@@heeeeeresrossy Agree. I've watched all the Bond films and this is such an amazing film. Mads Mikkelsen is such a great actor and the fact he plays the baddie who isn't a tough guy, he's just smart and has connections makes it quite believable. Daniel Craig wise, shame QoS sucked (the camera work made me feel car sick, the story, all so mixed up) but the rest were good, Skyfall and Spectre especially IMHO. Mark K is so correct in making a game (poker) which for someone like myself isn't particular interesting turn into psychological warfare is credit to the actors and director. The ONLY criticism I have of it, is I've spoke to people who didn't understand the early part where Le Chiffre 'shorts' the airline stocks with the money then attempts to blow up the prototype, it fails and he loses a tremendous amount of money thus leading to the poker tournament. I think unless you are familiar with trading that needed a tiny bit of additional explanation to the audience as to what 'shorting' is, why he did it and tried to blow up an airplane.
I still maintain that the problem is that the story is made for the 50s and should have been set in that time period. That would have meant removing a lot of the "modern" stuff, but that would have given them the opportunity to find new cold war stories going forward.. instead of the terrible storylines we have been given since Casino Royal. Daniel is very good, but the stories don't work.
Absolutely. Craig has been very transparent that Vesper Lynd is the ghost that haunted his entire series despite only having under one hour of screen time. She is completely integral to how they ended up carving his character and the overarching narrative. So a rare misjudgment from Kermode but I think one that he has since reexamined and changed his mind about.
I really enjoy Kermode as a reviewer. He doesn't mind if his counterpart has a differing opinion, as well as not taking jabs seriously. It's always pleasant listening to him.
Kermode and Simon just bounce off each other so naturally. I can listen to them for hours. I love it when Mark gets playfully bullied into going to see a film he knows he is going to despise like any of the Michael Bay films or PoTC and Simon is like 'so! Open-minded review, what did you think Mark?' :D
Eva Green was great. A real thinking Bond girl, who was a sidekick and a technician as well as a a squeeze. Best one in years. They've gone very downhill since. Some rando nameless chick riding a pony. Screwing a grieving women after her husband's funeral. Depressing stuff.
Skyfall has a far smoother pace though. And a better villain I think. Silva's plan is silly but at least he does something. Le Chiffre is a Z list constantly reacting and in the ropes. He doesnt feel dangerous and unpredictable like Silva.
Saturday night watching kermode and mayo with the headphones in while my wife watches a terrible film and my sons on the ipad. The joys of life. 25/11/17 Peace ✌️
From Russia with Love does tend to follow the book quite closely. The main change that I can think of is that Rosa Klebb and Kronsteen are not just working for SMERSH but secretly part of SPECTRE, but that doesn't really alter the plot significantly. .
Timothy Dalton was a very good Bond. But he was trying to do the Daniel Craig Bond with Roger Moore scripts, full of glib quips and exploding milk-bottles. His gritty, ahead-of-its-time performance was sunk by camp surroundings.
Watching in 2020. It's amazing how much Simon used to contribute to reviews (if he'd seen the film). These days he just sits silently for the most part. It's like he's lost his enthusiasm for this show. And yes, this is still the best Daniel Craig bond movie. And yes, would still have been better without the last 20mins
Kernite doesn’t know what he’s talking about! The love interest was totally believable with Eva Green. Best of the Craig era. Did he have a better time believing it in Spectre and No time to die? What’s amazing is you can easily watch Casino Royale again and again from start to finish. Can’t do the same with No time to die now I’ve seen it once. Shame really
I do too! I geniunely think Brosnan is one of the best Bonds. Goldeneye is one of my very favourites. I like the way he blends humour with the cold toughness, which was kind of lost in DAD, but thats more the poor writing and OTT action that let that film down.
When I saw this there were some thoroughly annoying kids in the cinema- even "oh no"-ing when Bond was captured. Then Le Cheffre got his knotted rope out, and they clammed right up.
Good review, I agree about the last 20min. The movie had it's climax and the Italy part feels like an unnecessary extension. I like Casino Royal as much as I like Man on fire and Collateral. The violence is more realistic and less glorifying than in other movies.
The scene that gets me the most as far as product placement goes, is when he goes to tie his shoe lace outside the Ocean View Hotel and you can see a Jaguar behind him in full view. It's so bad it looks like a poster advertising the car. In fact that whole car park sequence is like a car commercial. But I still consider this film to be one of the best in the series!
With respect to Mr. Craig's successful revitalisation of the character, I seem to be the only person left who misses Pierce Brosnan. Whatever animosity people have toward Die Another Day, the film is not his fault, and he was as charming as ever in the role. Why not blame Halle Berry or Purvis and Wade or the CGI crew for screwing up the franchise instead? They share far more of the responsibility. It's not like Pierce wanted DAD to be his swansong - he always wanted material as dark as Royale.
