CASINO ROYALE: Daniel Craig's best?

BT3366

Pierce2Daniel wrote: »

Thanks, guys!

Haha, @Jordo007 I honestly just never find the time.

TripAces wrote: »

Pierce2Daniel wrote: »

Zarozzor wrote: »

I don't think it's a masterpiece, but definitely top tier.

Weaker third act compared to the first two, and I wish they had waited to kill Le Chiffre until near the end.

In preparation for NTTD, I'm doing a Craig-era film every 2 weeks on Thursday nights. It should time perfectly with the release of NTTD in the UK on 30 September (if all goes to plan). So, let's begin........



I haven't watched CR since 2013 and since then - at least in the UK - the film has reached hallowed and iconic status. I thought I was about to watch a masterpiece and - as it turned out - I did not. I'll whisper it, but 'CR may have got a tad overhyped in the last 15 years.' Don't get me wrong, It's a very good film.....but there are problems. For example, as @Zarozzor points out the third act is not that strong.

My main point of contention is the lumpy structure. It struggles to really hold together propulsive plot and there are some sluggish sequences. It's not helped that the Bahamas and Casino interludes are in need of trimming.

Considering the film is now revered for being the 'gritty reboot' of Bond, I was surprised how light and entertaining CR actually is. It's definitely more character-driven, but it's also a very mischievous, sexy and charming film. There are even a few moments that are verge on the corny or absurd.



The real MVP here is Daniel Craig. This was the first time I've watched a Bond film in a while and really wanted to be Bond. Craig is simply that cool and his Bond is more of a lone wolf. It's helped that he plays an actual character. This is basically the 'bad boy' version of Bond (you know, 'the one your mother warned you about') who has a problem with authority and playing by the rules. He's naughty, sly and has a glint in his eye. He's that guy all the girls roll their eyes at and pretend to want nothing to do with, but secretly all want attention from. Though he can be a cocksure and arrogant git. 007’s got a frequently remarked upon ego, which can cause him to recklessly overreach and botch things. In fact, his aforementioned 'ego' forms a large part of his learning curve in the film.

Though - if watching Bond learn lessons about hubris sounds grating - Craig is equally as impressive as the stoic, romantic hero figure. Especially in his latter scenes with Vesper and the action. He feels so very authentic and convincing as the 'rough diamond' assassin finding his footing in MI6. The real magic from Craig comes in the emotional scenes. You see how Bond struggles with the violence and how he develops into a colder character before the credits roll.

Eva Green is simply stunning. Vesper Lynd is hardly the typical Bond girl and Green makes her an ideal match for Craig’s Bond. Their banter is so well performed and a surprise in this supposedly 'serious, modern reboot', as it feels more akin to something from a Hitchcock film. The real asset that Green brings to Vesper is a degree of complexity; she's enigmatic, elegant, vampish and - fundamentally - feels real. Her response to the violence is authentic and harrowing. If I had a gripe with the character, it would be the dumb 'little finger' scene in Lake Como. If only the film had scrubbed that wonky dialogue and added something more tender it would have sold the romantic relationship more (it's a shame as otherwise the script is actually excellent).



Martin Campbell is the ultimate master of ceremony. His combination of grand action set-pieces, claustrophobic bloody fight scenes with glitz and glamour among Europe's high flyers and criminal kingpins delivers by far the coolest Bond movie since the early 1960s. If Campbell didn't reinvent the Bond film with CR, he definitely shook it up a little, chipping away at the pastiche. The film isn't overly self-referential and it actually feels like an attempt to modernise the series for 2006 (it surprisingly hasn't aged much since either). The photography by Phil Mehuex is beautifully rich and glossy. Though, if I am to nitpick, I think the styling and camera shots of Craig at the poker table are not flattering (just too many ugly close-ups). Also, the action editing by Stuart Baird is A+.

