Casino Royale ** INLINE SPOILERS **
 

Best Bond film ever. Yes, including Sean Connery.

This is a new start for the franchise; in essence all previous Bond films never existed, ala Highlander II. The only connection is M.

This Bond is badder, more real, more vicious, more feral, more ferocious. Rounder, multidimensional, real depth of characterization. The whole character is reborn, fire forged. Frankly, this Bond makes Connery, Moore, and Brosnan look like the caricatures they were (no need to mention the aberation that was Dalton, or the hapless Lazenby).

Yes. I said it. The best Bond is no longer Sean Connery. It's this blonde guy who's name I can't even remember. Craig Something, or Something Craig.

Some people will complain that the plot was predictable. It was, but even though I knew where I was going, I enjoyed the ride.

There were homage's to the old style of Bond, but they were tongue in cheek; No Pussy Galores or Allotta Faginas, but Bond jokes that Her Majesty's Accountant's covername is Ms. Broadchest. We see the advent of the famous martini as it is simultaneously updated and then skewered ("Vodka martini." "Shaken or stirred, sir?" "Do I look like I give a damn?").

I can't say enough good things about this movie. Some will complain that it went on too long, that the ending was somewhat ad hoc. Both are probably true, but this first installment of a new incarnation of the franchise had a lot of character development to cover, and I don't mind the extra time in the seat.

This is probably a rambling review, but it boils down to: Highly recommended; the best Bond, character and film both, to date.

4.0/5 stars. And honestly, I'm not sure they could have addressed anything that would push it to 5 and still get the job done that they had to do.

PS. The poker was fun, and the opening sequence was dynamite.

Re: Casino Royale
 

How about a hand analysis of the last hand in the movie? Because I'm a poker junkies, I've been thinking about how the hand went down...

WARNING: Spoiler




















So here's what we know, 4 players --
SB, Japanese guy
BB, Black guy
UTG, Villian
Button, Hero

SB has KQs
BB has 88
Villian has A8o
Bond has 57s

Villian must have open-raised here. But he must have put in a small raise for Bond to call getting some deep implied odds with the deep stacks. I think blinds were 1mil/2mil? Bond has at least 40 mil behind as I recall at the end, and was the chip leader.

So Villian open raises, Bond takes a flyer ala Negreanu in position, SB calls with KQs and BB makes an easy call with 88 hoping to flop big.

Flop is A86, 2 spades. Checked to Villian who makes a decent sized bet. Bond calls with the open-ended straight flush draw, SB calls with the second nut flush draw.

Here's the tricky part. You figure BB must put in a healthy check-raise on the flop, due to all 3 players in the hand and an apparent flush draw on the flop. And then all call?

Would Villian just smooth-call the check-raise because he's afraid of Bond and SB smooth-calling the flop and potentially slowplaying a set? So I assume all just call.

Turn puts 4s out there, making an obvious flush. I could see it getting checked around here, SB possibly afraid Bond has AsXs or is he really slowplaying here? I could see BB checking the obvious flush as well as Villian and Bond (with the immortal nuts).

River is another sticky point. SB goes all-in (fine). BB goes all-in (fine). Why would Villian raise here? If I were Villian, I would just call hoping for an overall from Bond. Or does he "know" Bond has a flush/full house due to his action on the flop. Bond could possibly have 88/66.

What do you guys think?

Re: Casino Royale
 

<font color="white"> The hands were not the best, but they were not the worst. I was particularly annoyed by the bit where Bond is supposed to think that Scar-eye's min-raise is a bluff, when the pot is offering something like 4:1 on a call. And then why the reraise? If he's on a bluff, he's surely not going to call. Is Scar-eye supposed to be a maniac? Is Bond expecting him to re-reraise all in on a stone bluff? That's the only way the reraise to 2 million makes sense, which means it doesn't. As soon as Scar-eye went all in and Bond called him, I whispered to my wife "Quad jacks." </font>

Re: Casino Royale
 

<font color="white"> Actually, I think the board was AKKJJ on that hand. I know the plot point was that Bond thought the Villian was bluffing, but if he put the Villian on a K, Bond wins with the higher full house.

I think Bond made a mistake saying that the Villian "raised" the first time he was bluffing, when in fact I believe the Villian just bet when he had the 22. He never "raised" Bond.

The poker was actually decent, I agree overall. For a mainstream movie, it was done mostly right. I couldn't tell if they intentionally had Bond sloppily push all-in everytime he did it or what. That seemed kind of un-Bondlike and also is generally poor etiquette. But then, I guess the point of the movie was that Bond was kind of still rough around the edges.</font>

Re: Casino Royale
 

<font color="white">The whole premise was that Bond believed he was bluffing because of the tell. Kings full is not a bluff. </font>

Re: Casino Royale
 

[ QUOTE ]
No Pussy Galores or Allotta Faginas, but Bond jokes that Her Majesty's Accountant's covername is Ms. Broadchest. We see the advent of the famous martini as it is simultaneously updated and then skewered ("Vodka martini." "Shaken or stirred, sir?" "Do I look like I give a damn?").

[/ QUOTE ]

Its been years since Ive read a Bond book, but I think Ian Flemming included those outrageous names later in the series. Also if I remember correctly Bond always drank his martinis STIRRED, not shaken. Nobody drank shaken martinis in the 60's, it was 100% stirred, the way gentlemen prefer it. The shaken line was a movie addition.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Re: Casino Royale
 

Fantastic movie. I'm not sure if it's really as good as I think it is, or just that I went in with lowered expectations as I do with any movie that's just supposed to be "entertainment."

Either way, this is the darkest, most real Bond ever. Daniel Craig embues the character with such a steely-eyed masculinity, mixed with an ambiguous and well-hidden remorse for his actions - and why he's able to do the things he does - that makes his Bond the most well-rounded and human Bond yet.

The supporting cast is equally compelling, especially Eva Greene as a woman who is James Bonds' equal, and not merely a plaything between the covers.

And Judi Densch does more with less screen time than any actor alive. She's amazing.

The poker scenes, while ludicrous, were still fun to watch.

But what was so enjoyable about this film was how surprising it was, both in plot turns and in character building. I love how the writer's threw in classic Bond references like his martini, his car and others but with a modern, realistic twist.

And my god, how brutal and dark was this film at times? Bond goes through a torture scene that will have every man crossing his legs and wincing. Horrible.

Even though I saw the ending double-cross coming, it was still refreshingly powerful to see the origins of James Bond's emotionless resolve after being both betrayed and losing someone he loves.

And there's something so perfect about the scene - I won't ruin it for you - where Craig gets to utter those famous three words for the first time: "Bond. James Bond."

Terrific movie. Not only one of the best films of the year, but THE best Bond film ever. And yes, I'm serious.

(cross-posted from OOT 'cause I'm special)

Re: Casino Royale
 

I agree with everyone saying it was great. Definitely the best Bond movie I've seen. After watching Pierce Brosnan fiddle about with his fancy gadgets and nice cars this new guy was a welcome change. I may have missed it but I don't think there was a 'Q' character in this one at all (Q is the one with the gadgets, yes?).

Re: Casino Royale
 

[ QUOTE ]
Villian must have open-raised here. but he must have put in a small raise for bond to call getting some deep implied odds with the deep stacks. . I think blinds were 1mil/2mil? Bond has at least 40 mil behind as I recall at the end, and was the chip leader.


[/ QUOTE ]

not to be a nit but if the blinds were 1/2mil and bond had ~40mil then calling any raise with 57s is a real bad play.

you don't have implied odds when playing 20BB deep, especally when you are the biggest stack.

Re: Casino Royale
 

RayT,

I'm pretty sure Villain had A6o not A8o. Also everyone checking the turn there was quite lol. I think the Japanese guy played it the worst by checking the turn when he made his flush and then shoving when the board pairs on the river. And from the way he was smiling when the cards were showndown you could tell that he actually thought his hand was good. Oops.

Re: Casino Royale
 

I thought the poker was pretty laughable. I guess baccarat doesn't play well these days.

Also, I think Eva Green is the hottest Bond girl ever. Oh man I love her.

Re: Casino Royale
 

I loved this movie, not least because they finally got back to having a Bond that you can imagine beating your ass.

Re: Casino Royale
 

I loved the movie, one of the best of the year, and best in the Bond series.

As for the last hand: It was the CIA guy who had the flush and thought he was good, but with only 5 mil behind, dont think he can fold. The rest of the hands play themselves. BB was 1mil too.

Re: Casino Royale
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Villian must have open-raised here. but he must have put in a small raise for bond to call getting some deep implied odds with the deep stacks. . I think blinds were 1mil/2mil? Bond has at least 40 mil behind as I recall at the end, and was the chip leader.


[/ QUOTE ]

not to be a nit but if the blinds were 1/2mil and bond had ~40mil then calling any raise with 57s is a real bad play.

you don't have implied odds when playing 20BB deep, especally when you are the biggest stack.

