Reviews of Casino Royale

This left a lot to be desired

Posted : 4 months, 2 weeks ago on 14 March 2008 07:02 (A review of Casino Royale)

This movie left a lot to be desired as it was horrible the story line was too slow and everytime I tried to watch it I fell asleep other than two nights ago I finally watch it and I would have preferred falling asleep it is too slow too repetitive and the action moments don't seem good enough to call it a bond film
I honestly think they should re-do it and actually make it flow every thing seemed to be tacked on to beef it up it's a disgrace to bond movies and deserves to be burnt in the flaming pits of the Christian hell but it does have it's good points such as the action is pretty good and the romance is in there and it is following in the steps of its predecessors but it just didn't seem right

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Great.

Posted : 5 months ago on 21 February 2008 06:48 (A review of Casino Royale)

This is an excellent film. Daniel Craig does great as James Bond. The plot is exciting and entertaining. There are a lot of great action scenes, and the acting is wonderful. I think this might me the best Bond film so far. I am not saying that for sure though. The great aspect to this film is the gambling they do. It is for some reason very enjoyable and adds a lot of entertainment to the film. This is a great movie.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Kinda back to the roots

Posted : 5 months, 2 weeks ago on 10 February 2008 09:38 (A review of Casino Royale)

They did with this movie the same thing as with Batman begins. It has a much more realistic touch.

Some say that this is not a Bond movie, well...it is a bond movie, but the movie is set long before Bond was the Bond we know from the other 20 movies. So Bond is much more down to earth, he dosn't know the way he wan't his vodka martini, he looks bruised when he was in a fight and he can fall in love.

Watch it if you want to see a great action movie.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Casino Royale

Posted : 7 months, 1 week ago on 22 December 2007 01:15 (A review of Casino Royale)

By no means did this film resurrect the Bond series. I am sorry but I have to disagree with every critic, Daniel Craig is no James Bond. Not only did he not look or carry the role to the standard of any of his predecessors (including George Lazenby), the underlying story was just plain boring. No where near the adventure or the ladies of past movies. The only positive was its redemption of the offbeat Peter Sellers original of the same title.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

five stars

Posted : 8 months ago on 24 November 2007 07:21 (A review of Casino Royale)

Bond's best film of all time...

0 comments, Reply to this entry

I Love 007!

Posted : 10 months, 2 weeks ago on 15 September 2007 07:02 (A review of Casino Royale)

A reallly good movie...i really enjoyed it.
Daniel Craig was a good james bond, well, kind of average, because i still have my favourite.

There were some really good action scenes in this, but some quite unbelievable.. but I guess thats James Bond, eh?

There were actually some really funny lines in it, i was in a cinema full of people and every 5 mins or so they all laughed.

He is a different "bond" character, which was...in some parts good... but some parts bad..
James Bond fans definetly see this!

0 comments, Reply to this entry

The name's Bond...

Posted : 1 year, 4 months ago on 26 March 2007 05:26 (A review of Casino Royale)

No soy gran fan de las películas del 007. De hecho, solo he visto 3 de las de Pierce Brosnan y ninguna pasa el 7 según mi sistema de ratings (el 7 es, para mi, una pelicula que me entretiene pero que olvido en un par de horas).

Pero tenía ganas de ver esta, en parte por el cambio de actor y en parte por las buenas criticas. Y me gustó mucho.

La pelicula dura 2 horas y 20 minutos y no te das cuenta. Es agil, con mucha acción y un par de persecusiones muy buenas. La historia es simple, con un par de giros interesantes (aunque predecibles =/) y un partido de poker memorable :P.
Mención especial a la escena inicial en blanco y negro mostrando cómo Bond se convirtió en doble cero.

Y lo mejor: Daniel Craig. Creo que vi algunas pelis con él, pero nunca le preste atención. Que buen actor que es. Y su Bond fue muy interesante. Es oscuro... pero gris oscuro. Es frio, duro, calculador, pero a la vez capaz de enamorarse y sufrir. Muy distinto al muñequito delicado de Brosnan.

Más en Taly OnLine

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Casino Royale review

Posted : 1 year, 7 months ago on 9 December 2006 08:19 (A review of Casino Royale)

Over the years, Bond films have become more and more focused not on the eponymous character himself, but rather on the Bond girls, the Bond cars, the gadgets and the over-the-top villains. So it's something of a surprise that with almost all of this paired down to its bare bones, Bond still doesn't take the limelight in this installment.

