The big 'Casino Royale' thread [Archive]

LoopyLou

11-04-2005, 15:31

there is so much speculation at the moment about who will play the next james bond.

- latest name in the frame is Daniel Craig -

news item here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/film/4416609.stm)

although a later news bulleting from the star - denies it here (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/news/entertainment/050406_bond.shtml)

A friend of mine recently suggested - bringing the film bang up to date with a female JANE BOND..... but I think i would prefer this hero to remain male in this instance

Who do you think would make a good James (or Jane) Bond?

StarSparkle

11-04-2005, 18:08

Originally posted by LoopyLou
there is so much speculation at the moment about who will play the next james bond.

- latest name in the frame is Daniel Craig -

news item here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/film/4416609.stm)

although a later news bulleting from the star - denies it here (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/news/entertainment/050406_bond.shtml)

A friend of mine recently suggested - bringing the film bang up to date with a female JANE BOND..... but I think i would prefer this hero to remain male in this instance

Who do you think would make a good James (or Jane) Bond?

I've always thought that Clive Owen would make an excellent James Bond. Good looking, sexy, looks great in a suit, classy but tough, inscrutable when necessary, with quite a cold, detached manner.

If not Clive, then I think Dougray Scott would be great. Perhaps it's time to have another Scot as Bond! Although he's maybe not got the required coldness - not sure.

StarSparkle - not a big fan of Bond though.

PS I don't think a woman would really work in the Bond role, but a possible female Bond could be Natasha McElhone? (Ronin, Solaris, The Devil's Own). Beautiful, but cold as ice, and I could imagine her playing ruthless very successfully.

Rich

11-04-2005, 18:14

Hasn't Casino Royale been done before though? As one of the very first Bond films? Or is this simply a remake of that?

alchresearch

11-04-2005, 20:18

Originally posted by LoopyLou
there is so much speculation at the moment about who will play the next james bond.

- latest name in the frame is Daniel Craig -

although a later news bulleting from the star - denies it here (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/news/entertainment/050406_bond.shtml)

If he does end up being James Bond we should all boycott it because of him being a big fat liar!

How about Nigel Havers for JB?

According to some Bond fans, the original Casino Royale was the worst Bond film ever.

foxy027

11-04-2005, 21:07

It was mentioned on the radio the other morning that Pierce Brosnan had been asked to come back.

duffman

11-04-2005, 23:29

Originally posted by Rich
Hasn't Casino Royale been done before though? As one of the very first Bond films? Or is this simply a remake of that?

Wakey wakey Rich :rolleyes: read the whole thread matey and you will see it was a spin off Bond film by the same name. Wonder what the title track will be and who by?

carcrash

13-09-2006, 18:52

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvfCzQgM6r4&

Lestat

13-09-2006, 19:07

I dont know . . . looks abit poor really.:?

carcrash

13-09-2006, 19:36

I'm not convinced by him as Bond but the trailer looks ok.

Beakerzoid

13-09-2006, 23:23

I think it looks amazing. back to what Bond used to be before the silly gadgets and invisible frickin cars ruined it all. A nice meld of the Bond of the books and the early Connery films.

Can't frickin' wait!

Thunzi

13-09-2006, 23:53

I can't wait either! Looks amazing. I was a bit concerned when I first heard it was going to be Daniel Craig but I've seen him in a few films since and he seems a very capeable actor and I think he'll pull off the role.

KingMaker

14-09-2006, 01:58

For me the bond films have never got there magic back since Sean Connery left the role. Roger Moore was too much the joker for me.
I did like Licence to Kill with Timothy Dalton though.
Pierce Brosnon perhaps was the closest yet to Sean Connery but the actual films themselves have proved dissapointing.
I sure hope the new guy, Daniel Craig can bring back 007 to it's glory days.
Please no more Invisible cars... that's just silly!

Hecate

14-09-2006, 04:56

KingMaker

14-09-2006, 19:05

Daniel Craig is very pretty, but not suave enough for Bond.

Hey at least it's not Robbie William!
He'd turn Bond into a musical! ;)

donuticus

14-09-2006, 19:13

Bond in love, eh? I thought he was too much of a sociopath for that. I suppose it'll give him a weakness for the bad guys to exploit. The woman will be able to take on the standard action film role usually occupied by a dog/cat/small child that the hero always has to go and rescue, thus complicating his otherwise relatively easy escape from some disaster or other. Unless she gets killed off in the first ten minutes, of course.

