Goldeneye vs. Casino Royale

1356712

Comments

  • edited December 2011 Posts: 11,189
    actonsteve wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    M should trust Bond though. She shouldn't treat him like a small child and Bond shouldn't act like one. Also, she says that she trusts him some time before the end in the hallway of the hotel. One mmute she has him suspended pending further investigation, the next she lets him go (after he beats up the agents in the lift). Which is it?

    Shw did, but his actions in Haiti allowed her to query that trust. She has him suspended after the carnage in Haiti.~Once she meets him again i n Bolivia she re evaluates that and supports him after the conversation in La Paz. The character goes through a progression.

    Abit more interesting that just "your a sexist misygonist dinosaur Brozzer.." dont you think.

    I get what you mean but M seems to very quickly change her mind in the hotel. One minute she has Bond taken away saying "I think you're so blinded with inconsolable rage". He beats up the bodyguards, leaves them and M all of a sudden changes her mind.

    "I don't give a shit about the CIA. He's my agent and I trust him.

    Thats come just after he's got an apparent innocent killed and left several of her guards unconscious.

    I just feel that in the pre-Craig era M was a bit more...dignified.
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,262
    actonsteve wrote:
    How to categorise Boris Grischenko? Unfunny comedy character? aka Sherriff J W Pepper syndrome?

    I'd say the difference there was J.W. actually was funny.
  • edited December 2011 Posts: 11,189
    Boris wasn't that bad in my book but he was certainly the most stereotypically "90s" character in GE - much like Truman Lodge was the most stereotypically 80s in LTK and JW was the most stereotypically 70s in LALD and GG.

    I've never had a problem with JW (at least in LALD) but I'm sure u know KK that he's a controversial character.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,718
    BAIN123 wrote:

    I've never had a problem with JW (at least in LALD) but I'm sure u know KK that he's a controversial character.

    IMO Peppah is the best character in the franchise, apart from Bond that is ! I love J.W. !!
  • Posts: 11,189
    Well we all have our thoughts DC. At least you didn't say jinx.
  • Posts: 4,762
    actonsteve wrote:
    00Beast wrote:
    , a magnificent host of villains that is still unmatched by any Bond movie, t!

    Really?

    Better then Red Grant, Klebb, Blofeld, Kronsteen etc? Better then Auric, Oddjob, Pussy? Better then Kananga, Whisper, Tee Hee, Baron Samedi?

    I do agree with LALD and FRWL's villains, since they pretty much lead the movie. I just think that GE's villains interact and go together better than any others. Plus, they are all really unique and contribute something different to Janus that makes them even more dangerous.
  • Posts: 2,107
    J.W. Pepper deserved his own movie! I would've watched and enjoyed it and the sequel too!
  • Posts: 1,492
    BAIN123 wrote:
    [
    I just feel that in the pre-Craig era M was a bit more...dignified.

    Dignified? Is this the same character who tried to free herself from prison with a broom handle?



  • Posts: 1,492
    00Beast wrote:
    [I just think that GE's villains interact and go together better than any others. Plus, they are all really unique and contribute something different to Janus that makes them even more dangerous.

    Umm... I dont think they interact as well as the villains in OP or LTK, TB or OHMSS or FYEO?

  • Posts: 4,762
    actonsteve wrote:
    00Beast wrote:
    [I just think that GE's villains interact and go together better than any others. Plus, they are all really unique and contribute something different to Janus that makes them even more dangerous.

    Umm... I dont think they interact as well as the villains in OP or LTK, TB or OHMSS or FYEO?

    I see what you're saying with the others, because I do agree with you, but I just like the connections between Trevelyan, Xenia, Ourumov, and Boris. It's not a lot of villains to where each have limited screentime, and the small group of four provides more character/story behind each villain.
  • edited December 2011 Posts: 1,497
    Edit
  • Posts: 1,497
    Goldeneye might be more identifiable as as <b>Bond</b> film. Casino Royale though, works as a decent modern day action/drama/superhero/origins story flic--great for the popcorn munching; looks magnificent on the big screen. Me, I prefer Bond films. <i>But</i> Casino Royale is more thrilling. I'd say it's 50-50 for me, but only because I'm warming up to GE...in time in may eclipse CR.
  • edited December 2011 Posts: 1,778
    actonsteve wrote:
    How to categorise Boris Grischenko? Unfunny comedy character? aka Sherriff J W Pepper syndrome?

    I'd say the difference there was J.W. actually was funny.

    If I can erase one character from the Bond universe it'd be J.W. Pepper. Even in a Moore film he's simple too over-the-top.
    JBFan626 wrote:
    Goldeneye if a far better <b>Bond</b> film. Casino Royale is serviceable as a decent modern day action/drama/superhero/origins story flic--great for the popcorn munching; looks magnificent on the big screen. Me, I prefer Bond films.

