Casino Royale Reviews

[JackWade CIA]

Casino is a departure from what Bond had been. There was no problem with Bond as he had been still the change was refreshing.
I understand why some were upset with it and Daniel Craig as Bond. Casino Royale does not fit the old Bond and it you were any kind of fan that would be enough to upset the pope.

What I like about Casino is the difference from the original movies and the outdated oversexed spy Ian Fleming created. What Casino did was take the raw basics of what and who Bond is and draw the next logical conclusion without refining Bond as much as he was previously. Bond is a animal trying to fit in with the government as a agent and not doing a very good job. That is precisely what make him so valuable as a agent, he has the skills and the will but is not up to the part of a work a day professional and has to fight the bad guys his way and that is exactly what M needs and the 21st century has to have to keep it safe.

Vesper is Bond's first love and first betrayal. It helps to form who he will become which will not be the old style of Bond. New style of Bond and new style of Bond girls.

You guys gave it chance and didn't like it. I can respect that. I don't think this style of Bond can continue for as long as the first one did. One maybe two more movies before the load maximum is hit and Bond will have to be changed once again. My advice is sit back and enjoy it. I will not say you have to respect Craig as Bond, compared to Sean Connery he will never be as good to the original material. For what he does there are lot of movies worse than Casino Royale out there

[Dr. No]

Welcome to the forum JackWade!!

I am of two minds about your review. Still welcome!

[mcbride007]

If Casino Royale was an independent Bond like Never Say Never Again then I would have liked it. Casino Royale was a good film on its own terms, but I'd have preferred a Bond film to fit with the rest of the series.

There was a chance to move back to the series with Quantum of Solace but they did not take it.

Daniel Craig is a terrible Bond but a real Bond film with him could be watchable. I think someone else should be cast now though.

[Dr. No]

hummmmmmmmm

Is CR were out side of the official Bond series....................
I don't think it would change how i feel about it, although it would have more room. But int he end it would be too depressing for me to be agood movie.

[Alessandra]

Seen as I haven't seen it posted here, here is the review from one of the biggest-ever movie critics in Italy, Tullio Kezich. Who slammed down Casino Royale and Craig as Bond. (well pretty much he harshly criticized all of the movie and the actors in it). He was (he has sadly passed away meantime) the movie critic of Corriere della Sera, the biggest and most prestigious newspaper in Italy (equivalent of The Times in England or the New York Times in the US).

Here is the translation of his review (that I did, and I do professional translating work so stay assured I didn't translate the opposite of what he said LOL).

The New James Bond, Misogynist Cold-Blooded Killer, Disappoints.

By Tullio Kezich

(Corriere Della Sera, Jan. 5, 2007.)

I didn't like Casino Royale at all, but I don't pretend my word is worth as much as that of the 22 know-it-all whose unanimously positive critiques are reported by Variety (not to mention the half a billion dollars the movie cashed in so far). From New York to Chicago and from Los Angeles to London, only three dissenting critics: two perplexed and one openly opposing the movie, my colleague from the Independent, to whom I send a solidarity greeting. While respecting everyone's opinion, I have the impression that those who praised the movie didn't preoccupy themselves with actually having a look at the original novel, the one that launched James Bond in 1953.

I will hereby open a parentheses to say that after the fall of Ivan, the code name for the Soviet Union, Ian Fleming (1908-1964) has gone out of fashion: I in fact had to visit various book shops before being able to find Casino Royal in a reprint by Guanda editor, but I re-read it with much pleasure. It is a classic tale, structured in three acts: the millionaire baccarat game that sees Bond against evil Le Chiffre in the casino of an imaginary beachtown called Royale-les-Eaux, the kidnapping and ferocious torture of 007 carried out by the arch-enemy, and the love story of the protagonist with a charming female spy in a little hotel on the Channel (alas, on the brink of tragedy...).

While unscrupulous, gourmet and a major manwhore, this Bond of the origins is very little of a superman, being so vulnerable, problematic and sentimental; and to think that back then, they defined him "amoral hero". The gym-inflated, surly, effective Daniel Craig kills two scoundrels in a row, one after the other, in the first five minutes of the current 21st installment. So much for amoral, this is a cold-blooded killer; and right after, in a crazy chase after a terrorist in Madagascar, he makes more twirls than a circus acrobat. This is just the beginning of a frenetic action movie without a mother or a father, busy with inflating an inconsistent plot with the estrogens of violence and baroque special effects. Another parentheses: because of rights disputes, Casino Royale was missing in the "official" 007 movie line, a spoof was made in 1967 with Alberto Lattuada walking away from it right in time to leave it to 5 directors, united in producing that disaster.

Back to the movie, when he's allowed to take a breath, the protagonist sits down with 10 players of a millionaire poker game in the most luxurious hotel in Montenegro. Bond plays opposite Le Chiffre (who isn't a Russian spy anymore, but a terrorism financier, embodied in a lacklustre performance by Danish actor Mads Mikkelsen). Following the alternate phases of the game are two allies of British espionage, the beautiful Vesper (Eva Green, she too far from memorable) and the ambiguous Mathis to play whom Giancarlo Giannini incommoded himself, probably hoping to be more adequately used in the next installments (Note from me: yeah, dumped in a dumpster. Surely a more adequate use of his talent? NOT! ). New Zealand director Martin Campbell does his best to transform the poker in a mother-of-all-scenes, but as theater actors playing the "meneghèla" in Goldoni's "Una delle ultime sere di carnevale", the mise-en-place of a card game is always a risky business. The subsequent events follow the saying "lucky at cards, unlucky in love", with Bond having to face troubles of all sorts: a drug slipped into his drink causes him a heart attack (the London headquarters save him with an electrochoc delivered via the internet by the ineffable M, played by Judi Dench), quite a few whips on his genitals risk compromising his manhood, and a palace on the Canal Grande collapses under his eyes, in sync with the end of his love dream. The dissolution of his relationship with Vesper is more reminding of Mike Spillane's misogyny rather than Fleming's snobism.

