It runs from the assassination of Dimitrios to the death of the bomb assassin. It builts like a mini adventure?
Which bit would you cut out?
I'd actually cut out that whole thing to make the film more like Fleming's novel. It was all so unnecessary.
So how would you know that Le Chiffre needed the money and could be found at Casino Royale? They had to show the jetstar surviving?
M could have told Bond that Le Chiffre lost his money in a poor investment like in the novel.
Or they could have had Le Chiffre actually invest his money into the airline, only for the new aeroplane to actually be blown up (without Bond's involvement) and lose his investment. Something to that effect.
I'd actually cut out that whole thing to make the film more like Fleming's novel. It was all so unnecessary.
So how would you know that Le Chiffre needed the money and could be found at Casino Royale? They had to show the jetstar surviving?
M could have told Bond that Le Chiffre lost his money in a poor investment like in the novel.
Or they could have had Le Chiffre actually invest his money into the airline, only for the new aeroplane to actually be blown up (without Bond's involvement) and lose his investment. Something to that effect.
Also if you blow up the aeroplane - then the terrorists have won. Le Chiffres gamble that something nasty happens to the aeroplane works and he inherits a fortune. Therefore there is no reason to go to Casino Royale.
The whole thing depends on the aeroplane surviving
1. For Your Eyes Only 2. The Living Daylights 3 From Russia with Love 4. Casino Royale 5. OHMSS 6. Skyfall
So how would you know that Le Chiffre needed the money and could be found at Casino Royale? They had to show the jetstar surviving?
M could have told Bond that Le Chiffre lost his money in a poor investment like in the novel.
Or they could have had Le Chiffre actually invest his money into the airline, only for the new aeroplane to actually be blown up (without Bond's involvement) and lose his investment. Something to that effect.
Also if you blow up the aeroplane - then the terrorists have won. Le Chiffres gamble that something nasty happens to the aeroplane works and he inherits a fortune. Therefore there is no reason to go to Casino Royale.
The whole thing depends on the aeroplane surviving
You didn't read my whole post. My point was that Le Chiffre should have made a poor investment with the airline like how he makes a poor investment in the novel, rather than a poor bet against the airline.
M could have told Bond that Le Chiffre lost his money in a poor investment like in the novel.
Or they could have had Le Chiffre actually invest his money into the airline, only for the new aeroplane to actually be blown up (without Bond's involvement) and lose his investment. Something to that effect.
Also if you blow up the aeroplane - then the terrorists have won. Le Chiffres gamble that something nasty happens to the aeroplane works and he inherits a fortune. Therefore there is no reason to go to Casino Royale.
The whole thing depends on the aeroplane surviving
You didn't read my whole post. My point was that Le Chiffre should have made a poor investment with the airline like how he makes a poor investment in the novel, rather than a poor bet against the airline.
No. We actually see the "poor investment" up on screen which makes it realistic...
1. For Your Eyes Only 2. The Living Daylights 3 From Russia with Love 4. Casino Royale 5. OHMSS 6. Skyfall
Also if you blow up the aeroplane - then the terrorists have won. Le Chiffres gamble that something nasty happens to the aeroplane works and he inherits a fortune. Therefore there is no reason to go to Casino Royale.
The whole thing depends on the aeroplane surviving
You didn't read my whole post. My point was that Le Chiffre should have made a poor investment with the airline like how he makes a poor investment in the novel, rather than a poor bet against the airline.
No. We actually see the "poor investment" up on screen which makes it realistic...
I would have preferred the investment to have been a bad investment on its own and not something so forced. Bond should not have been the reason for Le Chiffre to end up at Casino Royale. The film's story tries way too hard to set it up, all through boring action scenes.
You didn't read my whole post. My point was that Le Chiffre should have made a poor investment with the airline like how he makes a poor investment in the novel, rather than a poor bet against the airline.
No. We actually see the "poor investment" up on screen which makes it realistic...
I would have preferred the investment to have been a bad investment on its own and not something so forced. Bond should not have been the reason for Le Chiffre to end up at Casino Royale. The film's story tries way too hard to set it up, all through boring action scenes.
Got to have the last word eh Matt S?
Not buying it. Your changing your tune too often.Lets agree to disagree
8-) 8-) ) ) ) -{
1. For Your Eyes Only 2. The Living Daylights 3 From Russia with Love 4. Casino Royale 5. OHMSS 6. Skyfall
No. We actually see the "poor investment" up on screen which makes it realistic...
I would have preferred the investment to have been a bad investment on its own and not something so forced. Bond should not have been the reason for Le Chiffre to end up at Casino Royale. The film's story tries way too hard to set it up, all through boring action scenes.
Got to have the last word eh Matt S?
Not buying it. Your changing your tune too often.Lets agree to disagree
8-) 8-) ) ) ) -{
Okay, we'll end it. I haven't been changing my tune, I just have so many problems with the film.
Btw, am I the only one who finds weird the face Craig makes when he kills the Ugandan dude at the bottom of the stairs (he looks plain stiff to me in that scene)?
"Hostile takeovers. Shall we?"
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
Taking out the airport scene would severely hurt the pace of the movie. In a movie without a tons of action it would be very hard to take that out and keep audience satisfied.
