It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I agree, wouldn't change a thing.
I also would have changes the scene in the hotel room with Le Chiffre and the African Warlord(can't remember his name). I know Le Chiffre was supposed to be a middle man of sorts, but it weakened him as a villain for me by being so pathetic in that exchange.
Other than that though, not a great deal. It's a class film. One of the top 6 or 7 Bond films ever, and Craig's best by a million miles.
Agreed. I could nitpick but I feel that changing one thing might alter the rest so...leave CR alone. Classic Bond, possibly the best of all.
For me Casino Royale is perfect the way it is.
Not that it would be a bad movie, particularly a Deakins’ contribution, but all of the fun and energy that makes CR so special would be sucked from it by the other two .
While I’ve come to appreciate Newman’s SF score, and he may , arguably, be. “better” overall composer than Arnold, the latter knocked it our of the park with his work on CR, including the magnificent YKMN . His contribution is a vital element of the film’s success.
Mendes would have made it more dower and introspective, with Le Chiffre being revealed to be Bond’s long lost third cousin. :P
There must have been some deleted scene regarding Bond's mangled gonads, because the whole 'little finger' dialogue seems even clunkier than it is.
I don't remember any passage in the novel that specifically states Le Chiffre is first mission after earning his licence. Maybe I need to read it again?
Of course part of the publicity machine selling factor was the re-boot concept and starting an entire new Bond series fresh, so in that respect it worked, and audiences flocked. But that idea never really did anything for me.
I think Batman Begins had alot to do with creating the origin story for Bond. As we never knew how exactly he got started prior in the films.
I think so as well. Batman Begins was huge. If one were to do a re-boot of the series with CR, that was definitely the right time. Today, I find it seems more like a gimmick to bring fresh ideas to the series after the DAD overkill.
I don't find the film as faithful to the novel as FRWL or OHMSS. If one were to really film the book, it would probably have the same run-time as QOS. The first half of the film has very little in common with the novel, IMO.
1. I would make the deceit of Mathis a bit clearer. I think a lot of people were confused back in 2006 when the film came out and maybe even still to this day.
2. I would remove the whole new name for the game aspect, or let Bond keep the name until a better point in the film. Introducing the idea of having different names and then having James just give his name away was somewhat pointless. Why have Bond be given a name at all if all he's gonna do is not use it and give his identity away anyway? I understand that it was a look into Bond's character but I don't know how much Bond would say mod edit on his first proper mission? I could be wrong.
I believe he is referring to Bond believing Mathis was the 'inside man' rather than Vesper. I agree with him too, that it could have been made clearer that Mathis was totally innocent at the end of it all.
The first half additions were deliberate because the producers realized that Bond film audiences (as opposed to the readers) demand action.
I love the stripped-down approach in CR despite its long run time. I see Villiers and think "Where's Moneypenny?" but then I think, "Oh, that's kind of cool and different."
QoS continued in this stripped-down vein but apparently went too far with its editing and departures from the formula to resonate with audiences.
Mendes, in the course of two films, brought us back to pretty much the same series bloat that we had with DAD after 20 films. Quite a feat.
And this is tangentially related but...why does every film (not just Bond) have to be 2 hours and 20 minutes now? Whatever happened to efficiency?
If his portrayal had stayed this way, I would have enjoyed his Bond a lot more.
Exactly that. A perfect movie.
Get rid of the Omega line as that exchange is gold with Craig and Green sparking immediately but that crass product placement almost brings it crashing to a halt.
I would change the Miami sequence, it's OK but that truck chase just makes me think of poor man's Raiders, something in the same setting just something more original, after the utterly superb PTS, the Parkour Madagascan chase and everything up to this point it feels a let down.
Also those Austin Powers horns on the score when the sky plane is unveiled, probably Arnold's only mistake of the film.
Also junk the little finger line.
After that we are good to go and the rest is fine by me.
There's relatively little I'd change, but here's a try:
-It's important to be careful what we wish for, but sometimes I wish CR had a bigger budget. There are one or two scenes that look a little cheap - the exteriors at the Nambutu embassy, for instance. More location work would have been nice too - mostly it works, but Miami is very generic.
