IGN likes it.

I'll be seeing it tomorrow evening. Impressions to follow.

I'm interested, but no car. :\

I've heard surprisingly good things about it. It's the first Bond film that I actually am looking forward to seeing (released in my lifetime, of course).

Though I always think of Daniel Craig as Conner Rooney, which is about as un-Bond like a character as there is.

I must admit, this new guy bares a striking resemblance to Ian Flemings vision of bond. That is except for the whole hair thing...




I was a little shocked initially at how that old lady was still going to be M despite this movie apparently taking place at the very beginning of bond's career. Turns out Casino Royale is a reboot, not a prequel. I look forward to James Bond's new direction over the over-the-top stunts and asinine gadgets that have made up the past 20 years of Bond films.

Re-boot? Lame. The new Bond guy is also way too ugly to be Bond. Not studly at all. He does not get my homosexual dick hard. Anyway, I'll probably try to see it while my car's in the shop today. No way am I going in the evening... I hate crowds.

Milletoolie strikes again. Dude, gay or not, his looks don't matter. I can honestly say he's the BEST Bond to date. He reminds me of Connery but even better. To a lot of fans that's blasphemy but hey, I was raised on Roger Moore.

A reboot is what the series needed. The last one went too Hollywood even though it was a good one.

The last good Bond film was Goldeneye. Tomorrow Never Dies was decent, but all the other recent ones have sucked.

Brosnan made a kickass Bond, but he got stuck with some shitty screenplays.

So far as I recall M has been a woman before this movie. So don't go pointing fingers at Casino Royale with Cheese.

What I like is how they're getting away from the bullshit gimmicks found in that steaming pile of feces known as Goldeneye and making Bond more of a straight no gizmos action character.

Call me nutty, but the gimmicks in Goldeneye lacked any of the charm or neatness of say - the Aqua Car in that one Bond flick. I think perhaps they tried playing those movies a bit too straight?

Ugh... this was so not a real Bond movie. I here-by rename it "The Movie That Ended Three Times". Really bad form in having too many "climaxes" (yeah, it's good in bed, but not in a movie), and it just wasn't "Bond". It was entertaining for a general movie though. I thought the female lead was pretty.

I give it a C.

Awful traffic prevented me seeing this tonight, which pisses me off mightily. Hopefully I can catch it before the weekend's over, but no promises.

Oh well that makes sense, but considering they're constantly fucking with the formula - I see no reason to bitch. Unless you want to be a douchebag on the Internet, because there isn't enough shit for your tighty whitey ass to do on your parents dime in Austin.

Bitch?!? Try cleaning the the snow out of your ears, if anything I was applauding the new direction.

I, however, am not. Bring back a good looking Bond and a real fucking car chase.

Oh, semi spoiler: The torture scene made me cringe.

I liked it quite a lot. I thought Daniel Craig made a great bond, I liked the primary villain and I liked the fights and poker scenes. The interaction between Bond and his babe was alright, but it seemed a little heavy on the witty banter and a little light on the pure-animal magnetism, not very Bondish IMO. I dunno maybe I'm wrong...


It's basically better than any of the Piercy flicks, except possibly Goldeneye (I've got a bit of a limp wrist for Alan Cumming.)

I thought the movie was okie. I do agree that the numerous almost endings where kinda of annoying. I however thought the Bond had the most beautiful blue eyes.

So those who saw this... Latina Chick or English Chick? I go with the English one.

I thought the movie was pretty sweet. Craig did a solid job as Bond and there were some great action scenes. However the romantic stuff wasn't too good. I'm excited for the next one.

The reason we still have the same M is that it's a reboot, not a prequel.