It looks like a pretty standard, testosterone-fueled action film. Daniel Craig is very pretty, but not suave enough for Bond.

Bond being in love is not that strange. He got married in "On Her Majestys Secret Service" she was killed by Blofeld on the way home from the wedding. It was very sad teh policeman stops Bonmd for speeding adn as he is hugging her the policeman asks what is wrong.

"Nothing she will wake up in a minute.":( :( :(

Jabberwocky

02-11-2006, 23:35

Ginner

02-11-2006, 23:46

...ANOTHER bloody James Bond movie!

I wonder what the plot will be this time...
Probably the same as it was when it was last released :P

Jabberwocky

02-11-2006, 23:50

Gud bye meeeeeeesterrrr Bund!

I bet the baddie says that at some point in the film.

Beakerzoid

03-11-2006, 00:10

Theyre doing it AGAIN!

ANOTHER bloody James Bond movie!

I wonder what the plot will be this time.
A mad man wants to take over the world by killing huge amounts of people with nerve gas/ bacteria/ nukes and JB infiltrates his lab/volcano/undersea fortress/space station pretending to be an expert blah de blah de blah then at the end theres some geek in the usual uniform doing a countdown as JB and an elite troop of marines descend on ropes to fight the baddies...

Come on, own up! Whose actually PAYING to go and watch this tripe? Come on, tell me, I promise not to extract the wee-wee.

much...

heh heh

The plot for the new film, Casino Royale, is taken from the first Bond novel. The film is adopting a 'back to basics' approach, ditching the dodgy gadgets and effects of recent (poor) offerings, and trying to get back to the roots of Bond.
The story focuses around the Casino Royale, and a high stakes poker tournement where a main financier of terrorist organisations is playing. Bond is sent (his first assignment since becoming a Double-O) to play against him, in the aim to bankrupt him. Once his identity is discovered, the organisations with a lot at stake plot to take him out of the competition....

If this is truely a return to what the franchise was before Roger Moore came along and turned it into Carry On Bond, then it is for the better, and should put the series back on par with the best spy thrillers of recent years.

I'm looking forward to it, as are a lot of people. Feel free to extract the wee wee. I'd rather see a new Bond film than half of the rubbish that is passed off as 'blockbuster film entertainment' these days.

Jabberwocky

03-11-2006, 00:12

Beakerzoid

03-11-2006, 00:27

Theyre going back to basics? No more mad proffessors in secret underground labs trying to take over the world?!?! No more eight foot blokes with tin teeth or little fat guys with killer bowler hats?

Its a bloody disgrace i tell ya!

As long as they dont do to JB what they did to the war of the bloody worlds...

Nope....no Q either. The approach peed off some sad fanboys when it was announced, and when they announced Daniel Craig as the new Bond got some of the saddos so wound up they made a website called Craig Not Bond (which was at craignotbond.com but, since the trailer came out and had everyone getting excited at the film, has gone under - shame, it was a laugh to read the rantings of such a sad bunch of losers). As a lifelong Bond fan (well, since I was young anyway...I wasn't reading the books when I came out the womb) I was glad they were dropping the silly nonsense and 'knowing winks to camera' that have been turning it into cheese since the late 70s.

As for WOTW....no film has yet done the book justice for that. The 50s film was too American, the Cruise film was a decent blockbuster, but not really WOTW, and as for the low-budget attempt to make a true adaptation (set in victorian times)...well....avoid at all costs!!! In fact the only version that continues to impress is Jeff Wayne's musical. Genius!

NEKRO138

03-11-2006, 09:32

I cannot complain about Bond films coming out. They're an institusion. Like Christmas. You got to have a new Bond film or Bond speculation every year. I love Bond films. They're a harmless, yet entertaining, bit of fluff.

JoeP

03-11-2006, 09:42

The new one does look quite interesting. I think Daniel Craig looks the part - I can believe him and the early Sean Connery as being killers.

I still regard 'From Russia with Love' as my favourite Bond film, although my favourite 60s spy thriller has to be 'The Ipcress File'

Jabberwocky

03-11-2006, 09:55

Nope....no Q either. The approach peed off some sad fanboys when it was announced, and when they announced Daniel Craig as the new Bond got some of the saddos so wound up they made a website called Craig Not Bond (which was at craignotbond.com but, since the trailer came out and had everyone getting excited at the film, has gone under - shame, it was a laugh to read the rantings of such a sad bunch of losers). As a lifelong Bond fan (well, since I was young anyway...I wasn't reading the books when I came out the womb) I was glad they were dropping the silly nonsense and 'knowing winks to camera' that have been turning it into cheese since the late 70s.

As for WOTW....no film has yet done the book justice for that. The 50s film was too American, the Cruise film was a decent blockbuster, but not really WOTW, and as for the low-budget attempt to make a true adaptation (set in victorian times)...well....avoid at all costs!!! In fact the only version that continues to impress is Jeff Wayne's musical. Genius!

I heared a rumour that an accurate WOTW movie HAS been made. It went straight to DVD because it was overwhelmed by the Tom Cruise thing this year. The DVD version is accurate right down to the descriptions of the fighting machines/ handling machines etc., and even has the cylindar on Horsell common, the artilleryman, the thunderchild and... well its accurate.
Im hunting for it but I only saw one instance of it on the net and that was back in June, but thats my next fetish. Im having that DVD if it kills me!

I just hope it isnt the low budget thing you mentioned.

Clare85

03-11-2006, 10:19

I really don't like James Bond, but I have a feeling this one is going to be different.

dieselbabe

03-11-2006, 10:20

Theyre doing it AGAIN!

ANOTHER bloody James Bond movie!

I said the same thing when i seen on TV that yet anouther one of these films was to be made. The Bond films never botherd me befor till i met my X boyfrind was a masive James Bond fan. He watch every film on TV even if it had been on the year before, even on his 30th birthday his mate got us all ticketts to see the new James Bond at the time. I never knew what was happening till we pulled up outside the cimema. Then my nightmear came when they put on EVERY James Bond film ever made back to back that month was my living hell never mind living daylights. I never date anouther Bond fan again.

nick2

03-11-2006, 10:31

The plot for the new film, Casino Royale, is taken from the first Bond novel. The film is adopting a 'back to basics' approach, ditching the dodgy gadgets and effects of recent (poor) offerings, and trying to get back to the roots of Bond.

So he will be a chain-smoking, alcoholic, homophobic, racist misogynist like in the books ?

PuressenceUK

03-11-2006, 10:32

You can't beat a bit of Bond! How very dare you!

Lindseyw

03-11-2006, 10:32

So he will be a chain-smoking, alcoholic, homophobic, racist misogynist like in the books ?

I'm sure I work with him ............. ?

cressida

03-11-2006, 17:10

In the Halle Berry one, she was supposed to be a crack special agent, and she had to be rescued at least twice, so much for girl power

donuticus

03-11-2006, 17:15

Nope....no Q either. The approach peed off some sad fanboys when it was announced, and when they announced Daniel Craig as the new Bond got some of the saddos so wound up they made a website called Craig Not Bond (which was at craignotbond.com but, since the trailer came out and had everyone getting excited at the film, has gone under - shame, it was a laugh to read the rantings of such a sad bunch of losers). As a lifelong Bond fan (well, since I was young anyway...I wasn't reading the books when I came out the womb) I was glad they were dropping the silly nonsense and 'knowing winks to camera' that have been turning it into cheese since the late 70s.

As for WOTW....no film has yet done the book justice for that. The 50s film was too American, the Cruise film was a decent blockbuster, but not really WOTW, and as for the low-budget attempt to make a true adaptation (set in victorian times)...well....avoid at all costs!!! In fact the only version that continues to impress is Jeff Wayne's musical. Genius!

You will be pleased to hear then that a £20,000,000 animated version of Jeff Waynes War of the Worlds is due out in cinemas next year.

Beakerzoid

03-11-2006, 18:36

Beakerzoid

03-11-2006, 18:38

So he will be a chain-smoking, alcoholic, homophobic, racist misogynist like in the books ?

Not that much "back to basics", but more an attempt to mix the Bond of the books with the Connery era Bond.

Shame really...would have been interesting to see how well the non-pc Bond of the nevels would wash with audiences today.