[/ QUOTE ]

Big blind was 1 million at the time, not 2. They raised the blinds earlier when Bond was short stacked and the dealer said "the big blind will be 1 million" which was 1 blue plaque. The reds were 500k. Scar eye tossed out a raise to 2 million "Make it 2" and the dealer passed him his small blind of 500k back just a bit before this.

Re: Casino Royale
 

[ QUOTE ]
RayT,

I'm pretty sure Villain had A6o not A8o.

[/ QUOTE ]

100% correct, it was A6o.

Re: Casino Royale
 

[ QUOTE ]
I loved the movie, one of the best of the year, and best in the Bond series.

As for the last hand: It was the CIA guy who had the flush and thought he was good, but with only 5 mil behind, dont think he can fold. The rest of the hands play themselves. BB was 1mil too.

[/ QUOTE ]

um no. Asian guy had flush, big fat black dude had 88.

the CIA guy busted the hand before with AJ vs AQ

Re: Casino Royale
 

Here is the hand from the movie in the PXF replayer. Does this look correct to you guys?

http://www.pokerxfactor.com/SH32643/...0061120_163252

Re: Casino Royale
 

This thread has turned out pretty funny, but given the context of the forum we're on, fairly predictably.

I wonder if there's a forum somewhere for hitmen where they sit around critiquing how Bond kills people?

Re: Casino Royale
 

Question about something that doesn't make sense to me:
spoilers******


<font color="white">Vespar apparently made a deal with some group of badguys to steal the 120 mill for them in exchange for James. This happens while Bond is being tortured, presumably. So, after they are free from the torture, why not tell Bond? What incentive does she have to keep to her side of the bargain? They said something about someone being held hostage, but I couldn't really hear it too well.

Also, why kill herself? Bond wanted to save her, and she could have easily explained that she did it to save him/some guy that got kidnapped. This didn't seem realistic.
</font>

Re: Casino Royale
 

[ QUOTE ]
Here is the hand from the movie in the PXF replayer. Does this look correct to you guys?

http://www.pokerxfactor.com/SH32643/...0061120_163252

[/ QUOTE ]

this is why i [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] mindwise.













did that sound gay?
http://www.fedge.net/~zdeschanel/ima...y/newguy51.jpg

Re: Casino Royale
 

[ QUOTE ]

Even though I saw the ending double-cross coming, it was still refreshingly powerful to see the origins of James Bond's emotionless resolve after being both betrayed and losing someone he loves.

And there's something so perfect about the scene - I won't ruin it for you - where Craig gets to utter those famous three words for the first time: "Bond. James Bond."


[/ QUOTE ]

That must be one hell of a scene, since the double-crossing was worth ruining, but the scene wasn't. Guess I should know better than to read these sort of threads, but whatever.

Re: Casino Royale
 

Ouch yeah that sucks that thats ruined for ya
but yea

The blind was 1 million I saw it about an hour ago and I had to explain to my girl why he got the 500k card back when he raised it to 2 million.

It was A6.


My girlfriend also told me to "stop laughing" when he was talking about the bluff minraise. Hmm lets see I have to win like 5% of the time for a call to be correct. I fold.

Yeah Great Bluff!

Also I am the only one who thought it was funny...

Poker over all not too bad. Kind of wish they had LESS seeing as how my girlfriend doesn't understand the game and I have to explain alot.

I also thought it was funny when villian loses the astin martin and it looks like that table sits 6 tops.. LIVE 6 max game perhaps?

Maybe just bad perspective.

Good movie though.

Re: Casino Royale
 

Anybody remembers the hand where Bond wins his Aston Martin?

Re: Casino Royale
 

kk vs aa bond (aa) turned set and villian rivered set I believe

Re: Casino Royale
 

I think Bond had the set at the flop. Not sure though.

Re: Casino Royale
 

Just saw this - solid film. The poker scenes were as well done as they could be. Craig's definitely a great choice for Bond - or at least for this character of Bond, who's still clever, but certainly a lot more edgy.

Sad to see 'Q' (or 'R') go, but I didn't miss him either - the Bond franchise was straddling the fence between goofy, cartoonish nonsense and serious action film - a few clunkers in a row made them have to decide one way or the other, and I feel like they picked the right one.

Re: Casino Royale ** INLINE SPOILERS **
 

What was supposed to be in the suitcase at the end? Please don't tell me it was $120M!! Also, I thought that the top prize was $150M- did they take $30M in rake??? That's Harrahsesque.