That honour goes to the man behind Bond: Craig, Daniel Craig. In the months leading up to the film's release, he's been thoroughly scrutinized, and everything from his hair and eye colour to his (apparent lack of) car driving skills have been criticized. And as this installment was very-much a character driven Bond movie, fleshing out Bond perhaps more than the previous 20 combined, many didn't believe Craig could pull it off.

But pull it off he did. Craig is not your typical suave, slick, one-liner spewing dark-suited hero - nor is he meant to be. This is something of a Bond Begins, as we follow a muscle-headed Bond being given 00-status, and face a series of character building exercises that eventually turn him into a character closer to the one we know and love.

I say a 'series of character building exercises', I mean: fights on top of moving cranes, high speed chases through airports, high-stakes poker games, torture scenes, brutal fights in public toilets and so on. For all its posturing as a more understated Bond film, there is still plenty of overblown action sequences to munch your popcorn to - they just dont feature INVISIBLE CARS this time round.

It's not all plain sailing though. The film struggles to maintain tension after the somewhat anti-climactic card-game on which the film is centered around, and there are shades of Attack of the Clones about some of the love scenes.

However, that's all very much excusable, in the face of otherwise stellar action sequences, and an excellent start from Daniel Craig. It may not be the best Bond film ever, but it's certainly the best blockbuster of the year.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Bond is back!

Posted : 1 year, 8 months ago on 18 November 2006 02:18 (A review of Casino Royale)

I've always loved watching the James Bond films. The fast paced action and beautiful woman are always a plus in these films. Casino Royale follows in the footsteps of its predecessors. The film has some fantastic action in the beginning of the film. Daniel Craig plays this 007 tough, serious, and ready to kick some serious butt.

The casino scenes will remind you of watching a high stakes poker tournament on ESPN. They kind of drag along and take away from the pace of the action. That was the only real flaw in the movie and it was a minor one. This is a movie that will provide worthy entertainment for the price of your ticket.

On a side note. We had the pleasure of watching the movie with one of the best Bond villains. Richard Keil, "Jaws", was in the theater with us while we were watching the movie. He is even bigger in real life than he is on the silver screen. That brought back a lot of memories seeing him in the auditorium with us. My kids got a real thrill out of seeing a movie star in the theater with us.

Flash

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Bond is back.

Posted : 1 year, 8 months ago on 16 November 2006 01:49 (A review of Casino Royale)

I don't have time to write a long review, so I'll just throw down a few quick thoughts for those thinking of going to see the new bond film 'Casino Royale'.

Firstly, this is the best action film I’ve seen for a long time, probably the best bond film by some way, and Daniel Craig may end up being the franchises best leading man as well.

The film does indeed differ from its predecessors, but is still very much Bond. If anything the thing that stops this film from being even better is the constant comparisons you find yourself making whilst watching. In my case this was increased by having recently read the original novel. This turned out to be a mistake, as whilst the film differs in many respects from the book, I was forewarned of a number of the plot twists.

There was a lot of pressure on Daniel Craig when he took over as Bond, and a lot of rather foolish criticism, and ill-informed talk about him not being up to the physical side of the role. Quite the opposite turns out to be the truth. As for all his credentials as the most ‘heavyweight’ Bond, in terms of acting talent, it’s in the actions sequences where he is truly outstanding. Not only has Craig bulked up for the role, but he plays a Bond with an almost Terminator attitude to getting the job done. Craig’s Bond is relentless, and the first hour of the film, which is mostly action, sees very little dialogue, but a more exacting physical performance than any of his predecessors turned in.

Whilst some of the lessor characters have the 2-D quality of Bond films of old, the main protagonists are much more developed. The relationship between Bond and the two leading ladies, M and Vesper Lynne are given more screen time than usual. This leads to some excellent scenes between Daniel Craig, Judi Dench and Eva Green. Stripped of most of the corny one-liners, the dialogue has much more depth than in previous films, whilst still retaining enough humour to remind you of past glories.

Thankfully the plot is much more fleshed out than the novel it was based on, whilst retaining some of the darker side of the job than Fleming wrote about. My only real criticism is that the Casino scenes do slow things down, leading to the makers feeling the need to up the action a little too much at the end of the film. Personally I ‘d have preferred them to really take a risk with the ‘new Bond’ and finish in a much more low-key manner, concentrating on the consequences of what has happened to them. In the end I think they played things down as much as they could.

All in all this is an excellent film and I’m looking forward to see what Craig does with the character next.

K-S


0 comments, Reply to this entry