It should be said that this isn't a 'Jason Bourne' film. Whilst the action is brutal, the tone is glamorous and the plot is far-fetched and bit daft. It's probably overly long and melodramatic. Though regardless of any fragilities on show, what makes CR an outstanding piece of work is Daniel Craig - who did nothing less than reinvent a character that everyone already knew and had thoughts on how he should be played. He totally took ownership of 007 here.

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐/5

I agree with pretty much everything here, @Pierce2Daniel. But I think much of the film has aged and not in a good way. CR is a top tier film for the other reasons you mention. DC is fantastic, and this is impressive given the scrutiny he was under. EG is close to perfection. But some scenes, in the first act, are not shot well at all. Campbell hits his stride when the film shifts to Montenegro.

There are some dated aspects - especially things like the phones, laptops, the hairstyles, costumes and the Dad rock title song. However, in the most part, it feels like a modern update. I think if someone was to watch it today for the first time, it wouldn't necessarily feel like an old movie nor would it feel like it was harkening back to the 1960's.

For me, if those are negatives then this film is in pretty good shape. None of those bother me. Things like phones and laptops change so quickly these days that it's only minor. Didn't they need to change things in NTTD with the phones being outdated already? I actually still think it's cool Bond has a phone in his Bentley in 1963.

The clothes in CR and QoS have a classic feel opposed to those shrunken Pee Wee Herman suits Craig wears in SF and SP, tuxes aside.

And I will take that "dad rock" theme over anything that followed it despite the accolades some of them got. Considering every other female singer I hear on modern radio these days is trying to sound like Billie Eilish, her NTTD theme is already sounding dated and the film hasn't even been released. You Know My Name didn't get any hype or play from what I remember and it's a hidden gem in that way.

Pierce2Daniel

BT3366 wrote: »

Pierce2Daniel wrote: »

Thanks, guys!

Haha, @Jordo007 I honestly just never find the time.

TripAces wrote: »

Pierce2Daniel wrote: »

Zarozzor wrote: »

I don't think it's a masterpiece, but definitely top tier.

Weaker third act compared to the first two, and I wish they had waited to kill Le Chiffre until near the end.

In preparation for NTTD, I'm doing a Craig-era film every 2 weeks on Thursday nights. It should time perfectly with the release of NTTD in the UK on 30 September (if all goes to plan). So, let's begin........



I haven't watched CR since 2013 and since then - at least in the UK - the film has reached hallowed and iconic status. I thought I was about to watch a masterpiece and - as it turned out - I did not. I'll whisper it, but 'CR may have got a tad overhyped in the last 15 years.' Don't get me wrong, It's a very good film.....but there are problems. For example, as @Zarozzor points out the third act is not that strong.

My main point of contention is the lumpy structure. It struggles to really hold together propulsive plot and there are some sluggish sequences. It's not helped that the Bahamas and Casino interludes are in need of trimming.

Considering the film is now revered for being the 'gritty reboot' of Bond, I was surprised how light and entertaining CR actually is. It's definitely more character-driven, but it's also a very mischievous, sexy and charming film. There are even a few moments that are verge on the corny or absurd.



The real MVP here is Daniel Craig. This was the first time I've watched a Bond film in a while and really wanted to be Bond. Craig is simply that cool and his Bond is more of a lone wolf. It's helped that he plays an actual character. This is basically the 'bad boy' version of Bond (you know, 'the one your mother warned you about') who has a problem with authority and playing by the rules. He's naughty, sly and has a glint in his eye. He's that guy all the girls roll their eyes at and pretend to want nothing to do with, but secretly all want attention from. Though he can be a cocksure and arrogant git. 007’s got a frequently remarked upon ego, which can cause him to recklessly overreach and botch things. In fact, his aforementioned 'ego' forms a large part of his learning curve in the film.

Though - if watching Bond learn lessons about hubris sounds grating - Craig is equally as impressive as the stoic, romantic hero figure. Especially in his latter scenes with Vesper and the action. He feels so very authentic and convincing as the 'rough diamond' assassin finding his footing in MI6. The real magic from Craig comes in the emotional scenes. You see how Bond struggles with the violence and how he develops into a colder character before the credits roll.