I haven't seen it yet (going on Friday), but, two things:

1. I agree that Goldeneye is by far Pierce's best bond film and that Alan Cummings is awesome, and

2. English girls are ALWAYS > than all other girls

As I understand it this sort of dark and sociopathic action is far closer to the tone of the books than the gadget faggitry that Bond films have become known for recently. I liked it, and the multiple endings made sense to me, but I thought the pacing of them got a little funky. In short, the concept itself was fine but the actual execution could have been improved. There were some great action sequences though, and I thought it did a good job of covering the paranoia of being a spy like that. I look forward to seeing what the next movies will bring.
Also, as far as the chicks go I thought they all wore too much makeup. The arab chick was much hotter as a corpse I thought.

She was a sandie? I thought she was a spic.

I just saw this movie last night.

I was amazed, this is by far the best Bond flick I've seen. Ever. And finally my Dad okay'd a Bond movie (he'd read some of the books, and they were much more gruesome and darker than any of the movies portray) He was happy, in a way, to see that they actually showed a torture scene (not really a spoiler, because--ah...you'll see) that happened that way in the book.

Was I the only one who noticed his 'drink' transition? What looked like scotch in the beginning evolved into the classic martini 'shaken, not stirred', that I thought was a nice touch to the movie.

The beginning was stunning, seeing where the 'gun barrel' intro came from.

I'd have to give this movie at least a 9.5 out of 10--the ending(s?) were good, but I thought they should have a little neater. It reminded me of LOTR 3 with it's...thirty hour long ending...

And...I miss 'Q' damnit!

I agree with Demon - the best Bond film I've ever seen.

One of the things that put this one over the top was its emphasis on character development, as opposed to gadgetry. Oftentimes, the Bond films get so caught up in showing off spiffy new tech, that you forget that there's people in it. Casino Royale was all about the people. Great film.

Runkimoushuuken topic reboot go! Major spoilers follow, but it's not like anyone cares at this point.

Having heard nothing but good things about this but never having seen it, I managed to finally give it a go tonight. Basically Ben nailed my feelings about the entire film almost exactly. I really liked Bond's character at the beginning of the film (NOT a nice guy), and while I felt his character development was rather forced by the limitations of the medium, you could definitely follow along. The anatomy fag in me was rather disappointed that the filmmaker didn't balls-up enough to show actual drowning rigors as Vesper choked and died. Other than that - action scenes great, car chase unfortunately cut short, fights well-choreographed for the most part. Oh, one other BIG mistake - when Bond electrocutes the nailgun-toting thug in the sinking house, he had hold of the guy's shoulder. He'd have been shivering and jerking along with his intended victim. Oh well - if you're not anal you probably wouldn't notice. Overall it's definitely a very ambitious Bond film that basically delivers on nearly everything it sets out to do. That's a pretty acceptable win in my book. Daniel Craig is fantastic as Bond IMO, and Dame Judi Dench steals scenes like it's going out of style. I'll buy it.

I thought electricity goes from high to low, seeking a ground? If you have someone by the shoulder and the current is running through their arm -> torso -> legs, then shouldn't you either get no shock or significantly less?

Anyway, Jon, what Bond films did you think were better? On a pure entertainment level, I'd say Connery made for a better Bond. But Craig's Bond made for a more believable character and that's what really drew me in.

Hmm, I'll have to ask someone who knows e-mag mechanics better than I do. I would have thought that with them both dripping wet, the charge would have hit both of them hard enough to make it a bad move for Bond at that point. The turn he made to grab the wire looked pretty weird, too, though not as bad as one in the stairwell fight where he knocked away the machete.

This was unquestionably the best Bond yet. Connery's screen presence was amazing and honestly Craig can't quite match up to it IMO, but the grittiness and lack of a happy ending in CR really made it pop for me. I wouldn't exactly class either character as totally believable, but this story felt more believable - more like the kind of shit field operatives go through (with obvious exceptions). Thus the characters felt more real/believable within its context, and the gestalt experience is improved as a result.

The charge will follow a path of least resistance which could be very narrow, or could be spread out along the surface of either. It's pretty much impossible to predict where it goes, which nerves it affects, etc, but it's not unreasonable to suggest Bond would have made it out OK.