Printable View
Kick ass.
The best Bond movie yet, without a doubt. If you haven't seen it yet, GO OUT AND SEE IT. NOW.
Craig is way better than Connery as bond, without a doubt. Everything in the movie is improved from the space-bourne death lasers of yore. The plot is interesting, and plausible. (GASP!) The characters have personality, and the Bond girls are a world away from the arm candy of the past movies.
I couldn't really find anything wrong with the movie... 10/10. Yep.
Yes, I loved it too!! And Eva Green too :D. He plays a more rugid and a more "get to the point" Bond. I wouldn't say he's better than Connery but I'd say it is an equal match now. Great acting too, it wasn't just about the action. But, of course, Paul Haggis co-wrote it. Personally, I always liked Roger Moore.
I was going to watch it yesterday but every seat was booked except for the first 2 rows so I didn't bother. I'll probably watch it this week end.
Glad you guys like it.
half the fun of the old bonds were the ditz girls, the over the top plots/villains and the sweet gadgets...
outside of that... this movie does look very good.
I've heard so many older women say how good-looking the new Bond guy is, but he's just okay, imo. I dig the accent, but that's about it. I never really got into the Bond movies too much.
I just saw the movie a couple of hours ago. I don't think you can really compare it to the other Bond films because it was so different. Great storyline... amazing villians... the poker was great... the torture scene was really horrible but still great... everything about this film was great, apart from the bloody advertising of sony erikson and the vaio laptop. That really annoyed me. But otherwise, this was definitely among the best films of the year.
I saw it, and I LOVED it. I don't think the new guy quite trumps Connery, but he's definitely good. I was actually surprised that there was actually a relationship that built up in the movie--not just Bond screwing some ditz.
It really didn't have the normal focus on high-tech gadgets at all, either. That's kind of good, kind of bad. It made the movie a better standalone film, but like jacopo said, really, a lot of the fun of old Bond movies was the over-the-top techno-gadgets and evil supervillains.
But I've gotta say, it had some REALLY good laughing moments. The bomber and the plane for one. And the "scratching my balls" line had me cracking up, too.
Altogether, I'd give it 9.5/10.
It does look quite good, I'll probably see it soon. I think it could include more casino games in it though. I can almost see it...
Evil dude: You're very good at poker, but lets see how you do on the fruit machines!
Yep.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaniaz
I see I am the extreme minority to think this is the WORST Bond film ever made. Yes, really extreme; 'the WORST'! I felt it destroyed everything Bond had evolved to, before the not-so-good ones at the end. Not only that, but he was portrayed in not only a clumsy oaf way, but he actually annoyed me as a character. I guess the making-of affected my opinion of him, but I know others who went with me felt the same way.
The characters seemed to change more often than his shirt and jeans, and this 'thuggish' personality is nowhere to be seen, imo. It was riddled with product placement (No doubt Sony, Omega and Ford will profit enormously) and the scene changes seemed to have no continuity.
8/10 film
4/10 Bond
[edit]: Oh! And not to forget the instantly forgettable villain, who spent 90% of the film playing poker, crying, and begging for more time to get the cash back
i think it was really awesome, but really unique. no other bond film involves not having a cool car most of the movie, or all da gadgets. in this bont was more old fashioned. the torture was horrific !!
everything-100000/10
Arrggg thats my point. Its nothing like Bond at all. As for the torture, it wasnt horrific; he joked his way through it! There was torture in D.A.D. that was, imo, much more sinisterQuote:
Originally Posted by skuruza
Ok, you need to remember it was almost like a training mission for him. it was the first book of the series. at least this one had some good acting in it from craig. but ya, the torture was sick.
But Brosnan was a brilliant actor!! :/Quote:
Originally Posted by secret_neo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burns
if you want to see him in a damn good roll you should rent layer cake.
i dun get why the bad dude was sweating so much during the torture though. is he a wimp or something? cant handle swinging a rope?
Lol, I dont think any man would. The mankinds true weakness. Except for maybe Goldmember from Austin Powers.
Loads of Americans on IMDB were saying he sounded American; anyone on here reckon he does?
I am a bit sceptic, the new bond looks... different form the old (how weird!).
But actually, this new dude might be more intersting then Pierce... I'll have to see the movie some day soon. James Bond movies allways are fun. They never rock HARD. But allways are a pleasure to watch. All 21/22 whatever parts :)
Yeah, it is REALLY different. Some people like it, but I personally really don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neruo
I watched it day after release, bloody good watch, fiver well spent. Craig plays an excellent Bond. Weak at the end, but so many one liners.
They say the second one is...
...yes, considerably.
Casino Royale was great... Daniel Craig is probably the best Bond I've seen. :happy:
-____________________-
Yeah, it was good. The only downside I would say is that Craig, while a good actor, didn't look Bondish enough in my opinion, but once I got used to that, it was great.Quote:
Originally Posted by FreshBrains
Thumbs up from me as well, great film. Opening credit sequence was awesome, I liked the song, Daniel Craig is a wicked Bond. The poker bits weren't amazing however, not quite realistic but I suppose if I worked in the security services I'd say the same thing about the whole film!
4 out of 5