Eva Green is simply stunning. Vesper Lynd is hardly the typical Bond girl and Green makes her an ideal match for Craig’s Bond. Their banter is so well performed and a surprise in this supposedly 'serious, modern reboot', as it feels more akin to something from a Hitchcock film. The real asset that Green brings to Vesper is a degree of complexity; she's enigmatic, elegant, vampish and - fundamentally - feels real. Her response to the violence is authentic and harrowing. If I had a gripe with the character, it would be the dumb 'little finger' scene in Lake Como. If only the film had scrubbed that wonky dialogue and added something more tender it would have sold the romantic relationship more (it's a shame as otherwise the script is actually excellent).



Martin Campbell is the ultimate master of ceremony. His combination of grand action set-pieces, claustrophobic bloody fight scenes with glitz and glamour among Europe's high flyers and criminal kingpins delivers by far the coolest Bond movie since the early 1960s. If Campbell didn't reinvent the Bond film with CR, he definitely shook it up a little, chipping away at the pastiche. The film isn't overly self-referential and it actually feels like an attempt to modernise the series for 2006 (it surprisingly hasn't aged much since either). The photography by Phil Mehuex is beautifully rich and glossy. Though, if I am to nitpick, I think the styling and camera shots of Craig at the poker table are not flattering (just too many ugly close-ups). Also, the action editing by Stuart Baird is A+.

It should be said that this isn't a 'Jason Bourne' film. Whilst the action is brutal, the tone is glamorous and the plot is far-fetched and bit daft. It's probably overly long and melodramatic. Though regardless of any fragilities on show, what makes CR an outstanding piece of work is Daniel Craig - who did nothing less than reinvent a character that everyone already knew and had thoughts on how he should be played. He totally took ownership of 007 here.

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐/5

I agree with pretty much everything here, @Pierce2Daniel. But I think much of the film has aged and not in a good way. CR is a top tier film for the other reasons you mention. DC is fantastic, and this is impressive given the scrutiny he was under. EG is close to perfection. But some scenes, in the first act, are not shot well at all. Campbell hits his stride when the film shifts to Montenegro.

There are some dated aspects - especially things like the phones, laptops, the hairstyles, costumes and the Dad rock title song. However, in the most part, it feels like a modern update. I think if someone was to watch it today for the first time, it wouldn't necessarily feel like an old movie nor would it feel like it was harkening back to the 1960's.

For me, if those are negatives then this film is in pretty good shape. None of those bother me. Things like phones and laptops change so quickly these days that it's only minor. Didn't they need to change things in NTTD with the phones being outdated already? I actually still think it's cool Bond has a phone in his Bentley in 1963.

The clothes in CR and QoS have a classic feel opposed to those shrunken Pee Wee Herman suits Craig wears in SF and SP, tuxes aside.

And I will take that "dad rock" theme over anything that followed it despite the accolades some of them got. Considering every other female singer I hear on modern radio these days is trying to sound like Billie Eilish, her NTTD theme is already sounding dated and the film hasn't even been released. You Know My Name didn't get any hype or play from what I remember and it's a hidden gem in that way.

YKMN works perfectly in the film. However, after Madonna's song, it's probably a masterpiece. But much like David Arnold's score for the film - it's fine. Though not to dig out Arnold's score too much, his Vesper theme is *chef's kiss*.

I wanna hear people's perspective on the Venice ending. I saw in the great Roger Ebert's review that he described CR as the 'film that just kept giving' and when you thought it was over, the film had further surprises. That's a rather generous interpretation. for me, it made the film feel lumpy and left the sinking house sequence feel like an excuse for some action. Plus, you could probably have done another film with Vesper and her betrayal. More Eva Green is never a bad thing.....She's just so sultry and enigmatic (I have a thing for a smokey eye)

JamesCraig

I really warmed up to YKMN over the years.

As much as I like SF, CR is still the best Craig Bond imho.