-Similarly, some more lush cinematography might make things more immersive. At the time I wasn't bothered by it, but the bar has been raised so much by SF and SP.
-As others have mentioned, the "little finger" exchange makes me cringe a bit.
-Ibid., but the whole "Mathis is (not) a double" thing was unclear to me at the time (and I'm a fan!). Maybe casual viewers simply didn't care, but it might have helped if the moment that Bond spotted "ellipsis" on Vesper's phone we also saw something fall into place that vindicated Mathis more clearly. When he tells M later to "keep sweating Mathis," we're back to square one (until halfway through QOS).
-I'm indifferent to Caterina Murino as Solange. I know she has her fans but I'd be happy enough with someone else in the role.
Things not to change:
-The cast is almost totally perfect. Eva and Mads deserve big credit here, but good lord Mathis and Leiter are brilliant. Absolutely everyone has excellent chemistry here - you'd think they'd all done several movies together already.
-The exchange on the train actually works well for me, Omega and all. I'd heard that Tom Stoppard did some polishing on this script, and if so I'd wager some of that snappy back-and-forth is his. More like this in future please, EON!
-The 'humour' here is absolutely spot-on. This especially stands out relative to the difficulty they've had in adding levity to the movies since. But the bit with the German tourists at the Ocean Club or the "that last hand nearly killed me" are perfect.
-The PTS is lovely. The ending with Mr.White is perfect. . . ah, the more I think about this one the better it gets.
Get in while you can and get ready for Quantum of Solace.
Pretty underwhelming considering how they mined greatness from Fleming with a new actor in the role and a reboot.
It also bothered me in the restaurant scene how Bond suddenly suspects Mathis and jumps into action to save Vesper. That’s always confused me. What tipped him off? What went through his head there? It was never very clear and always bugged me.
Other than that, fantastic film with the best ending to a Bond movie ever!
The only change i would make is cutting that jarring moment in an otherwise brilliant scene when Vesper mentions Bond's watch. Product placement is one thing, but this is ridiculous.
I don't have many Bond films with a top rating, but this was 5 out of 5 easily.
I concur. The watch thing never bothered me, but then again the first meeting of Vesper and Bond is my favourite scene in the movie. Craig and Green really spark together. Would have liked this sequence to go on longer in fact!
I’d lose the Bond Begins angle, it feels like a faux Nolan. Some of the things I really liked about Dr No was that we immediately got 007 the way he is. That goes for the CR novel as well. It should have been that way in the film too.
Speaking of the novel, it is infuriatingly superior to the film. Vesper’s death for instance is handled with subtlety. In the film it acts as an after thought and it is in the middle of an overblown action scene. Watch OHMSS again to do it right.
Also, have Bond act as sophisticated as he should be. The brutish pleb we see in CR has nothing to do with Ian Fleming’s James Bond I’m afraid. Talking with his mouth full of food, acting smug to a waiter and all that pretended toughness is nowhere near the refined gentleman spy we would have got if they had understood who Bond is and should always be. Might as well have given him an orange Lamborghini instead of that beautiful Aston.
Ow and one minor detail, linguists were clearly never involved in the making of CR. Yes Mr Wilson and Mrs Broccoli, you have a spelling mistake in your title. Casino Royale is correct in Fleming’s book because the casino is named after the fictional town Royale-les-Eaux where the book takes place. This is however not the case in the film which is supposed to take place somewhere in Montenegro and in which case one should drop the e in Royale because “casino” is a masculin word. Hence, it should be Casino Royal.
Also, if you don’t go through the effort of changing all the Czech words on the surrounding shops in Montenegrin why don’t you just tell the audience where you really are, namely in the Czech Republic. Or even better go to France, keep the fictional town created by Fleming and your title is correct again. A bit sloppy if you ask me.
I think CR is a good film because it can use so much Fleming and indeed the best part is the middle part which uses a lot of the book. Also Green, Mikkelsen and Gianninni are genuinely great actors and any film would benefit from their presence. I also think however, it could have been so much better if they had kept more of Fleming’s spirit instead of going full wannabe Nolan. But many were happy with how they did it, so I’m clearly in the minority. I’ll move over now.