Important Message

You are browsing the archived Lancers Reactor forums. You cannot register or login.
The content may be outdated and links may not be functional.


To get the latest in Freelancer news, mods, modding and downloads, go to
The-Starport

Casino Royale..

This is where you can discuss your homework, family, just about anything, make strange sounds and otherwise discuss things which are really not related to the Lancer-series. Yes that means you can discuss other games.

Post Mon Nov 20, 2006 3:19 am

Casino Royale..

I went to see the new Bond film yesterday with the boy.

Most likely once again I'll be in my usual minority of one, but I didn't like it that much. but I'll try to be dispassionate in my summary (and I won't give away any plot spoilers)

It's a much more physical Bond film than previously, less relaince on gadgets and more on fists, guns, and guile. The director seems to be trying to get back to the early Connery days, close in fighting, sneaking, lots of martinis, Bond not quite as effortlessly confident as he normally is; they even used locations and props from the early 60s. Stylistically it works well and I suppose for younger people, it's a great retro experience, for me it was "haven't I seen all this before?"

And for all that it's a physical film with very graphic stunts and muchos punching, it shamelessly is designed to appeal to females. Bond's a hardcase but he's just sensitive enough to be vulnerable and for the right woman to melt his heart, but of course, she's not the right woman (boring, get back to the guns!) The Boy was utterly cringing at those moments and I must confess they were making me squirm too.

The plot really confused me and I didn't know who was who by halfway through, I suppose that reflects the murky world of the secrent agent but it doesn't half make for difficult entertainment. Craig is a worthy Bond and reminds me of a cross between Connery and Lazenby (the film's ending is very reminiscent of O.H.M.S.S.)
and thankfully he plays it very seriously and not for laughs. The girls were as glamorous as ever but they are of course largely just eye candy, and as i don't like modern fashions much I mostly just ignored them. And it was obvious from the start that Bond's relationship with the lead female was doomed and that she'd betray him in some way (even my 12 yr old had that figured out)

As per usual, Bond gets out of impossible situations that no sane human would ever get into in the first place - fortunately in this he doesn't have laser watch cutters, submarine cars, or rocket firing cigarettes, and what gadgets he does have are all fairly low key and quite sensible. He also gets beaten up quite badly and is frequently cut to ribbons, rather graphically too. So on the whole, apart from a confusing plot and far too much touchy-feely stuff for my tastes, it's ok and of course will prove immensely popular.

However, it baffled the Boy because he was expecting a contuation of the Bond story, but it is really more of a "re-imagining" of Bond for the modern day. Bond's career has been turned back to the beginning when he's just become a 00 agent, and hasn't even met Felix Lighter yet. I suppose this was one of the only courses left to the writers as they have long been running out of Bond plots, Fleming's original stories having been thoroughly mined for ideas and situations, Casino Royale being the only one that hasn't been done, except as a comedy spoof starring David Niven.

There were some nice little touches - Bond gets hold of an original 1964 Aston Martin in the Bahamas, and MI6 joke about him being "on holiday"; M also makes a comment about "missing the Cold War" because at least you knew then who the bad guys were. Some lovely shots of Venice too, we were squeaking "been there! stood there!" as it involved a pleasant little ride up the Grand Canal

git

Post Mon Nov 20, 2006 6:20 am

i watched this http://www.klast.net/bond/cr67.html version a couple of days ago, laughed my socks off lol

www.kokrull.com/freelancer home of ** uk server **

Post Mon Nov 20, 2006 1:35 pm

I haven't seen the comedy original for years, but I'm sure someone will put in on the telly to cash in on the current publicity. It was apparently origianlly meant to be a serious production, but because the guy who then had the rights to Casino Royale couldn't cut a deal with EON who had the rights to all the rest (bar Thunderball) out of spite he made it as a complete send-up of Bond type spy films. It was supposed to be a vehicle for Peter Sellers but as it turned out, it was made in different parts by different directors each with different stars, so Sellers' part is quite limited, and the film as a whole lacks coherence and retains a sense of being made of ill-matched vignettes.

I really must watch it again sometime soon, although as far as Bond send-ups are concerned, Austin Powers was much more successful and far more coherent.

Post Mon Nov 20, 2006 1:57 pm

'twas on this weekend pete.

Post Tue Dec 12, 2006 6:06 pm

I caught it last week, it's only recently opened in Orstraylia. Personally I thought it a good return to a more grittier Bond. Brosnon was good, but imo he lacked any real depth, Craig's interperatation shows a real human in there rather than the unbelievably unstoppable Bond we've gotten used to. Though there should have been at least a couple of clean kills rather than the myriad of macho punch-ups, little bit to messy imo. I personally liked the retro Connery era approach, I've always loved films from the era so it's nice breakaway the glitz of the 80's and 90's Bonds.

Have to agree with you on the plot Pete, it bounced around a bit to much without really fleshing out who the enemies were and their intentions, especially after the baccarat game. I thought the locations and sets were magnificent. Maybe it's a bit boring to Euro's, but Australian architecture is so fantastically goudy it's always exciting to see some locations with a bit of style.

I thought Eva Green provided smidge more depth than the regular Bond girl. It's the regular girl power cheese and endless witty retorts that directors seem so enamoured by these days, but at least there was something more than just T&A. She was definately sexy as hell though, personally I thought the casino dress was more than enough to get any red blooded man to hand over the keys to the Aston Martin.

All in all though bond flicks aren't academy material, there just a bloody good romp in fantasy land and there is usually a cheesy bit of ramantic crap to cringe through. One golden eye moment comes to mind.
"How can you be so cold?"
"It keeps me sane."
"No, it keeps you alone!"
**Kissing ensues**
Shudder

Definately worth a viewing and I honestly think Daniel Craig is going to be one of the best bonds since Connery, maybe (I'm going to regret this) even better.

Post Tue Dec 12, 2006 10:33 pm

well, he cant be anyworse than lazenby.

git

Post Wed Dec 13, 2006 5:12 am

prob why he was only in the one film, personlly i'm a Sean Connery fan so he gets my thumbs up as bond, not seen the new one yet, but guess i will at some point

www.kokrull.com/freelancer home of ** uk server **

Post Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:07 am

Craig reminds me of a cross between Connery and Lazenby. In point of fact, effs, Lazenby has always been generally accounted as a very good Bond, his problems were not so much his portrayal as his insufferable behaviour on-set and lack of co-operation with the director and producer.

Return to Off Topic