Re: Casino Royale ** INLINE SPOILERS **
 

i just saw this.

i'd like to see poker scenes where you don't need the pure nuts to win, but whatever. just once, i'd like to see the hero call w/ 22 on a 3677J board because he knows villain has AK, but that's me.

Craig is great, as I suspected he'd be. this is a Bond I find really interesting to watch.

one thing I noticed: Bond movies are always pushing, pushing, pushing the technology for obvious reasons, but this one was refreshing in that the technology is advanced enough on its own that they can do cool stuff without stretching too far. Dude gets a text message. That I can get behind.

that last big scene is going to make a great video game level

Re: Casino Royale ** INLINE SPOILERS **
 

I just saw this movie at the weekend, and really enjoyed it. Good to see the world's biggest badass is British [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

It was a radical departure for Bond. They sort of tried to be this edgy with Dalton, and a little with Brosnan in Goldeneye, but veered away from it in the past, but looks to me they finally grasped the nettle and settled for a new take. Works well, I just hope they have the character developing from an intelligent flyboy into the suave agent we know and love over the course of a few films, so we can see Bond growing into the figure that was Connery in Dr No and From Russia with Love (or something like it - a dangerous dude wrapped up in a suave overlay).


I did have an issue with the card scenes, but not because of the over the top hands...didn't mind that, it's a movie, after all. My gripe is that they were quite flat. They could have been much more tense and exciting with a little opportune music, editing, and unusual angles.


Good Bond, would have liked to have seen Bale or Owen there, but not disappointed with Craig.

Re: Casino Royale ** INLINE SPOILERS **
 

I just saw it. While, all in all, I definitely enjoyed the movie and think it's one of the better Bond films, there's a je ne sais quoi that bothered me about it. It wasn't anything in particular, like the poker, which did suck (to be expected), but it was just throughout the entire film. I will definitely be thinking about this, trying to find what about the film was rubbing me the wrong way. I might have to see it again to figure it out.

Anyways, I think Craig was great as Bond. I think he embodies Bond better than Clive or Bale. So, he's probably the best aspect of the movie. The worst, probably the song in the opening credits. Am I the only one who thinks that song was completely bland and sucked hardcore?

Re: Casino Royale ** INLINE SPOILERS **
 

Just saw it on Friday. Totally agree with LOTD about the song in the opening credits. It sucked. Thank god the movie was better than the song.

Daniel Craig is cool! and intense, and oddly sexy, and unpredictable, and a very, very good fighter. Freakin tenacious is what he is. I’m not sure I was keeping up with the plot though. It seemed a little confusing to me. I don’t know much about poker but the poker game seemed kind of dumb. I guess I agree with diebitter that the game was a little flat. I was really surprised they didn't try to make it more exciting.

Anyway, this movie was very much fun and I wasn’t bored, mostly just confused. Not sure I was entirely sold on the romance thing either between him and the girl. Did anyone else buy it? I thought it wasn’t as intense and passionate as I would have liked. Don’t get me wrong, she is breathtaking and the camera really loves her. I just wanted more.

Daniel Craig is just ridiculously intense. He would need an extremely feisty, intelligent girl to tame him. I liked the part where he was rolling around on the floor with that guy’s wife. Wow. We needed a lot more of that kind of action in this movie is what I think. He is very watchable.

Re: Casino Royale ** INLINE SPOILERS **
 

[ QUOTE ]
What was supposed to be in the suitcase at the end? Please don't tell me it was $120M!! Also, I thought that the top prize was $150M- did they take $30M in rake??? That's Harrahsesque.

[/ QUOTE ]
They mentioned once that it was $115M, and a few times that it was $120M, if I remember right. I figured they just had some people that didn't rebuy. The CIA guy, for example, might not have rebought for the $5M since he knew he was a dog at the table.

Re: Casino Royale ** INLINE SPOILERS **
 

I saw this over the weekend and agree it's the best Bond movie in a very long time.

But while I thought Craig was quite good - and a huge improvement over recent choices - I still prefer Connery. Basically, I think Connery is equally plausible, just as tough (in the context of the villains he faced), and at the same time more likeable.

One thing that bothered me in this film was the romance, which I really didn't buy. Craig didn't persuade me that he actually cared about what's her name.