Beakerzoid

03-11-2006, 18:39

You will be pleased to hear then that a £20,000,000 animated version of Jeff Waynes War of the Worlds is due out in cinemas next year.

Yeah...read a blurb about that and really can't wait. I will be pressing for us (at Cineworld) to get a print in!

Jabberwocky

03-11-2006, 19:09

That is the one which I state to "avoid at all costs". I made the mistake of watching it (via Region 1 DVD) and it was painful! Effects were atrocious, acting diabolical, and seemed to be directed by a blind man with a dead guide dog! Seriously...I suffer these films so others don't have to. Avoid!
Ok thanks for the warning.

Im determined to win the lottery so i can make a decent version of it. True to the book.

Jabberwocky

03-11-2006, 19:20

You will be pleased to hear then that a £20,000,000 animated version of Jeff Waynes War of the Worlds is due out in cinemas next year.
This?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQ_eZ8V5l8k

JFKvsNixon

03-11-2006, 20:20

I heared a rumour that an accurate WOTW movie HAS been made. It went straight to DVD because it was overwhelmed by the Tom Cruise thing this year. The DVD version is accurate right down to the descriptions of the fighting machines/ handling machines etc., and even has the cylindar on Horsell common, the artilleryman, the thunderchild and... well its accurate.
Im hunting for it but I only saw one instance of it on the net and that was back in June, but thats my next fetish. Im having that DVD if it kills me!

I just hope it isnt the low budget thing you mentioned.

I have it on dvd, here is an amazon link:

http://www.amazon.com/H-G-Wells-Worlds-Timothy-Hines/dp/B0009PW4D2/ref=dp_return_2/104-4061485-7630338?ie=UTF8&n=130&s=dvd

Before you buy it read my review:

H.G. Wells' The War of the Worlds is the worst film ever. Not Speilbergs version, or even the 1950's version, but Timothy Hines straight to DVD 2005 version. The film is based in Victorian England. I purchased this DVD as i was seduced by the thought of an accurate retelling of H G Wells book. I refused to believe the reviews. The reviewers where correct, the film is truely awful.

It is almost worth watching for this reason alone. It has the worst actors,the worst dialogue, the worst editing,the worst producing, the worst script and the worst special effects of any film ever made. The actors use the worst accents i have ever heard, straight from Mary Poppins. In one sentence one actor manages to go from a geordie to a Irish, then to a Scotish and then finally settling back to an "olde" english accent. Truely poor.

The film was so obviously filmed in America, even though the storey is based in England. The American train station with the American trains is my favorite. One actor plays 2 characters, how does the directer think he can carry this off??? Easy, put on an obvious false mustache. There are large parts of the film where the lead character is just walking, no dialogue, nothing. Just a man walking down country lanes.

I could go on and on about this film but i guess it would sound like a rant. I am surprised that anything like this could ever be released. I must admit that there is a certain monty python charm to this film, but do you really want to buy a film where the only entertainment is laughing at the cast and directer?

It may be tempting to want to own the worst film ever made. But PLEASE don't buy this film as it will only encourage those who made it to make more!

Jabberwocky

03-11-2006, 20:46

God why do they HAVE to wreck a potentially great movie like that? The story is brilliant and a landmark in science fiction history yet they have to ruin it like that.

All i want to see is the movie made in england with an authentic time line and with actors and effects that would do Wells justice.

okka north

05-11-2006, 10:34

I'd rather stare at flowery wallpaper and work out how many petals there are per square metre than have to watch any of the bond films, including the new one.

Beakerzoid

05-11-2006, 11:32

Ok thanks for the warning.

Im determined to win the lottery so i can make a decent version of it. True to the book.

If that ever happens, I'll help you make it. In fact, if I win the lottery, I'll foot the bill.

cressida

05-11-2006, 11:36

the new James Bond film will be a big box office hit, why? because of the new James Bond, Daniel Craig, who not only looks the part but he is the most attractive one yet.

PuressenceUK

17-11-2006, 00:23

It's late, just got in from an advance corporate event screening at The Printworks in Manchester.

It's absolutely amazing. Go and see it ASAP.

The guys will love the action sequences (as always with Bond, only this time he kicks some SERIOUS arse), and the lasses will swoon over Daniel Craig (or at least 99% of the ladies in this screening were).