    Casino Royale is very much a Bond film and will stand the test of time much more than GE. All the elements of Bond's character are there in CR but they're simply in the development stage. And how could CR be less a Bond film when it's taken directly from a Fleming source? GE is a United Artist's Bond film with plenty of big explosions but a weak story and in some cases even weaker acting. CR is an updating of Fleming's Bond (i.e. a modern day DN or FRWL) with more focus put into character and storytelling plus alot of great action, which puts it way ahead of GE for me.
  • Posts: 4,762
    JBFan626 wrote:
    Goldeneye might be more identifiable as as <b>Bond</b> film. Casino Royale though, works as a decent modern day action/drama/superhero/origins story flic--great for the popcorn munching; looks magnificent on the big screen. Me, I prefer Bond films. <i>But</i> Casino Royale is more thrilling. I'd say it's 50-50 for me, but only because I'm warming up to GE...in time in may eclipse CR.

    I like what you said about Bond films and modern day Bond films. I've talked to people who have said that they had only seen Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, which didn't surprise me considering they're not huge Bond fans. Hopefully SkyFall, being a "modern-day" action movie, will include the classic Bond formula that can turn some people into Bond fans!
  • Posts: 1,497
    Casino Royale is very much a Bond film and will stand the test of time much more than GE. All the elements of Bond's character are there in CR but they're simply in the development stage. And how could CR be less a Bond film when it's taken directly from a Fleming source? GE is a United Artist's Bond film with plenty of big explosions but a weak story and in some cases even weaker acting. CR is an updating of Fleming's Bond (i.e. a modern day DN or FRWL) with more focus put into character and storytelling plus alot of great action, which puts it way ahead of GE for me.

    Would you say Casino Royale '67 is more of a Bond film than GE? Afterall it has Bond the bare bones of the fleming story including LeChiffre in a game of baccarat. Vepers Lynd is also in it...

    That being said, though I revised my post to read GE is more identifiable of a Bond film (I'm not one to strike up an argument for the sake of an argument).

    Let me elaborate: when I saw CR in the cinemas in 2006 I was pretty impressed. CR had a gritty realism to it that was refreshing after DAD. As time goes by though, when I revisit CR, I continue to notice things that are lacking/or shouldn't be there. First: Bond as a highly agile stuntman: there's just too much of this. Bond should be more resourceful and shouldn't constantly be throwing himself into a steeplechase. 2nd: There's very little actual spy work: Bond just breaks into M's apartment, throws himself into a parkour chase, beats up the guy in the stairwell. Not that we need quirky gagdets, but again, I'd like to see Bond a little more resourceful. DC to me, also lacks a refinement of the character I look for: he seems akward, rather than smooth in his delivery. He does have an intensity about him, which is welcome, but I think he could be a bit more refined. I'm not looking for formula mind you (i.e. the obligatory M, Moneypenny, Q moments--though I wouldn't mind seeing there return), I just think GE captures the spirit and persona of the Bond character better.
  • Posts: 11,189
    actonsteve wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    [
    I just feel that in the pre-Craig era M was a bit more...dignified.

    Dignified? Is this the same character who tried to free herself from prison with a broom handle?




    Yea! At least she wasn't saying "Christ" or "bloody" whenever she was onscreen.
  • Posts: 4,762
    BAIN123 wrote:
    actonsteve wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    [
    I just feel that in the pre-Craig era M was a bit more...dignified.

    Dignified? Is this the same character who tried to free herself from prison with a broom handle?




    Yea! At least she wasn't saying "Christ" or "bloody" whenever she was onscreen.

    Oh yeah, that made me mad! I was thinking to myself, there are other things to say than to throw around Christ like it's a common word. It's always funny in a not so funny way to see how Hollywood thinks it has to use such language as that to make the movie a box office hit. It can be done without!
  • edited December 2011 Posts: 11,189
    One thing GE does have is my favourite Bond girl. I know I'm probably in the minority but I'd take Natalya over Vesper easily. Natalya to me just has a gutsy attitude and a real survival instinct that we don't see that much of in Vesper. Also, Vesper doesn't come in until almost an hour into CR.

    "Is everything satisfactory?
    Everything except the interruption"

    "Do you destroy every vehicle you get into?"

    "Well don't stand there get us out of here"

    I'd happily get ordered around by her.

    Additionally the one love scene between her and Brosnan was, IMO, really sweet - especially how she playfully smoothers him with the pillow.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited December 2011 Posts: 15,718
    actonsteve wrote:
    How to categorise Boris Grischenko? Unfunny comedy character? aka Sherriff J W Pepper syndrome?

    I'd say the difference there was J.W. actually was funny.

    If I can erase one character from the Bond universe it'd be J.W. Pepper. Even in a Moore film he's simple too over-the-top.

    I would put J.W. Pepper in every Moore outing, and give him his own series... he's a damn icon to me. Pepper is like all I ever wanted in a Bond film !! Coupled with Moore, and you have an epic duo ! Moore and Pepper should have had a buddy tv show !!
  • edited December 2011 Posts: 11,189
    actonsteve wrote:
    How to categorise Boris Grischenko? Unfunny comedy character? aka Sherriff J W Pepper syndrome?

    I'd say the difference there was J.W. actually was funny.

    If I can erase one character from the Bond universe it'd be J.W. Pepper. Even in a Moore film he's simple too over-the-top.

