Is it just me, or does the new bond look more like a villain?
http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/casinoroyale/
What is he supposed to look like? He's a paid assassin with a bit of a mean streak. He's not exactly a "good guy" if you go from the original source material.
I've always thought Timothy Dalton matched best with the image of James Bond that I had from reading the Fleming novels.
I dunno about villain, but Craig doesn't have the look or the screen personality for Bond, IMO. That shot makes him look kind of weaselly, maybe even sidekickey.
"Craig doesn't look like Bond" was done to death when he was announced, do keep up chaps...
And +1 for Timothy Dalton, also. Licence to Kill is one of my top 3 for sure.
I won't delve into the look, but the teaser has me excited to see the film. I have high hope for this one. Partly because of the attempt to go darker again, partly because of the director. I wouldn't have minded seeing Brosnan get this flick though.
Yeah, the whole "Bond is a psychopath who happens to work for the right team" angle is completely missing in most of the films, though Connery conveyed it on occasion and Dalton, as you said, also seemed to understand this.Originally Posted by Timemaster Tim
CLIVE OWEN THE END.
DON CHEADLE THE END AGAIN
Right on. The slapstick humor of most of the movies is ridiculous compared to the books, which may from time to time be unintentionally humorous these days, but which were written to be deadly serious.
Example: I think in the original Casino Royale, Bond's lover turns out to be a double agent (turned by Smersh quite against her will since of course she has fallen in love with Bond). When she gets herself tragically killed, his telegram to M at the end of the book says something like "The bitch is dead" despite the fact that a couple of chapters before he was thinking of retiring to marry her.
Speaking of the books, I wonder why they haven't been reprinted in something like 25 years or more. You'd think given all those utter garbage new Bond novels from people like Gardner (the best of the hacks they signed on for them) that they'd reprint the old ones, but apparently not.... Is there a dispute amongst the copyright holders or something?
Yeah, I remember that scene. She tearfully confesses to him, dies, and he tells M "She turned out to be a traitor but the bitch is dead now." or something.
He works cheap.
This is going to be fantastic. If you don't think so, you're dead inside.
He looks a bit scary and that's a good thing.
Yeah. That looks okay by me.
It can't be worse than the last one.
Cheadle is the only reason I'm seeing the Poseidon remake.
Texas Hold 'Em.
WHAT THE FUCK
Last edited by Sean Hargraves; 05-04-2006 at 10:37 PM.
I thought the last one (Die another tomorrow yesterday, or whatever it was called) began quite well when Bond was captured, tortured, and abandonned by his government for years. By the time he was parasail snowboarding his way through a tidal wave, it was so far off track that my mind shut down in self defense.
Ohhhh, that's pretty bad. Baccarat just too obscure I guess?
"Huit a la banque" *boggle*
Hmm.. Interesting that they have decided to use YAMP (Yet Another Media PLayer) for the video clips from that site..
What was wrong with 3 options; Quicktime/WMP/Real(spyware)?
Oh whell, guess I can skip the trailer until it shows up in another format, not installing any software from sony if I can avoid it :-)
Is flash okay?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=o-wC4X8wI...asino%20royale
Right-click this and save as an .flv file. Opens with VLC (no seeking) or a dedicated FLV player.
TY :-) Edit: So this is just a remake of the David Niven James Bond movie with the same name?... Kind of a sad state of affairs when even James Bond is reduced to retexturing older versions of the same movie.
Considering how popular Texas Hold'em is becoming in the US, is this really a surprise? Also, if the card scene is going to be quite lengthy, wouldn't you want your audience to have a chance at understanding the underlying game?
The old movie was a Bond parody, very loosely based on the first Bond novel, Casino Royale.
The new Casino Royale is a serious approach to the same novel.
Yeah the old Casino Royale is a spoof. The secondary characters are mainly the same, however (Vesper, Le Chiffre, etc.)
--- Alan
It was directed by Woody Allen, wasn't it?
Well, it has Woody Allen in it, but amazingly enough he's not one of the five credited directors (I think John Huston was the first).
--- Alan
There's a major difference in the underlying drama for the scene when James Bond is dropping huge amounts of cash on a game where the outcome is determined entirely by chance (as in baccarat) as opposed to a game like Texas Hold 'em, where the player's skill plays a role in the result.
I believe he ended up losing a lot of money in the book, but I'm not sure. If they stay true to the book, I'd rather he lose a huge stake because the game's mechanics dictate that chance determines the result, not player skill.
With baccarat, it shows he has balls by letting "fate" decide what happens, win or lose. If they use Texas Hold 'em and he loses, well, James Bond sucks at cards. Of course, I suspect they will Hollywoodize the scene and he'll win.
It's not something which will keep me from watching the movie, but it sort of goes against the Bond archetype. He drinks martinis (shaken not stirred). He drives Aston Martins. He uses a Walther PPK. And he plays baccarat.
Only Chinese people play Baccarat anymore.
Well except that I believe he actually had to learn to play Baccarat in the first part of the book.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote