Casino Royale. Some people said it's the best 007 movie. Do you agree?

casino royale wallpaper - 007 James Bond Casino Royale Wallpaper
December 25, 2006 8:53am CST
I heard some people saying that Casino Royale is the best 007 movie ever made. Do you agree? I think it was great but not the best though. There were more hand combats and a lot of details to be thought about as if it's a suspense movie in my opinion. Overall, I think it is worth watching. What is your opinion?
4 responses
@lafavorito (2966)
• Philippines
25 Dec 06
I recently watched Casino Royale with my husband last week, and it's a great movie. The James Bond in that movie is better at close contact combat because he doesn't have fancy gadgets and yet he still emerged victorious. The only flaw I saw is that if the woman has not made the arrangement, james bond will be killed by the man who have a scar on his left eye. Overall, it's worth watching!
• Thailand
25 Dec 06
yes.. the hand to hand combat was the real good part. The gadgets in the previous episodes made it as if it was a sci-fi movie.
• India
25 Dec 06
As a big James Bond fan I excitedly anticipate the opening of a new 007 flick, but having read the Casino Royale, and upon hearing that the filmmakers were going to adhere to the content of Ian Fleming’s first Bond novel, I was a little anxious, as this is a brutal book, and that brutality is brought to the big screen and overshadows the rest of the film, even though it is rated PG-13. Casino Royale is an excellent spy thriller, but very vicious in content, which runs contrary to the escapist fun we mostly expect in a James Bond movie, and therefore, for some this will take a little getting used to. Casino Royale has many plus points which make it one of the better Bond films that have come to the big screen. Firstly Daniel Craig (Layer Cake, Munich) – finally, they have selected a guy who is actually physically and personality wise, fitting of an assassin. Also Craig is an actor’s-actor and can masterfully convey emotion without words and through mere stares with his piercing blue eyes. He may not be as ‘pretty’ as Pierce Brosnon before him, but Craig does portray Ian Fleming’s Bond more closely with rugged looks, and he looks like a guy who could snap your head off if you rubbed him the wrong way. Secondly, the dialogue in this film is far superior to many of its recent predecessors, perhaps due to the addition of Paul Haggis (Million Dollar Baby, Crash, Flags of our Fathers) to the writing team, making the popular ‘one-liners’ seem to actually flow well for a change. The action sequences are back to Goldeneye standards under the helm of Director Martin Campbell (Goldeneye, The Mask of Zorro). Campell, has re-inserted gritty and precise hand-to-hand combat sequences, amazing chase sequences, and off-set those heavy punching elements with bright-colored backdrops and settings that are all classic Bond. So where does the film go wrong – it’s the content I am afraid. There is a reason why Casino Royale was not made as the first 007 movie, although it was in-fact the first 007 novel – because the story is overshadowed by the torture of James Bond. Now, we all had to endure Brosnon getting tortured at the hands of the North Korean army in the opening sequence of Die Another Day, which made the rest of the film depressing for the audience, that is not considering the effects on our senses with the invisible car, and a digital Bond para-surfing a tidal wave. You will feel the same mood shift in Casino Royale, not at the beginning of the film – thank heavens - but further down the line, and unfortunately this torture sequence is vicious . . . accurate to the novel . . . but vicious. For parents taking their kids - be warned, your kid may not get to see the visual intricacies of the torture, but they will understand the cruelty of what is happening. This sequence does depress the mood of the rest of the film, you will be able to tell from the drop in excitement level of the audience from that point, and although you want yourself to say ‘yes this was an excellent movie’, you will feel the pit of gloomy depression in your stomach as you get up from your seat to the infamous Bond theme music and rolling credits. Conclusion: One of the better James Bond movies with excellent acting by Daniel Craig who fits the role of 007 very well and carries the film. The film does tend to drag a little long and your attention will start to wander towards the middle. And finally the torture sequence, it overshadows the rest of the film, and you will leave perhaps a little depressed with that sequence in your mind rather than the top-notch chases or fight scenes that you want to take away with you after seeing Bond . . . James Bond.
1 person likes this
• Thailand
25 Dec 06
Agreed in everything you wrote. Pierce Brosnan was really handsome though.. but he had to go.. anyway.. the torturing part where James Bond got hit it right in his... "...." was really vicious... yes.. "very" I could feel the pain as I was watching
@Josette_J (806)
• Malaysia
14 Feb 07
I like Casino Royale and Daniel Craig. I'm not really a fan of James Bond but some of the movies were great. Pierce Brosnan was just okay. My parents think that Sean Connery was the best Bond though.
• India
27 Dec 06
It was definitely better than all Pierce Brosnans mvies. I can watch it any no. of times. The chase sequences were also lookin real n dint involve a lot of fake gadgets that earlier moveis had.A must watch.