Superman Through the Ages! Forum

Superman Through the Ages! => The Clubhouse! => Topic started by: davidelliott on November 18, 2006, 05:07:56 AM



Title: Anyone see Casino Royale yet?
Post by: davidelliott on November 18, 2006, 05:07:56 AM
FINE!  I'm warming up to the idea of this movie... the Bond series I guess needed a fresh start.

Anyone see it?  Is it any good?  Any tamperings with the gunbarrel, opening credits, pre-title sequence, etc?  Is the formula intact?  Faithfulness to the novel?



Title: Re: Anyone see Casino Royale yet?
Post by: Super Monkey on November 18, 2006, 01:18:52 PM
I haven't seen it, I have only watch the old Bond films, but here is a review:

http://www.suntimes.com/entertainment/movies/137741,CST-FTR-wwcasino16.article


Title: Re: Anyone see Casino Royale yet?
Post by: davidelliott on November 18, 2006, 02:15:38 PM
Cool review... I am looking forward to nightwing's review!


Title: Re: Anyone see Casino Royale yet?
Post by: Permanus on November 18, 2006, 05:34:12 PM
You're just using this forum to convince yourself to go and see the film, aren't you?  ;)
Go and see it! What's the worst that could happen? (Though I agree with you, Nightwing's review should be something else!)


Title: Re: Anyone see Casino Royale yet?
Post by: nightwing on November 18, 2006, 10:44:15 PM
Quote
Anyone see it?  Is it any good?  Any tamperings with the gunbarrel, opening credits, pre-title sequence, etc?  Is the formula intact?  Faithfulness to the novel?

Yes, me, as of five hours ago. 

Quote
Is it any good?

Yes, it's excellent.  Easily the most emotionally involving Bond since 1969's OHMSS, and I must say very stylishly directed considering the man at the helm is Martin Campbell, whom most of us had written off as a workmanlike director at best.  And with the exception of a bit player or two, everyone does a great job with the acting.


Quote
Any tamperings with the gunbarrel, opening credits, pre-title sequence, etc?

Yes, all of them, but all in respectful and cool ways.  Go see it before someone spoils them for you.

The best part of the above, for me, is Danny Kleinman's credits, which are imaginative, striking and nostalgic despite looking like none in the series before.  He's managed a look that's somehow "retro" and futuristic all at once...sort of a mesh of 60s pop art, vintage private eye show credits (especially the Saint) and nice homages to the cover art of Casino Royale's first edition hardback (appropriately created, back then, from sketches by Fleming himself).  After years of aping Maurice Binder, Kleinman's gone off his own way and boy does it work.

The only downside is the song stinks like a dead skunk family on a hot stretch of highway.


Quote
Is the formula intact?


Well, more the Fleming formula than the EON formula.   It certainly doesn't hit all the usual marks like clockwork as the last few have ("Let's see, 45 minutes in, time for the second-stringer Bond girl to die....there she goes...and now the speech from the villain...).  This one's structured differently and you'll be kept guessing as to what's coming next. It's all in there (well, no giant hidden fortresses) but in new configurations.

Quote
Faithfulness to the novel?[/


Oh boy, if you're a fan of Fleming are you going to like this one.  If you're old enough to have seen OHMSS in the theater (I'm not!), this is probably what it felt like.  Or if you were around to see the first part of The Living Daylights, where the whole "sniper was a girl" routine is lifted from the short story, then you know how fun it is to see Fleming, real Fleming on screen, even for a few minutes.  That's the whole second half of this film.  There are modifications and updates to the novel, because it has been fifty years after all...and besides you don't want to know everything before it happens.  But all the important moments from the book are here, not to mention some of the original dialog, and it all unfolds in the right sequence.  CR reminds me of the Grenada Sherlock Holmes series or the more recent "Hornblower" TV films...there are alterations because it's film and not prose, but where it counts its very faithful indeed.  And it really makes you appreciate what a great thriller writer Fleming was, that a very much "of the moment" film could follow his story outline so closely and work as well today as it did in  1954.

One caveat: if your total exposure to Bond comes from the films, and you want more of the same, you may be disappointed with this movie, disoriented and yes, even bored.  But if you're a fan of the novels, you'll love it.  If you like "Bourne," you'll love it.  And, it must be said, if you hate James Bond movies, you'll love it.  My wife went with me only after making it clear I would owe her big time for sitting through yet another Bond movie (and one with an "ugly" 007, at that), but when the lights came up, she was singing its praises.

Pay your money, enjoy your popcorn and pretend you've never seen a James Bond movie before.  Officially you haven't, as this is a reboot.  We may have been born to late to see "Dr No" first time out, but this is a rare second chance to get in on the ground floor of something amazing.  Don't pass it up.


P.S. - saw the Spider-Man 3 trailer.  I am so over that series.




Title: Re: Anyone see Casino Royale yet?
Post by: davidelliott on November 18, 2006, 11:18:54 PM
Thanks, nightwing...

I LOVE the Fleming novels... I loved his writing style and all...

I do think the series is due for a reboot of sorts, come to think of it.... so I am a little bit more open minded about it.  I was leery of a really "hard" reboot that some elements would be missing, like the gunbarrel and pre-credits sequences.  Believe it or not, for me, without the traditional gunbarrel sequence at the beginning, it's not a Bond film (NSNA was a good little film, but didn't feel right from the start)

I'm assuming the opening credits are a bit like the one Robert Brownjohn did for FRWL and GF?  Bond-like but different?

The kids are off school this week, maybe I'll take the boys to a matinee showing.  But I'm going to see it.

BTW, OHMSS is my favorite Bond film, so if there are similarities I should be in for a treat after all...


Title: Re: Anyone see Casino Royale yet?
Post by: nightwing on November 20, 2006, 10:11:50 AM
Quote
I'm assuming the opening credits are a bit like the one Robert Brownjohn did for FRWL and GF?  Bond-like but different?

If I had to liken them to any previous credits, it would be OHMSS, with the silhouetted Bond figure running about and the focus on one over-arching visual theme (for OHMSS, it was timepieces, for this film, playing cards).  There's also, as I said, a bit of the feel of the "Saint" titles of the color years and, now that I think of it, Apple's i-Pod commercials (!).

Overall, there's a cleaner, more simplified feel to the credits that fits the tone of the film.

Quote
The kids are off school this week, maybe I'll take the boys to a matinee showing.  But I'm going to see it.

I don't know how old your kids are, but please be advised this film is probably not appropriate for kids under 15.  Well, maybe 12 depending on the kid.

While not what I'd call "gory" by modern standards, there's a lot of blood in this film and, for a Bond, a much more realistic take on violence and its consequences.  Killing is a messy and difficult business and that's reflected here.  Also, the torture scene is lifted straight from the book, and it's pretty rough stuff.  In fact until I saw it I never believed the day would come that they could put it in a non-R film.

Oh, and the language this time out is considerably saltier than your standard Bond.  In fact, once or twice I had to chuckle at the mental image of the Queen of England watching this film at the royal premiere last week.  I hope the cast met her *before* the movie because if it was me I'd have a hard time looking her in the eye afterwards.  "Sorry about the language, mum.  They made me say it."



Title: Re: Anyone see Casino Royale yet?
Post by: davidelliott on November 20, 2006, 01:28:05 PM
I think it was in Raymond Benson's "James Bond Bedside Companion" that Cubby Broccoli wanted the Bond films to be a movie you could take your teenage kids to (pretty much) and to be somewhat family friendly... those days are gone....



Title: Re: Anyone see Casino Royale yet?
Post by: nightwing on November 20, 2006, 03:19:10 PM
Yes and what was that famous quote from all those years ago...from Pauline Kael perhaps: Bond films are "sadism for the whole family"?  :D

Whether CR is inappropriate for your children is your call to make.  It's certainly not the worst thing out there and it does show restraint.  But as Bond's go, it's decidedly more earthy than most installments.

Some folks may have no trouble with kids seeing it.  In fact as we stood in line outside the theater, the wife and I noticed a prominent sign on the front door:

"Children under 6 years of age will not be admitted to R-rated films after 6 pm".

Well, good for them...you've got to draw the line somewhere.  ::)


Title: Re: Anyone see Casino Royale yet?
Post by: Super Monkey on November 20, 2006, 07:27:13 PM
oh boy, you better watch the film after all of that (two long threads!) or I will ban you ;)

There now you must watch it :)


Title: Re: Anyone see Casino Royale yet?
Post by: davidelliott on November 21, 2006, 08:34:52 PM
Just got back from seeing the film....

Very faithful to the novel.. first movie since OHMSS to be so.  I liked the "explanations" of somethings.. who is Bond shooting in the gunbarrel sequence at the beginning of each film (hate the redesigned gunbarrel, though)... the signature martini the "Vesper", the drive of 007, etc...  the titles were awesome and I didn't terribly mind the theme song...

Daniel Craig.. the jury's still out.  He doesn't look like Bond, either Fleming's Bond or the EON Bond.  BUT he did do a better effort than I thought he would.  I'm glad Felix Leiter made an appearance, but changing his race and personality was a negetive.  As a fan of the novels, I love the Leiter of the books and I wish that EON would portray him as he is in the Fleming books.

Little things that made the movie... the recipe for the Vesper drink was great.  I love the little touches in the film like that.

This is definitely a restart of the series... one that I guess is sorely needed.  Die Another Day was the last of the previous Bond series and this is an obvious restart.  I'm wondering if SPECTRE or SMERSH will also return...

More as I dwell on it...


Title: Re: Anyone see Casino Royale yet?
Post by: davidelliott on November 23, 2006, 12:02:57 PM
Welllll... I watched Die Another Day again last night... for the first time in a couple of years.  Compared to Casino Royale, DAD was like Moonraker... so over the top!  The "effects" were horrible, direction was horrible, the car chase on the ice was embarrassing...

But I still love the references to the earlier films.  And the plot was similar to the Fleming version of Moonraker.

Now I'm wondering if EON is going to remake all the novels, more faithfully and in order...


Title: Re: Anyone see Casino Royale yet?
Post by: davidelliott on November 25, 2006, 04:05:22 AM
Well, I'm monopolizing this thread ;-)

I saw CR again... took my 2 teenage stepsons this afternoon... I liked it more the 2nd time around.

It feels like a early Bond film, like Dr No or From Russia With Love.  Daniel Craig has grown on me and in him I see some Connery and some Dalton, but that BLONDE hair!!! I like the opening credits alot (very retro) and yes, the Bond series needed an overhaul BADLY.  Comparing this film with Die Another Day is night and day.  I never cared for Brosnan as Bond (shudder)... he was too, um, pretty?  Very much like Roger Moore (a little tougher).

FINE! I'm a convert!


Title: Re: Anyone see Casino Royale yet?
Post by: JulianPerez on December 04, 2006, 03:07:56 AM
Well, I just managed to catch CASINO ROYALE, and I really loved it.

In one of life's weird little coincidences, the shopping mall that I saw CASINO ROYALE at was the exact same mall that was hosting the macabre BODIES exhibit that James Bond himself goes to when he briefly touches down in Miami!

First things first: I love the new guy. He's so dispassionate that he's downright glacial. If they do a Doc Savage movie, this guy would be a pretty good choice.

I love how this film captures early Connery-era James Bond's grit and toughness - this was, after all, the guy that threw an electric lamp at a guy in a bathtub! The film opens up with a distinctly un-Bondish, but very Tarantino-esque fight sequence in black and white, which is set inside of a lavatory. The violence in the movie has a brutality that reminds me of a cross between particularly stylish gangster movies, and Edgar Rice Burroughs's Tarzan and his battles fought by the law of the jungle. The movies involved brawls with a sense where blows connect, and no slick, overchoreographed fight scenes can be seen here.

The first hour of this film does the best it can to establish this particular new Bond film as being "not your father's Bond." Bond doesn't do any of the familiar stuff. I never before realized how much the Bond films were really going through the motions with all that "shaken, not stirred" Martini stuff. It was astonishingly refreshing to see Bond sipping on a coke and rum. Sometimes, doing something over and over again can be stifling instead of reassuring. I was especially relieved to see Bond wasn't going to have a chase on skis.

They even have a little fun with the Bond formula. There's one scene where he drives up to a health club. Surprise! He's actually valet parking. Dum dum dum! On another occasion, somebody asks him if he'd want his martini shaken or stirred, and Bond says "Do I look like I give a darn?"

Every single problem that faced Bond in the last few movies here, is corrected. I love Bond's gadget watches too, but you can only go so far making the same movie over and over.

For one thing, no CGI. None whatsoever. There is one absolutely astonishing chase sequence that is a return to the days of hollywood stuntmen and athletes in action pictures, which features Bond chasing down an astonishingly athletic figure that must be part cat, made all the more incredible because it has no wires, just one very limber athlete. Bond doesn't do anything totally insane: the most number of people he takes on at once in this entire film is two.

There was no car chase. Thank God!

I loved the first hour, where James Bond is put-putting around some third world locations that feel like the real Africa. It always bothered me that when James Bond went to a locale, they showed the EPCOT version. This was especially apparent in OCTOPUSSY, where they go through India and they have fakirs, guys on a bed of nails, snake charmers...every goofy Hollywood cliche.

Bond in the less glamorous but more real Third World made it all the more a breath of fresh air when they captured the espionage related glamour later on in the film. You knew the first act was over when some gorgeous dame rises from the water onto the bad guy's private yacht, hosting a card game. That's when we get back into familiar gentleman spy, glamour adventure Bond territory with Bond in a tux...but by this point we get the sense of how different this film is than the others.

I did like they used Poker instead of Baccarat. There was an episode of PINKY AND THE BRAIN where Brain's casino goes out of business...because nobody on Earth knows how to play Baccarat!

This James Bond in this movie is very cerebral. We see Bond do some detective work in this film, using rather ordinary means. Further, Bond has his most important quality: the ability to improvise and come up with a clever solution, hair-trigger wits where he has a life and death situation and in barely a second thinks of something. This movie is an espionage-style thriller: there are betrayals and people have multiple motives.

One important thing about this movie that is emphasized is James Bond as a kind of cog in a machine, that comes up with little passive-aggressive ways to get back at his superiors. Bond' rapport with M here is priceless.