    I would put J.W. Pepper in every Moore outing, and give him his own series... he's a damn icon to me. Pepper is like all I ever wanted in a Bond film !!

    Pepper isn't that bad - esp compared to some of the other characters (*cough*Mr Kil*cough*) although I agree he was in one film too many.
  • Posts: 1,497
    I would put J.W. Pepper in every Moore outing, and give him his own series... he's a damn icon to me. Pepper is like all I ever wanted in a Bond film !! Coupled with Moore, and you have an epic duo ! Moore and Pepper should have had a buddy tv show !!

    Wow, the way you talk this up with such zeal, I just made be turned on to the idea!

  • Posts: 1,492
    BAIN123 wrote:
    actonsteve wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    [
    I just feel that in the pre-Craig era M was a bit more...dignified.

    Dignified? Is this the same character who tried to free herself from prison with a broom handle?




    Yea! At least she wasn't saying "Christ" or "bloody" whenever she was onscreen.

    the swearing fitted the character. She was head of MI6 not mother superior.

  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,718
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Pepper isn't that bad - esp compared to some of the other characters (*cough*Mr Kil*cough*)

    Yes Mr Kil was a bit cringeworthy... too much IMO. He didn't have the magical stuff seen in the Moore films. DAD is excellent, but there are a few big mistakes in the film.
  • edited December 2011 Posts: 11,189
    actonsteve wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    actonsteve wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    [
    I just feel that in the pre-Craig era M was a bit more...dignified.

    Dignified? Is this the same character who tried to free herself from prison with a broom handle?




    Yea! At least she wasn't saying "Christ" or "bloody" whenever she was onscreen.

    the swearing fitted the character. She was head of MI6 not mother superior.

    Is it professional though? Does it show someone in control? Did Bernard Lee or Robert Lee need to do it? They were all top people too.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited December 2011 Posts: 15,718
    JBFan626 wrote:
    I would put J.W. Pepper in every Moore outing, and give him his own series... he's a damn icon to me. Pepper is like all I ever wanted in a Bond film !! Coupled with Moore, and you have an epic duo ! Moore and Pepper should have had a buddy tv show !!

    Wow, the way you talk this up with such zeal, I just made be turned on to the idea!

    Dare I say J.W. Pepper joining Brett Sinclair and Danny Wilde as the ultimate buddy trio would have been excellent !! :)>-
  • Posts: 1,492
    BAIN123 wrote:
    . I know I'm probably in the minority but I'd take Natalya over Vesper easily. Natalya to me just has a gutsy attitude and a real survival instinct that we don't see that much of in Vesper. Also, Vesper doesn't come in until almost an hour into CR.

    .

    I thought Natalya was an average Bond girl. Once she gets to the Cuban facility her story is over. She does the usual running around, dodging explosians, popping up with a gun...but other then that she is pretty forgettable.

    Vesper IS Casino Royale. She is the reason why he is the way he is. She is the catalyst which makes James Bond James Bond.

    Possibly the most important Bond girl of the franchise.
  • Posts: 1,492
    BAIN123 wrote:
    actonsteve wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    actonsteve wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    [
    I just feel that in the pre-Craig era M was a bit more...dignified.

    Dignified? Is this the same character who tried to free herself from prison with a broom handle?




    Yea! At least she wasn't saying "Christ" or "bloody" whenever she was onscreen.

    the swearing fitted the character. She was head of MI6 not mother superior.

    Is it professional though? Does it show someone in control? Did Bernard Lee or Robert Lee need to do it? They were all top people too.

    You mean Robert Brown? I suspect they swore like troopers. Ex Naval men. Didnt M drink some fiery Moroccan wine.

  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,718
    actonsteve wrote:
    Possibly the most important Bond girl of the franchise.

    In the novel yes, but not in the film... In the film Vesper was a farce.
  • Posts: 1,492
    actonsteve wrote:
    Possibly the most important Bond girl of the franchise.

    In the novel yes, but not in the film... In the film Vesper was a farce.

    Please explain why she is a farce?

  • edited December 2011 Posts: 11,189
    actonsteve wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    . I know I'm probably in the minority but I'd take Natalya over Vesper easily. Natalya to me just has a gutsy attitude and a real survival instinct that we don't see that much of in Vesper. Also, Vesper doesn't come in until almost an hour into CR.

    .

    I thought Natalya was an average Bond girl. Once she gets to the Cuban facility her story is over. She does the usual running around, dodging explosians, popping up with a gun...but other then that she is pretty forgettable.

    Vesper IS Casino Royale. She is the reason why he is the way he is. She is the catalyst which makes James Bond James Bond.

    Possibly the most important Bond girl of the franchise.

    Hmm I think thats Tracy. Played by a better actress, the only Bond girl pre-Craig to tame Bond and who had a death that was IMO even more powerful than Vesper's. By the time we hear she's a traitor we know her fate.

    I like Vesper but I just prefer Natalya. She saves Bond at the end and is partly responsible for stopping the Goldeneye.

    Robert Brown probably did curse but we didn't see it. They got their points across without having to do so.
Sign In or Register to comment.