At this point light years away from his dignified literary origin, James Bond has lost all hope to look like himself. If he could see him in Casino Royale, his creator would feel like dad Geppetto when Pinocchio ran away on his own legs.

This guy was a big Bond fan and he clearly was one who took his job very seriously (bothered to re-read the book before evaluating the movie). I think all that he says is completely spot-on.

[Dr. No]

"major manwhore"

Great review . I read CR again and can't help but miss this story didn't really show up in the movie they made.

I do believe ht e critics swallowed the lines they were feed because it was too hard to read the book and think for themselves.

Seen as I haven't seen it posted here, here is the review from one of the biggest-ever movie critics in Italy, Tullio Kezich. Who slammed down Casino Royale and Craig as Bond. (well pretty much he harshly criticized all of the movie and the actors in it). He was (he has sadly passed away meantime) the movie critic of Corriere della Sera, the biggest and most prestigious newspaper in Italy (equivalent of The Times in England or the New York Times in the US).

Here is the translation of his review (that I did, and I do professional translating work so stay assured I didn't translate the opposite of what he said LOL).

The New James Bond, Misogynist Cold-Blooded Killer, Disappoints.

By Tullio Kezich

(Corriere Della Sera, Jan. 5, 2007.)

I didn't like Casino Royale at all, but I don't pretend my word is worth as much as that of the 22 know-it-all whose unanimously positive critiques are reported by Variety (not to mention the half a billion dollars the movie cashed in so far). From New York to Chicago and from Los Angeles to London, only three dissenting critics: two perplexed and one openly opposing the movie, my colleague from the Independent, to whom I send a solidarity greeting. While respecting everyone's opinion, I have the impression that those who praised the movie didn't preoccupy themselves with actually having a look at the original novel, the one that launched James Bond in 1953.

I will hereby open a parentheses to say that after the fall of Ivan, the code name for the Soviet Union, Ian Fleming (1908-1964) has gone out of fashion: I in fact had to visit various book shops before being able to find Casino Royal in a reprint by Guanda editor, but I re-read it with much pleasure. It is a classic tale, structured in three acts: the millionaire baccarat game that sees Bond against evil Le Chiffre in the casino of an imaginary beachtown called Royale-les-Eaux, the kidnapping and ferocious torture of 007 carried out by the arch-enemy, and the love story of the protagonist with a charming female spy in a little hotel on the Channel (alas, on the brink of tragedy...).

While unscrupulous, gourmet and a major manwhore, this Bond of the origins is very little of a superman, being so vulnerable, problematic and sentimental; and to think that back then, they defined him "amoral hero". The gym-inflated, surly, effective Daniel Craig kills two scoundrels in a row, one after the other, in the first five minutes of the current 21st installment. So much for amoral, this is a cold-blooded killer; and right after, in a crazy chase after a terrorist in Madagascar, he makes more twirls than a circus acrobat. This is just the beginning of a frenetic action movie without a mother or a father, busy with inflating an inconsistent plot with the estrogens of violence and baroque special effects. Another parentheses: because of rights disputes, Casino Royale was missing in the "official" 007 movie line, a spoof was made in 1967 with Alberto Lattuada walking away from it right in time to leave it to 5 directors, united in producing that disaster.

Back to the movie, when he's allowed to take a breath, the protagonist sits down with 10 players of a millionaire poker game in the most luxurious hotel in Montenegro. Bond plays opposite Le Chiffre (who isn't a Russian spy anymore, but a terrorism financier, embodied in a lacklustre performance by Danish actor Mads Mikkelsen). Following the alternate phases of the game are two allies of British espionage, the beautiful Vesper (Eva Green, she too far from memorable) and the ambiguous Mathis to play whom Giancarlo Giannini incommoded himself, probably hoping to be more adequately used in the next installments (Note from me: yeah, dumped in a dumpster. Surely a more adequate use of his talent? NOT! ). New Zealand director Martin Campbell does his best to transform the poker in a mother-of-all-scenes, but as theater actors playing the "meneghèla" in Goldoni's "Una delle ultime sere di carnevale", the mise-en-place of a card game is always a risky business. The subsequent events follow the saying "lucky at cards, unlucky in love", with Bond having to face troubles of all sorts: a drug slipped into his drink causes him a heart attack (the London headquarters save him with an electrochoc delivered via the internet by the ineffable M, played by Judi Dench), quite a few whips on his genitals risk compromising his manhood, and a palace on the Canal Grande collapses under his eyes, in sync with the end of his love dream. The dissolution of his relationship with Vesper is more reminding of Mike Spillane's misogyny rather than Fleming's snobism.

At this point light years away from his dignified literary origin, James Bond has lost all hope to look like himself. If he could see him in Casino Royale, his creator would feel like dad Geppetto when Pinocchio ran away on his own legs.

This guy was a big Bond fan and he clearly was one who took his job very seriously (bothered to re-read the book before evaluating the movie). I think all that he says is completely spot-on.

[The Saint 007]

Found this review on YouTube and I figured I should post it here, since it's not very often you see a comical video review of Casino Royale. I suppose I should warn that the review does have some strong language. The review is divided into three parts.

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8enfh61_wY

Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-hssriy ... ure=relmfu

Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAISFM_c ... ure=relmfu