Harry O

17-11-2006, 00:54

Harry O

17-11-2006, 00:56

I'd rather stare at flowery wallpaper and work out how many petals there are per square metre than have to watch any of the bond films, including the new one.

Let me Sellotape your eyelids open and force you to watch it..........then you could tell me if it was worth going to see.

NEKRO138

17-11-2006, 08:06

I went to watch it last night. It is brilliant. My favourite Bond film so far. Apart from the terrible product placement.

cressida

17-11-2006, 08:15

not seen the film but Daniel Craig looks more of a hard man than any of them, no quips, just get on with it, never thought much of any male star in the way of attractiveness but he has it

Cuey

18-11-2006, 16:13

Its a great film and Daniel Craig was superb. The product placement was a bit obvious but i guess with a £100million cost you need to get every penny you can. What really suprises me is that it is a cert 12. There is a torture scene that made my eyes water and if it every gets shown on terestrial TV it will have to be edited.

Kingmaker2

19-11-2006, 11:36

Theyre doing it AGAIN!

ANOTHER bloody James Bond movie!

I wonder what the plot will be this time.
A mad man wants to take over the world by killing huge amounts of people with nerve gas/ bacteria/ nukes and JB infiltrates his lab/volcano/undersea fortress/space station pretending to be an expert blah de blah de blah then at the end theres some geek in the usual uniform doing a countdown as JB and an elite troop of marines descend on ropes to fight the baddies...

Come on, own up! Whose actually PAYING to go and watch this tripe? Come on, tell me, I promise not to extract the wee-wee.

heh heh

Hey Jabber don't knock Bond, there's nothing wrong with a bit of Bond excitement now and again. I grew up with watching Sean Connery and Roger Moore, although I much preferred the more serious Connery as Bond.
Let's face it, most guys wished they could be James Bond and still do.
Just like certain songs everybody seems to remember what they were doing when their favourite Bond film was doing the rounds and who could forget the fantastic "Goldfinger" sound track.
Bond is a British institution and long may it continue.
If Bond were ever to finally hang up his holster then there would be far more tears than cheers.

pattricia

19-11-2006, 11:42

the new James Bond film will be a big box office hit, why? because of the new James Bond, Daniel Craig, who not only looks the part but he is the most attractive one yet.

I agree. The body youve been waiting for ladies.Straight from the horses mouth,as you can see from my avatar Im Miss Moneypenny. :thumbsup:

Whatif wewin

19-11-2006, 21:13

Well what do you think of the latest Bond film. My sons and I saw it yesterday.

rubydazzler

19-11-2006, 21:16

What do you think? After all you saw it, give us your review. Was it worth going?

Whatif wewin

19-11-2006, 21:30

What do you think? After all you saw it, give us your review. Was it worth going?

Well since you ask.

I thought it was bloody fantastic!
My boys 23 and 14 enjoyed it immensely
My wife refuses to watch Bond, but I think she would possibly have liked this one.
She likes 'Spooks' and this was a cross twixt Spooks and Bond.
The story was more believable, but kept to the original Fleming book, with the obvious need to bring up to date.
Bond was a little 'mad' an orphan. I will stop there so as not to give away too much.

pattricia

19-11-2006, 21:39

Well since you ask.

I thought it was bloody fantastic!
My boys 23 and 14 enjoyed it immensely
My wife refuses to watch Bond, but I think she would possibly have liked this one.
She likes 'Spooks' and this was a cross twixt Spooks and Bond.
The story was more believable, but kept to the original Fleming book, with the obvious need to bring up to date.
Bond was a little 'mad' an orphan. I will stop there so as not to give away too much.

Havent seen it yet , but Like the look of Daniel Craig.Wow. :thumbsup:

rubydazzler

19-11-2006, 21:43

Havent seen it yet , but Like the look of Daniel Craig.Wow. :thumbsup:

tsk :hihi:

..... apparently the shot of him coming out of the sea in his little blue trunks is going to be the iconic image of the decade!

pattricia

19-11-2006, 21:44

tsk :hihi:

..... apparently the shot of him coming out of the sea in his little blue trunks is going to be the iconic image of the decade!