Re: Casino Royale ** INLINE SPOILERS **
 

[ QUOTE ]
What was supposed to be in the suitcase at the end? Please don't tell me it was $120M!! Also, I thought that the top prize was $150M- did they take $30M in rake??? That's Harrahsesque.

[/ QUOTE ]

You may want to look it this . It was obvious not USD.

Only thing I can think of is was some sort of bond ?

Edit to add: I thought the exact same thing. Inflation is evil.

Re: Casino Royale ** INLINE SPOILERS **
 

[ QUOTE ]
I just saw it. While, all in all, I definitely enjoyed the movie and think it's one of the better Bond films, there's a je ne sais quoi that bothered me about it. It wasn't anything in particular, like the poker, which did suck (to be expected), but it was just throughout the entire film. I will definitely be thinking about this, trying to find what about the film was rubbing me the wrong way. I might have to see it again to figure it out.


[/ QUOTE ]

I just saw it last night and I'm gonna have to agree here. The guy who played bond was awesome, the action was awesome, the poker was decent, double cross at the end was pretty predictable once you find out that old was working for scar eye. I think the thing I didnt like was the whole premise of the movie was kind of lame. Basically some evil guy loses a ton of money on the stock market and bond has to stop him from getting the poker money because it is going to be used to fund terrorism. How lame is that? No evil genius trying to blow up the world, just general terrorism.

Re: Casino Royale ** INLINE SPOILERS **
 

In the final hand, I thought they sacrificed accuracy for dramatic effect - they had the players show their hands in reverse order - the side pots should have shown first, and the main pot last....

Since they switched from baccarat to Hold'em in response to the poker craze, I think they missed an opportunity for some typical Bond movie tongue-in-cheek humor. (Like having Richard Branson stuck in screening at the airport - did you notice that one?) I think they should have included a known poker personality (Helmuth, Brunson, etc.) playing in the game - it would have been hilarious if Hellmuth threw a tantrum if Bond or the villian had eliminated him - funnier still if he got rubbed out.....

Re: Casino Royale ** INLINE SPOILERS **
 

BobOjedaFan's Take on This Movie.....

OK, I saw this movie last night, wow. Although I'm usually able to predict the end of movies, I honestly have to say I did not see the end coming. Maybe I was blinded because I liked the Eve Green character too much, but I was really surprised, everyone here says it was obvious, but wow I just didn't see it. I was also under the impression that his Bond movie was to be a 1 time deal like 'Never Say Never Again', so I thought it would have a tidied up/happy ending.

Anyway, the end of this movie IMO also made this movie. The whole movie I thought Craig was a huge douchebag and couldn't get into his romance at all because I thought he
was just a cold hearted ass. Originally I blamed this on bad acting by Craig to come off THAT COLD but the end made it all make sense. It was all part of his character development when he finnally sheds all of his armor/[censored] because he has fallen in love. Seeing him shaking the bars of the cage trying to save the girl who is obviously already dead almost made me want to cry, wow what a finish. This movie was so much different than other Bonds.


<u>General Things in the Movie That Were Awesome</u>
Eva Green - Even though you're evil, you can still marry me
Chase Scene Into the Embessy - lol


<u>Things That Sucked</u>
Fight Scenes weren't as cool as they generally are in Bond Films IMO
Bond bitching that he could beat the evil guy at cards hes better than him, etc etc etc, and then he beats him with an unbeatable hand vs. a practically unbeatable hand, wow that took skill

Re: Casino Royale ** INLINE SPOILERS **
 

Just saw it tonight...Best Bond film I've seen.

This Bond would never have existed if Jason Bourne had never hit the screen. Its obvious that writers realized that in a Jack Bauer/Jason Bourne type world they had to create a new harder version of the slick fancy James Bond.

Eva Green never really doublecrossed him per say.

She worked for the bad guys initially to save her boyfriend.

Then after she fell in love with Bond and the frenchman was killed by Mr. White she promised to get them the money if they gave her Bond's life in return.

So technically she never betrayed Bond but aved his life twice...once with the defib and once in the ship when they were going to kill him.

The only thing is I didn't get why she intentionally killed herself at the end...unless it was just because of guilt etc.

Re: Casino Royale ** INLINE SPOILERS **
 

[ QUOTE ]
The only thing is I didn't get why she intentionally killed herself at the end...unless it was just because of guilt etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't realize it until people mentioned it in this thread, but the correct answer is "Because the plot and (Bond's) character required it." Ah well.

Re: Casino Royale ** INLINE SPOILERS **
 

It was a bit silly the way it was handled by the writers but was a minor blip.