Casino Royale

Casino Royale

Starring: Daniel Craig, Eva Green, Judi Dench, Jeffrey Wright

Director: Martin Campbell

One more James Bond movie ended another classic to your video collection. This time, we have a new performer in the place of James, a British man called Daniel Craig.

Casino Royale is very special from your regular James Bond flick. The action isn't as cartoonish, and the movie has a much darker feel than the others. For some, it's good news, and for others, it's bad news. (Movie review 1: casino Royale)

The film takes place in many dissimilar locations. From the Bahamas, all the way down to Europe. The site makes the theme of the movie change pretty hastily.

It's mostly because a lot of things take place in the movie, diverse action scenes, in progression being exposed, which all leads from one thing to another, until the very dramatic ending.

Watch Casino Royale clips at TubeCasino.com

The main villain is very odd, and his role is more sensible than any other 007 film. What makes this film more sensible than the others is how all of the actions can in fact happen in realism.

Not anything over the top and the actions are similar to real life. No other action film I have seen contains such realistic events.

On the whole, this is one of the superior films of the James Bond sequence. It is one of the most unique action films I have seen, and I would positively suggest it to action movie fans, and James Bond fans.

People from all over the world can enjoy this film, as it is likeable by many people. Casino Royale has been in theatres for 2 weeks, and has made a total of $94.2 Million, and is one of the most successful Bond films.

top

Movie Review 1: Casino Royale

Movie Review 1: Casino Royale

The James Bond films carry certain prospects: guns, cars, gadgets, beautiful girls, sex, martinis shaken and cringe-worthy double entendres are chief among them.

Casino Royale is amazing in its defiance of some of those gathering. But this film isn’t the balm to soothe the wounds of a decade’s worth of poor filmmaking.

The 21st Bond film in the 44-year-old film franchise, released November 17, ushers in a new Bond (Daniel Craig) and an obvious original course for the series.

Bond is a more three-dimensional quality, and he’s made relevant for the times, superiority very much lacking in the last four films.

Bond has just received his double-0 status as the ultra-stylish credit series begins. He’s on his first real mission in this film, trying to foil an international group of terrorists.
After an overlong, almost completely empty first hour, Bond is put on the trail of Le Chiffre the terrorist group’s money man.

Le Chiffre has just lost a lot of bad people’s money in the stock market, and to get it back he enters a high-stakes poker competition at the Casino Royale.

M (Judi Dench) gets Bond in the game — it appears that Bond is MI6’s ace cards man — in order to stop Le Chiffre from winning back what he lost, then bring him in for questioning.

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting Casino Royale, the first Bond book written by Ian Fleming, is the last Fleming Bond text to be adapted, straight, cinematically.

In 1967, a madcap spy spoof version of Casino Royale starring Peter Sellers, Woody Allen, and Orson Welles, among others, was made to send up the Bond series. This more recent edition is far more true to the source fabric.

When the film finally settles into the meat of the story — the card game — Fleming’s literary Bond, keen descriptions, and adroit plot growth subjugate the cinematic Bond’s penchant for shoot-‘em-up nonsense.

But that’s only one change among many producers have brought to the franchise. There are no peculiar gadgets (because Q isn’t in the book, so he’s not in the movie), and the double entendres are almost totally forgotten (thank God).

There are fast cars (Bond gets two Aston Martins, a vintage 1964 and a modern 2006) and “Bond Girls,” but the sex is kept to a minimum.

This isn’t as bad as it might sound. Bond has heretofore been a mimbo; now, he earns his sexual adventure and it doesn’t render him cheap and misogynistic.

Another change comes in the violence. Rather than video game distant, we’re given up-close brutality. (Movie review 2: casino Royale)

Bond engages in numerous hand-to-hand combats, with one encounter leaving him extremely bloody and another giving him numerous facial lacerations.

This up-close-and-personal move toward is taken to its utmost effect when Bond attaches a bomb to a radical and allows the terrorist to blow himself up; before, Bond would have shot at the terrorist from a tank or some other heavy armed machine to do the same job.

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting the most important improvement Casino Royale brings to the table is that Bond is a character for the times, not a relic caricature of a character that should have ended with the Cold War.

Bond pine away as the Cold Warrior with no real reason nor enemies to combat over the past four films.

Here, though, he’s charged with fighting violence, a suitable if not entirely worthy substitute for collectivism.

And to go with this new mission Bond is given a sense of actuality. He’s a stone-cold killer, but he feels and grows and develops as the film development.

Vesper Lynd (Eva Green) is key to this process, providing Bond with a serious romantic interest that makes him reconsider his position as a spy rather than a floozy that makes him reconsider his position under her.

Vesper isn’t treated as a sexual object, but rather as Bond’s check on reality and sanity.

top

Movie Review 2: Casino Royale

Movie Review 2: Casino Royale

Daniel Craig is as much a reason for this development to Bond as anyone. Besides being as close to Fleming’s Bond as has been seen on screen, Craig holds himself, as Bond, with dignity and reason. (Movie review 1: casino Royale)

Craig’s less-than-matinee idol looks relocate Bond away from what has distinct the quality for decades and towards something new entirely.

Unluckily, Casino Royale is still plagued with some of the troubles of previous films.
The pre-credit sequence is obtainable in black-and-white, despite being shot in color, for no obvious reason other than to have a black-and-white opening.

It’s used as a novelty rather than a story device, rendering it hokey and disingenuous.

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting Worse, though, are the action set pieces. Not only are they too long, they grind the film to a screeching halt.

The whole chase sequence, post-credits, is utterly senseless. Bond chases a man around Madagascar as the man jumps and spring up from building to building, flea-like, in a mad effort to escape the pursuing Bond.

When the sequence ends, you’re left speculate why Bond went through so much trouble. Similarly, the climactic battle in a sinking Venetian building is remarkably bland.

Besides prolonging the end of the film by a good 20 minutes, it robs the story of the emotional punch Fleming delivered in his book.

As a Bond film, judged on the merits of preceding Bond films, Casino Royale is a huge step in the right course.

However, this still isn’t the great Bond film. It fall down too easily under the traps of the past, even after apply a lot of time and power to building the series back up.

There is still a lot of work to be done to exact the permit. Optimistically this is truly the commencement of a new direction for James Bond.

top