Casino Royale

There’s a new trailer for CASINO ROYALE and it lays to rest any doubts that Daniel Craig can play Bond or that the producers were serious about rebooting the franchise. The last vestiges of the Roger Moore years seem to be completely erased.  Bond is once again the young,  lethal assassin from DR. NO and FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE.  I liked the Pierce Brosnan Bonds, though they seemed like a compromise between the Connery and Moore versions of 007. CASINO ROYALE is definitely a throwback to the Connery interpretation. It looks like this movie could be the best Bond film since GOLDFINGER… (though the bad guy’s scarred eye is a little too reminiscent of Donald Pleasance in YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE). I can’t wait to see it.

11 thoughts on “Casino Royale”

  1. I have never seen a Bond film in the theatre, prefering instead to watch it on late night TV several years/decades afterward. But this trailer for Casino Royale has got me really excited. I think I might just plunk down $12 to see it on opening weekend.

  2. Being a huge Bond fan of both the books and films. I always take the movies with a grain of salt since most later on were title only. True it looks like Craig is playing the thug Bond really is, but the true sacrelige and its because its so hip now. Texas Holdem instead of Baccaret, sure most people understand holdem.
    Oh yeah Eva Green hottest Bond girl EVER

  3. Nice! Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
    I don’t care who you are, if the Bond theme over a montage of ass-kicking doesn’t get your heart pumping a little, you hate both movies and fun.
    I didn’t like most of the Brosnan movies much, especially the one with Denise Richards, but I loved Die Another Day (don’t ask me why, I can’t explain it) and am super-jazzed about this one.

  4. Yeah, the trailer looks cool and all … but how can they do a Bond “restart” and have Dame Judi Dench as M?
    (My wife explains that CASINO ROYALE is creating a separate, parallel universe for the new Bond. But even if I choose to buy that explanation, something about it troubles me.)

  5. It’s no different than having Bernard Fox as M through Connery, Lazenby, Connery and Moore…
    or the same no-name actor as M through Moore and Dalton. (Moore was in his late 60s, Dalton in his 30s…how do you explain THAT??).

  6. >> It’s no different than having Bernard Fox as M through Connery, Lazenby, Connery and Moore … << No, no, that is different -- even when the actors changed, you still assumed the series was moving forward in time ... But with Casino Royale, we hit the "restart" button and now we have this "fresh kid" who is going to BECOME 007 ... but he's working for the M from the FUTURE? (Maybe there is some secret time-travel subplot at work here.)


Leave a Comment