Oh man! I am SO SORRY!!!! I forgot this is the internet...where your opinion of something dictates your intelligence level. Please forgive me for not agreeing with you right away!
Good review, but I diagree with what Mark said about From russia with Love not being faithful to the book, its one of the few Bond movies that is faithful to the books.
First, I admire the writers for bringing Bond back to more Fleming-esque roots (less gadgets, more intrigue) in CR. Second, I disliked both DAD and QoS but for different reasons. Third, I still prefer Pierce AS Bond (more sophisticated and stylish, and you actually believed he could have gone to Eton).
The film is A fresh reinvention of the 007 films as the film’s action packed, well acted, stylish, well directed, intense & thrilling. (88%) (4.5/5 stars) (positive)
Not in places not a film to see with your mother (said place being seeing Le Chiffre’s girlfriend on the balcony and asking very loudly establishing the character’s gender) (mum, obviously).
around the 6 minute, when Mark says that Casino Royale is decidedly unspecific about what time it's set in....ummm, did this guy actually pay any attention to this film? It clearly says on the security tapes in the first hotel Bond stays in that it's set in July 2006.
This is one of the funniest reviews I’ve seen from these 2 so many funny likes but I definitely agree with Simon, Casino Royale (1967) is one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen.
The way blimey Charlie came out I believe mark was a very special fan of that particular scene for many unsettling reasons and probably watches it on repeat
@etocadet I guess the original author didn't know ANYTHING about James Bond when he wrote the book because all those criticisms apply to it. Don't blame the writers for trying to take Bond back to his roots after Die another Day destroyed the franchise and spat on Ian Fleming's vision and grave.
1. FRWL is actually one of the MORE faithful adaptations. Maybe he was thinking of Moonraker. 2. Although the specific time of which the film is set is not established we do know it takes place post 9/11. Judy Dench referrs to that event when talking to DC.
Kermode is dead wrong. Casino Royale is blatantly set in 2006. Look at all the dates on the computers and mobile phones. Bond even says "2006" at one point.
Pierce Brosnan was incapable of anything beyond posing like the male model he is. He'd be as out of water with dark and serious material as Roger Moore would've been.
@KingOfTheShrews Referring to anything as 'real cinema' immediately proves that you know far less about cinema than your smug superiority complex allows you to think.
Yeah, he didn't want to stop at Die Another Day, they were just planning on doing Casino Royale and they told Brosnan that he was too old to play Rookie Bond.
I have to say this is the only bond that actually could be passed off as a great individual film, which does of course mean it is a bit less classic bond unlike skyfall which sort of combined modern bond with the old bond but still felt a bit souless to me. So i have to say my top 3 bond films are "From Russia with Love" , Dr No and casino royale. eva green has to be the best bond girl character yet.
The Bond films could get away with that kind of Die Another Day mediocrity before Bourne came along. The Bourne films showed everyone that Bond films were simply outdated and the same kind of material could be done (and were being done) better elsewhere. Bourne had everything that the Daniel Craig Bond has: visceral fights, realistic guns and believable characters. They had to update the franchise in every way because of Bourne and succeeded spectacularly.
@PurushaDesa you're not the only one it didn't feel like a bond film, it was written/produced by americans who didn't get what a british spy is about. there was no fancy gadgets there was no state of the art car there was no super weapon to deal with, sure it was a pvt organisation but if uve played the metal gear games it combined both and worked brilliantly they described the vodka martini which annoyed me, i thought it had vodka and martini but no it had so much more both films failed
I didn't like Pierce because he seemed a tad, just a tad, reliant on the gadgets he obtained and the help he obtained from other people. Not because of the script, but his action sequences were always some muscular brute running at him and Pierce doing some "using my pinkie I will flip you around onto your head" and not a real meaty fight. Craig is much better in this regard and you honestly believe he could save the world with his bare hands whereas Pierce needed some help.
Lazenby was a perfectly fine Bond, Dalton and Moore were the worst actors, the Brosnan years were the stupidest plots and the Craig years are still stained by the mess that is Quantum of Solace
+Gjakova Shqipni True, the 67 version is one of the worst films I've ever seen. Horrible production, plot makes no sense, jokes aren't funny. Disaster of a film
Casino Royale was awful. Maybe I'm just out of love with Bond films, but it was. It was like one long, pretentious, arty car advert. And it was so hokey that in the final scene of the guy on the beach who Bond shoots in the knees, you can actually see the kneepads and squibs he's wearing! Bleh, so shoddy.
DIE ANOTHER DAY WAS TEH BEST BOND FILM EVER AND HIS INVISIBLE CAR WAS THE BEST GADGET HE EVER GOT AND IT IS REALISTIC BECAUSE THERE ARE REAL CARS LIKE THAT AROUND NOW AND MY DAD IS GETTING ONE FOR ME SO SHUT UR MOUTH KERMIT!!!!