RichardTheBruce

I thought the Venice ending worked fantastically well, literally bringing the house down and removing Bond from everything else (underwater) to be confronted firsthand with Vesper's death.

Unbelievably well done filmmaking and storytelling.

JamesCraig

RichardTheBruce wrote: »

I thought the Venice ending worked fantastically well, literally bringing the house down and removing Bond from everything else (underwater) to be confronted firsthand with Vesper's death.

Unbelievably well done filmmaking and storytelling.

This x 100.

ProfJoeButcher

As a non-fan of the film, I won't spam the Masterpiece thread with my reasons for not loving the third act. :) But I will say I wish we could have seen what the very underrated Purvis & Wade had in mind for it. My understanding is that Paul Haggis was mostly behind the Venice stuff and that among other things, Purvis & Wade had Vesper's death closer to the novel, and perhaps with even a clear motivation behind it?

Fire_and_Ice_Returns

I love the CR post titles action set piece, I was running up several hundred steps today, and I do this a lot whilst running I was humming the African Rundown theme in my head.

CraigMooreOHMSS

I think being faced with the choice of dying by the enemy's hand or having to live with the reality of being labelled a traitor is solid enough motivation for her to drown herself.

ShakenNotStirred

Not sure where to put this , but Martin Campbell is currently doing a AMA (Ask me Anything) on Reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/p196vr/im_martin_campbell_director_of_goldeneye_casino/

Q:GoldenEye and Casino Royale are two of the greatest Bond movies ever! Would you ever consider doing another one?

Martin Campbell: Yes, I would. I love the franchise, and it would be with a new Bond, which is always interesting, especially given my two Bond movies had different Bonds.

Junglist_1985

ShakenNotStirred wrote: »

Not sure where to put this , but Martin Campbell is currently doing a AMA (Ask me Anything) on Reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/p196vr/im_martin_campbell_director_of_goldeneye_casino/

Q:GoldenEye and Casino Royale are two of the greatest Bond movies ever! Would you ever consider doing another one?

Martin Campbell: Yes, I would. I love the franchise, and it would be with a new Bond, which is always interesting, especially given my two Bond movies had different Bonds.

Count me in! Bond 26 directed by Martin Campbell, score by David Arnold, and let’s bring back Linus for cinematography. Villenueve has been my pick, but he has a long career ahead.

StirredNotShaken

"CASINO ROYALE: Masterpiece?"
https://imgur.com/gallery/eSOrjob

ToTheRight wrote: »

I'd say CR is a masterpiece, and it doesn't bother me the cell phones are dated. As for the fashion, I prefer the clothes in CR ( and QoS) to Craig's later films.
My controversial opinion regarding this film is that it's the BEST movie ever made during the 2000's. I'll take it over any film that decade.

It held that spot for a LONG time for me; I'd say that There Will Be Blood and The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford have just edged it out over time, but I think bronze is more than respectable when that's your competition. To say nothing of how it's right next to In the Mood for Love in my all time list.

Thunderball

CR is my favorite Bond film and though it’s among my most favorite films of the 2000s, i still vastly prefer Eternal Sunshine of The Spotless Mind, No Country For Old Men, and most of all, Lost In Translation, one of my top ten favorite films ever.

MakeshiftPython

UGH. Please do not bring back David Arnold. He had his run, let other composers have a crack at Bond.

Pierce2Daniel

Another aspect that has dated CR is the fawning receptionists and side glances from women. It's all a bit corny and looks more like something from one of the Roger Moore films. In fairness, even some of Christopher Nolan's Batman films from the same era of filmmaking as CR fall foul to this. In comparison, it's interesting to think that the current Marvel films rarely have love stories anymore. It used to be such a staple of the blockbuster.

I don't think you'd want to put this element in any more Bond films going forward. It's a bit cringeworthy. Even if it is Alessandra Ambrosio given you a second glance....

talos7

Pierce2Daniel wrote: »

Another aspect that has dated CR is the fawning receptionists and side glances from women. It's all a bit corny and looks more like something from one of the Roger Moore films. In fairness, even some of Christopher Nolan's Batman films from the same era of filmmaking as CR fall foul to this. In comparison, it's interesting to think that the current Marvel films rarely have love stories anymore. It used to be such a staple of the blockbuster.