That will suit me nicely thank you. :thumbsup:

Whatif wewin

19-11-2006, 21:46

Has any one else on the forum seen it ?
What do you think ?

medusa

19-11-2006, 21:52

Mod note: Several similar threads merged.

HappyHoosier

20-11-2006, 18:02

Saw "Casino Royale" over the weekend and was blown away. Daniel Craig is the quintessential James Bond. Absolutely, positively, the best one ever! :thumbsup:

I must admit I had my doubts when he was chosen, but he's even better than Sean Connery. He looked fab in his tailored clothes and luxury cars -- and even better out of them!

The movie was good, too -- more faithful to the Ian Fleming novels than most of the others. It even included some of the dialogue as well as the heinous, manhood-threatening torture scene that's so uncomfortable to read in the book.

I was especially thrilled that the script dispensed with all that high-tech gadget goofiness.

I wish they would remake all the Bond movies in order -- with Craig as 007.

Halibut

20-11-2006, 18:52

I thought it was excellent. Craig makes a superb Bond and watching Roger Moore after this is going to be even more excruciating.
More realism, more humanity - a Bond who feels pain, isn't superhuman and actually bleeds. Gone are the gut - wrenchingly awful lame gags of yore, replaced with a few genuinely witty lines. As HappyHoosier points out the gadgetry is down to an absolute minimum ( no 'Q' exasperatedly telling bond not to wreck the new 'toy' ) and in its place some truly gritty and (slightly) believable fights and action sequences.
Not sure who the actress is playing Vesper Lynd, but she does a fine job and is damned pretty too. It's a lengthy picture, but I'd recommend it to anyone, with the possible exception of under twelves of a nervous disposition.
The ten year old that came with us had to mke a trip to loo to avoid the worst of the torture scene....

Funky_Gibbon

20-11-2006, 21:56

I saw it yesterday and thought it was pretty good, certainly one of the better Bond films. The action scenes at the start where Bond is chasing someone are fantastic.

The ending seemed a bit tacked on but someone told me that the next film was going to be a kind of sequel where some of the loose ends would be sorted.

The actress who played Vesper Lynd is called Eva Green.

BTW if you go and see it in the cinema feel free to kill anyone who starts playing with their mobile phone in the middle of the film. It's a mercy killing.

TheGodOfWar

20-11-2006, 22:07

i watched it on friday thought it was amazing. i like the new one compared to the old ones kinda glad they got rid of the gadgets. in this one 007 has a more violent side which is good.
And the car is amazing aston martin Dbs he crashes it way to quick though.

Moonwalker

21-11-2006, 21:55

Saw the film last weekend and thought it was fantastic. My dearly beloved actually said that, because we'd seen it in meadowhall and were walking back down one of the malls upstairs, she had an urge to jump up on the barrier and dive accross to the next one:hihi:
Can't wait for the DVD to come out, deffinatly going to be purchasing it. Daniel Craig has joined Roger Moore as my top favourite Bond of all time, I think simply because even thought Roger Moore was doing Bond at a time when the one-liners were full and a bit boring, he managed to bring that bit extra to them but make put them accross in such a way they were easy to forgive :D
Loved the plot, action sequences, witty but not over done one-liners and all in all I would reccommend to anyone who hasn't seen it to please pleas go and watch it.

Banjo Griner

21-11-2006, 22:18

apparently the shot of him coming out of the sea in his little blue trunks is going to be the iconic image of the decade!
The iconic image of the decade is officially Paul Burrell choking on a Kangaroo testicle.

SimonS

22-11-2006, 15:07

I thought some of the story such as who was double crossing who could have been explained better, but 10/10 for the action scenes.

Shaun_A

22-11-2006, 21:34

I want to take my son and wanted to know if it would be acceptable for a youngster of 6?

Shaun

PS I'm not after perfection, just not gory and the likes.

Halibut

22-11-2006, 22:45

I want to take my son and wanted to know if it would be acceptable for a youngster of 6?

Shaun

PS I'm not after perfection, just not gory and the likes.

I think it may well be a bit much for a six year old. There's plenty of fairly realistic violence and a torture scene which sent the ten year old I was with scurrying away to the loo (i.e. he was terrified and didn't want to admit it).
Not a great deal by way of blood, but fairly graphic depictions of killing. I'd wait till he's older frankly.

donuticus

23-11-2006, 05:14

The BBFC have classified this film as 12A meaning it is suitable for those around that age for those under that age a responsible adult is required to accompany them in the screening.

