Daniel Craig get's poisoned, difibrilated and goes back to win a huge card game and nobody says a thing about that being a tad unbelievable! Double standards?

That part was unbelievable, and it was probably my least favorite aspect of the film. With DAD, however, most of the film was like that.

Starkers · October 31 2008, 11:25 AM

^^ I like the way the guy who wrote that article wonders when Bond learned his Zen like skills...well presumably during his 14 months in a North Korean prison!

One could argue that it's easier to suspend your disbelief for a film that requires you to suspend your disbelief over everything than to do it for part of a film that proclaims itself to be gritty and grounded in realism?

I'm in a minority I know because I actually like DAD (in the same way I like Moonraker) neither is my favourite, but I'd watch them over several other Bonds (View to a Kill, TWINE, FYEO or Thunderball) any day. I like camp Bonds and more serious Bonds, but let’s face it, Bond has always been ridiculous. People go on about how Connery made proper spy thrillers but really there was only FRWL that counts in that respect.

mostly_nameless · November 3 2008, 08:12 AM

I liked the first part of CR, up to the crash and torture scenes. I didn't even mind the do-it-yourself defib scene.

But, I cringed when Bond gave up the codes to the money like a stupid rookie. And from there, I was just counting the minutes until the girl got killed. (And I was rather disappointed at the drowning in a sinking house demise she got. And, living in the midwestern USA where houses don't tend to sink, I've had to explain the scene to everyone I've ever watched it with or talked to about it.)

To me, the second half was weak and too long.

Still, I think I'll pop it in and watch it again to see if I can work up some enthusiams for QoS. It will be interesting to see if Craig grows in the role, or if we've already seen his best.

Sci · November 3 2008, 09:08 AM

Starkers wrote:

One could argue that it's easier to suspend your disbelief for a film that requires you to suspend your disbelief over everything than to do it for part of a film that proclaims itself to be gritty and grounded in realism?

*shrugs* For me, it's not even a matter of suspension of disbelief. I simply don't like James-Bond-as-camp. The character and the concept just don't work for me except in a very serious, dark, Naturalistic context.

Starkers · November 3 2008, 12:22 PM

Sci wrote:

Starkers wrote:

One could argue that it's easier to suspend your disbelief for a film that requires you to suspend your disbelief over everything than to do it for part of a film that proclaims itself to be gritty and grounded in realism?

*shrugs* For me, it's not even a matter of suspension of disbelief. I simply don't like James-Bond-as-camp. The character and the concept just don't work for me except in a very serious, dark, Naturalistic context.

James Bond is like Dr Who, it shouldn't ever be taken that seriously

Sci · November 3 2008, 09:49 PM

Starkers wrote:

Sci wrote:

Starkers wrote:

One could argue that it's easier to suspend your disbelief for a film that requires you to suspend your disbelief over everything than to do it for part of a film that proclaims itself to be gritty and grounded in realism?

*shrugs* For me, it's not even a matter of suspension of disbelief. I simply don't like James-Bond-as-camp. The character and the concept just don't work for me except in a very serious, dark, Naturalistic context.

James Bond is like Dr Who, it shouldn't ever be taken that seriously

*shrugs* All I know is, I would give Bond a chance again and again over the years and never enjoyed it. Then Casino Royale came along and I was riveted from beginning to end.

Casino Royale was really the first Bond film I enjoyed.

David cgc · November 3 2008, 09:58 PM

Starkers wrote:

James Bond is like Dr Who, it shouldn't ever be taken that seriously

On that note, have I explained my elaborate and wacky variation on the Bond-as-Time-Lord theory which allows the Craig films to remain in continuity with the earlier ones, involving the Time War, the alternate Universe, and occasionally a cameo by Mary Poppins, this year?

Emher · November 3 2008, 10:15 PM

Dream wrote:

Anyone else kind of feel like Dench's M is almost like Bond's mom in these new movies? Maybe it's the fact that Bone is just starting out as a 00 agent.

There's a joke about that in Quantum of Solace actually

October 30 2008, 04:10 PM	#46
LCARS 24 Commodore	Re: Rewatching "Casino Royale (2006)" I don't want to say that Casino Royale is any worse than any of the other non-Connery Bond flicks, but it is definitely one I never want to see again and the main reason I don't want to see Quantum of Solace.

October 31 2008, 11:25 AM	#51
Starkers Admiral Location: Behind enemy lines...	Re: Rewatching "Casino Royale (2006)" ^^ I like the way the guy who wrote that article wonders when Bond learned his Zen like skills...well presumably during his 14 months in a North Korean prison! One could argue that it's easier to suspend your disbelief for a film that requires you to suspend your disbelief over everything than to do it for part of a film that proclaims itself to be gritty and grounded in realism? I'm in a minority I know because I actually like DAD (in the same way I like Moonraker) neither is my favourite, but I'd watch them over several other Bonds (View to a Kill, TWINE, FYEO or Thunderball) any day. I like camp Bonds and more serious Bonds, but let’s face it, Bond has always been ridiculous. People go on about how Connery made proper spy thrillers but really there was only FRWL that counts in that respect. __________________ Werewolves on the Moon Now with Byzantium review The Devils of Amber Street

November 3 2008, 08:12 AM	#52
mostly_nameless Commander Location: mostly_nameless	Re: Rewatching "Casino Royale (2006)" I liked the first part of CR, up to the crash and torture scenes. I didn't even mind the do-it-yourself defib scene. But, I cringed when Bond gave up the codes to the money like a stupid rookie. And from there, I was just counting the minutes until the girl got killed. (And I was rather disappointed at the drowning in a sinking house demise she got. And, living in the midwestern USA where houses don't tend to sink, I've had to explain the scene to everyone I've ever watched it with or talked to about it.) To me, the second half was weak and too long. Still, I think I'll pop it in and watch it again to see if I can work up some enthusiams for QoS. It will be interesting to see if Craig grows in the role, or if we've already seen his best.

STAR TREK

CSI

ABOUT US