I don't think you'd want to put this element in any more Bond films going forward. It's a bit cringeworthy. Even if it is Alessandra Ambrosio given you a second glance....

I love the receptionist; she should have been given more screen time. In another era she would have come to Bond’s room to drop off a spare key. As she leaves his room, a bit disheveled, Bond quips about the excellent room service.

All fanboy fantasies aside, she was very good in a throwaway role.

CraigMooreOHMSS

Is it not a fairly integral part of the character of Bond that he has the ability to turn heads everywhere he goes? It's part of his appeal. What they did in the Craig era was actively lean into his physical traits to make the reasoning behind that captivation with Bond more relatable to modern female audiences. I'm not sure it's dated. They made it more relevant than ever.

Mathis1

talos7 wrote: »

Pierce2Daniel wrote: »

Another aspect that has dated CR is the fawning receptionists and side glances from women. It's all a bit corny and looks more like something from one of the Roger Moore films. In fairness, even some of Christopher Nolan's Batman films from the same era of filmmaking as CR fall foul to this. In comparison, it's interesting to think that the current Marvel films rarely have love stories anymore. It used to be such a staple of the blockbuster.

I don't think you'd want to put this element in any more Bond films going forward. It's a bit cringeworthy. Even if it is Alessandra Ambrosio given you a second glance....

I love the receptionist; she should have been given more screen time. In another era she would have come to Bond’s room to drop off a spare key. As she leaves his room, a bit disheveled, Bond quips about the excellent room service.

All fanboy fantasies aside, she was very good in a throwaway role.

I agree!
We need to stop getting rid of all the stuff why we like Bond!

MakeshiftPython

There’s a big difference between the receptionist in CR and the older films. In the older films after Bond leaves we get a shot of the receptionists staring at Bond longingly, whereas in CR the last we see of her is focusing on her desk work.

That’s why the CR bit was a great update because it showed there can still be a brief flirtation between Bond and the receptionist, but it’s not enough to throw her off from doing her work.

talos7

MakeshiftPython wrote: »

There’s a big difference between the receptionist in CR and the older films. In the older films after Bond leaves we get a shot of the receptionists staring at Bond longingly, whereas in CR the last we see of her is focusing on her desk work.

That’s why the CR bit was a great update because it showed there can still be a brief flirtation between Bond and the receptionist, but it’s not enough to throw her off from doing her work.

I agree 100%; while I would have liked to have seen her have more screen time, the way this encounter is handled was beautifully done.

talos7

A sequence that absolutely screams Bond and is one of my favorites from the entire franchise is the seaplane approaching Nassau then Bond exiting, buttoning his jacket and walking past the camera.

Everything is perfect, the exotic location with its Turquoise water, David Arnold’s music and of course Daniel’s cool swagger.

w2bond

Pierce2Daniel wrote: »

Another aspect that has dated CR is the fawning receptionists and side glances from women. It's all a bit corny and looks more like something from one of the Roger Moore films. In fairness, even some of Christopher Nolan's Batman films from the same era of filmmaking as CR fall foul to this. In comparison, it's interesting to think that the current Marvel films rarely have love stories anymore. It used to be such a staple of the blockbuster.

I don't think you'd want to put this element in any more Bond films going forward. It's a bit cringeworthy. Even if it is Alessandra Ambrosio given you a second glance....

Any more interferences from the woke crowd and the series really will turn into Mrs Bond, or is that Mx Bond

Mathis1

talos7 wrote: »

A sequence that absolutely screams Bond and is one of my favorites from the entire franchise is the seaplane approaching Nassau then Bond exiting, buttoning his jacket and walking past the camera.

Every is perfect, the exotic location with its Turquoise water, David Arnold’s music and of course Daniel’s cool swagger.