The film was originally classified as 15 due to the graphic nature of one torture scene. This was edited down to make it eligible for 12A certificate less than three seconds of the original print were removed this however removed ".........the underlying intensity from the scene in question" (direct quote) however the BBFC do not believe that it is suitable for anyone under the age of 10.

Hope this is of use to you.

yummyyumyum

23-11-2006, 09:39

i was dragged along by my hubby to see james bond last night.
my hubby is a big fan of bond films. i am the complete opposite im afraid, i really cant stand them.
i have to admit i enjoyed this one. even my hubby said its possibly his favourite.
casino royale would appeal to fans and non fans alike.

nez75

23-11-2006, 13:02

I went to see it last night and I thought it was great. Its alot grittier, darker and more realistic than previous Bond films which is what the franchise needed IMO.

Did anyone else see Richard Branson's cameo? He was in the Miami airport scene getting searched by some security guards at check-in. Blink and you'll miss it though.

Whatif wewin

23-11-2006, 16:22

I saw it yesterday and thought it was pretty good, certainly one of the better Bond films. The action scenes at the start where Bond is chasing someone are fantastic.

BTW if you go and see it in the cinema feel free to kill anyone who starts playing with their mobile phone in the middle of the film. It's a mercy killing.

I agree with that, no one seems to actually talk on their mobile, thank goodness but don't these people realise that their lit up screen ,tiny though it is plainly distracting to others' enjoyment of the film?

crowefan

24-11-2006, 00:13

I thought it was a cracking film

Daniel Craig was excellent , sexy,big ego, physical and vunerable

go see it

Beakerzoid

24-11-2006, 06:44

BTW if you go and see it in the cinema feel free to kill anyone who starts playing with their mobile phone in the middle of the film. It's a mercy killing.

...although please wait until you have followed them out after the film, and left the building. The paperwork on a death would be a nightmare, and delay me getting home after lock-up.

Much obliged! :)

As for Bond. My review is up for all to read in full over at filmfile.co.uk

I loved it!

Hjdary

26-11-2006, 21:26

Just been to Centretainment today with my son to see the new Bond flick.

Went last week as well, to see it with Mrs Dary.

This is the first time I have ever wanted to go and see a movie twice, and if I'm honest I would gladly go and see it again.

This afternoon the boy and me, loved every minute of it, and on the drive home spent the whole time talking about it.

Can't remember ever loving a film as much as this.
I have seen some great films, (On video or DVD) my favorite being Blazing Saddles but I think this is possibly the best thing I have ever seen at the picture's!

ps Also discovered the nachos and jalapeno chilli's today.....they rock, mind you its now 22.24 and I have had quite a bit of dark rum and it is reacting with the chilli's a bit...time for some Rennie's I think!

cressida

26-11-2006, 21:39

My son went to see it tonight and thought it great, the car chase, the special effects, scenery (finished in Venice) and the lack of music which usually builds up when the villain appears, all in all one of the best if not THE best

scarby

26-11-2006, 21:51

Just been to see it tonight, wern't too bad, although the popcorn has gone downhill since the last time I went! :hihi:

andy22kent

26-11-2006, 22:44

Thought the film was quiet good, New bond man wasnt bad. Alot more violent than the normal bond films i thought, More blood etc etc lots of fighting. Story line was not as good as some of the bond films. would recomend it though.

Andy

Mr Goose

21-12-2006, 11:01

Went to see it last night. Mrs Goose and I really enjoyed it....

Anybody know if he has signed up to do another?

Hecate

21-12-2006, 11:20

According to IMDB (http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0830515/), 'Bond 22' is in pre-production, with the delightful Mr Craig listed in the credits.

Clare85

21-12-2006, 12:20

Mr Goose

21-12-2006, 12:27

Does anybody think if James Bond was a certificate 15 it would be better.

Its just soooo cheesy (however I have not seen new one...)

I just think it needs a bit more violence through the action.....

Maybe even some swearing?

The new one is not cheesy, quite dark, violent and gory... it was a 12a, but the Geese thought it should have been a 15. It definately was NOT a kids movie - no space gadgets to speak of, and stuff like cringe making torture scenes.