Love that scene! Campbell sets it up well with the helicopter lifting off to reveal Bond appearance!
It was briefly in the trailer in b+w, even more cool!
God, when i think back to that original trailer for CR....absolutely blown away by it!

Scaramanga1974

My all time favorite

Pierce2Daniel

I just saw this on Instagram....So iconic

CrabKey

-- fawning receptionists and side glances from women. It's all a bit corny--

Mathis at the bar when Vesper arrives. "Don't worry about being objectified. No one noticed you. Not even a turn of the head. As for Bond, that tailored dinner jacket you ordered was a waste of money. He's the invisible man."

BT3366

CrabKey wrote: »

-- fawning receptionists and side glances from women. It's all a bit corny--

Mathis at the bar when Vesper arrives. "Don't worry about being objectified. No one noticed you. Not even a turn of the head. As for Bond, that tailored dinner jacket you ordered was a waste of money. He's the invisible man."

Those glances are homages to the classic films where Connery and Moore got the same treatment. Funny that a lot of people have been complaining there aren't enough of those touches and Bond isn't enough of a ladies man in the most recent films.

talos7

BT3366 wrote: »

CrabKey wrote: »

-- fawning receptionists and side glances from women. It's all a bit corny--

Mathis at the bar when Vesper arrives. "Don't worry about being objectified. No one noticed you. Not even a turn of the head. As for Bond, that tailored dinner jacket you ordered was a waste of money. He's the invisible man."

Those glances are homages to the classic films where Connery and Moore got the same treatment. Funny that a lot of people have been complaining there aren't enough of those touches and Bond isn't enough of a ladies man in the most recent films.

I love every one of those touches. I actually find the receptionist fairly reserved and professional. The actress is fantastic. It would have been a nice touch to later have her , courteously , bring Bond a spare key for his room. ;)

BT3366

talos7 wrote: »

BT3366 wrote: »

CrabKey wrote: »

-- fawning receptionists and side glances from women. It's all a bit corny--

Mathis at the bar when Vesper arrives. "Don't worry about being objectified. No one noticed you. Not even a turn of the head. As for Bond, that tailored dinner jacket you ordered was a waste of money. He's the invisible man."

Those glances are homages to the classic films where Connery and Moore got the same treatment. Funny that a lot of people have been complaining there aren't enough of those touches and Bond isn't enough of a ladies man in the most recent films.

I love every one of those touches. I actually find the receptionist fairly reserved and professional. The actress is fantastic. It would have been a nice touch to later have her , courteously , bring Bond a spare key for his room. ;)

Bond's charm and ability to win women to his side was always a key to helping him accomplish what he needs. Who knows if that will be a part of the character in the future.

Venutius

I think they got it right with the way they showed CraigBond's effect on women. There was no point trying to have him charm and seduce women with Brosnan-style sophisticated smoothness. But some women respond to high-T masculinity (er, so I'm told...!) and CraigBond was locked and loaded with that, so it was totally plausible that women like Solange, Severine and Lucia would respond to him the way that they did. EON have a good track record when it comes to tailoring the various Bondian elements to suit the particular actor.

Jordo007

talos7 wrote: »

BT3366 wrote: »

CrabKey wrote: »

-- fawning receptionists and side glances from women. It's all a bit corny--

Mathis at the bar when Vesper arrives. "Don't worry about being objectified. No one noticed you. Not even a turn of the head. As for Bond, that tailored dinner jacket you ordered was a waste of money. He's the invisible man."

Those glances are homages to the classic films where Connery and Moore got the same treatment. Funny that a lot of people have been complaining there aren't enough of those touches and Bond isn't enough of a ladies man in the most recent films.

I love every one of those touches. I actually find the receptionist fairly reserved and professional. The actress is fantastic. It would have been a nice touch to later have her , courteously , bring Bond a spare key for his room. ;)

I thought the receptionist was great Casino, she plays it perfectly. You can tell she fancies him but it's subtle and believable.

One of the best thing about Casino, is all the actors with smaller parts play them really well