Actualy, the torture scene made me wince..... and Im a Goose!

Clare85

21-12-2006, 12:29

medusa

21-12-2006, 12:32

Mod Note: Thread merged into the megathread.

Mr Goose

21-12-2006, 12:57

Well.

I may enjoy it then! I am not saying I am a violent maniac or anything, just needs more oomph.

But then I suppose that would just ruin the whole idea of James Bond and die hard fans would probably hate it.

Its actually a lot closer to the spirit of the books.

I have seen all the bond flicks, and I would put it up there with "From Russia With Love"

(as you will gather - I dont like the kiddie friendly 1970's ones)

Ps
(looks round)
I have been sick in Timothy Dalton's dog kennel :( )

StarSparkle

21-12-2006, 13:49

Its actually a lot closer to the spirit of the books.

I have seen all the bond flicks, and I would put it up there with "From Russia With Love"
(as you will gather - I dont like the kiddie friendly 1970's ones)

Ps
(looks round)
I have been sick in Timothy Dalton's dog kennel :( )

I used to really dislike "From Russia with Love" when I was younger - thought it was the worst of the Bond films. Now it's one of my very faves - I'm assuming it's an age thing? The Sean Connery Bond was very much closer to the Bond of the books - a barely-civilised virtual psychopath, so I guess those films were much more suited to an adult audience.

StarSparkle

Mr Goose

21-12-2006, 13:54

I used to really dislike "From Russia with Love" when I was younger - thought it was the worst of the Bond films. Now it's one of my very faves - I'm assuming it's an age thing? The Sean Connery Bond was very much closer to the Bond of the books - a barely-civilised virtual psychopath, so I guess those films were much more suited to an adult audience.

StarSparkle

And Robert Shaw is an ace badie... not one who looks like he has been to drama school either (in a good way)

I'm sure you will like the new one Sparkly!

StarSparkle

21-12-2006, 13:56

And Robert Shaw is an ace badie... not one who looks like he has been to drama school either (in a good way)

I'm sure you will like the new one Sparkly!

I'm sure I will - just as soon as I can get organised enough to get out to the cinema! :thumbsup:

StarSparkle

country_girl

04-01-2007, 23:11

I went to watch it tonight and really enjoyed it however I was left a little confused. I know Casino Royale is the first book however is the film a prequel to the others as it refers to events that have take place after the other films were made. I think it is a prequel because James Bond has just got promoted to a 00 and he makes a lot of mistakes eg being seen, however my friend said that the films see James Bond as a title awarded to a new spy therefore James Bond isn't real its a code name. I felt a bit confused because I interpretted the film to be introducing the character of James Bond and establishing who he was surely if it was the case of being a code name the agents wouldn't have virtually the same characters eg the drink they like, womanisers who don't get involved (In casion royale I know he fell in love but could that be the reason why ever since JB has been emotionally detached apart from once?) etc.

If anyone has any ideas it would be appreciated.

turpz

05-01-2007, 00:00

It is a prequel, but it isn't... the character's the same guy, but I think they decided not to set everything before the other films, timeline-wise. So basically we're meant to realise that everything that happens to Bond in the new film, had already happened to the Bonds in the older films, but we just have to ignore the time it was set in.

In the book of Casino Royale, it's set in the 1940's anyway, so none of the films' timings have been spot on.

And while we're on the subject, has anyone else read the book, and what did you think? I didn't reckon much to it at all... To say it's the first book, Bond is never introduced really, and had no deep character?

D2J

05-01-2007, 08:26

My expectations weren't high on this one as I hadn't seen Daniel Craig in anything previously. Really enjoyed the film :D

Roll on the next one and the release of Die Hard 4 in June :D

chimaera

05-01-2007, 09:32

Country_Girl - It's a series reboot - basically they're starting again but in contemporary times - Batman Begins is another example of this. That M is the same actress as in the previous films is a bit confusing though - but sice her role is *much* better this time round I'm not complaining :)

My short review is that aI loved the movie, its easily one of the best films I saw in 2006 (along with Goodnight and Good Luck)

ShefStudents

05-01-2007, 13:56

i just have to say that the naked torture scene in that film was the best scene from any film, ever, can't think why......................... :D

country_girl

05-01-2007, 15:43