Taking out the airport scene would severely hurt the pace of the movie. In a movie without a tons of action it would be very hard to take that out and keep audience satisfied.
Yet, I find that scene incredibly boring and I think it really slows down the film. Somehow this action scene does that for me. It's like the car chase in DAF in that it goes nowhere. Do you find films without action to all lack in pace? FRWL is brilliant and doesn't have much action.
Taking out the airport scene would severely hurt the pace of the movie. In a movie without a tons of action it would be very hard to take that out and keep audience satisfied.
Yet, I find that scene incredibly boring and I think it really slows down the film. Somehow this action scene does that for me. It's like the car chase in DAF in that it goes nowhere.
But it does go somewhere, it sets up the whole reason for the rest of the film. That's a pretty huge SOMEWHERE.
Do you find films without action to all lack in pace? FRWL is brilliant and doesn't have much action.
But you can't make a Bond film like that anymore, the transition would be too great and audiences would walk out. CR was a fine balance between that and the action film audiences have come to expect.
Taking out the airport scene would severely hurt the pace of the movie. In a movie without a tons of action it would be very hard to take that out and keep audience satisfied.
Yet, I find that scene incredibly boring and I think it really slows down the film. Somehow this action scene does that for me. It's like the car chase in DAF in that it goes nowhere. Do you find films without action to all lack in pace? FRWL is brilliant and doesn't have much action.
No I don't find films without action to lack in pace. I love all types of movies. But when an audience goes to a Bond film they are expecting action. So when a Bond movie goes a long time in between action scenes it could mess with the audience.
I have no problem with less action scenes. CR is one of my favorites. As is FRWL. As long as the movie is great I don't care if it's not action packed. But I feel to completely omit the airport scene would mess with the pace. Because the movie was already at a long point in between an action scene. And would be awhile again for another. But hey your opinion. That's what makes it fun.
The way I see it, it's not about how much action a movie has, but how it's used.
I've no issues with the action in CR, and it's respectable that Craig does his own stunts.
I think Dalton was the only other Bond to do so.
"Hostile takeovers. Shall we?"
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
The way I see it, it's not about how much action a movie has, but how it's used.
I've no issues with the action in CR, and it's respectable that Craig does his own stunts.
I think Dalton was the only other Bond to do so.
Dalton's and Craig's Bond films have had more realistic and less grandiose stunts. And those stunts aren't as memorable as the ones that necessitate stuntmen. The best stunt in the Craig films is one that Craig didn't do himself: the DBS barrel roll. Craig has yet to have a Contra Dam-type stunt. But for the kind of action Craig's Bond films have, using a stuntman the way Roger Moore so often did wouldn't work.
My least favorite section, of CR, along with the sinking house finale, is the airport scene. Very much a Die Hard style action scene, and if it were shorter I'd probably enjoy it more. The film doesn't really start to follow the book until about halfway in, and to me the whole Bond's first assignment bit was just an excuse to follow the then current trend of re-booting. In the book he'd been an agent for awhile, and only reflects on his first assignment after the torture. Still, the many things I like about CR outweigh the things I don't.
My least favorite section, of CR, along with the sinking house finale, is the airport scene. Very much a Die Hard style action scene, and if it were shorter I'd probably enjoy it more. The film doesn't really start to follow the book until about halfway in, and to me the whole Bond's first assignment bit was just an excuse to follow the then current trend of re-booting. In the book he'd been an agent for awhile, and only reflects on his first assignment after the torture. Still, the many things I like about CR outweigh the things I don't.
Wow! Someone else shares my opinions on the film! But unlike you, these things really sink the film for me.
Of course its worse. The biggest **** up in Bond history
The airport business was superb. Bond tracks the guy at the airport. Its his ambition to kidnap the plane and destroy it. If he doesn't then he'll owe his creditors millions - and Le Chiffre is forced to play the game at Casino Royale, to recoup his losses.
In the car chase we have
- the spectacular stunt as the police car is lift by that soaring plane
- when Bond is dangling from the fire truck and is about to be swept off - he rolls off and out of his way
- the switching of the bomb from the assassins belt
All done at a rush. The scene follows smoothly. It reaches a natural end
When Bond falls exhausted to the floor after the cops get him - he's only just won. Its a mini adventure. It was Bond who saved the plane.
Great analysis of one of the best action sequences in the whole series. It also has the suspense of not actually knowing what happened with the bomb; the close ups don't let you see where it actually is until the terrorist activates it. When he does, we see a close up of Bond smiling when he sees the explosion. Now, that is superb filmmaking.
The way I see it, it's not about how much action a movie has, but how it's used.
I've no issues with the action in CR, and it's respectable that Craig does his own stunts.
I think Dalton was the only other Bond to do so.
Dalton's and Craig's Bond films have had more realistic and less grandiose stunts. And those stunts aren't as memorable as the ones that necessitate stuntmen. The best stunt in the Craig films is one that Craig didn't do himself: the DBS barrel roll. Craig has yet to have a Contra Dam-type stunt. But for the kind of action Craig's Bond films have, using a stuntman the way Roger Moore so often did wouldn't work.
Do you think you're seeing Daniel Craig the whole time in CR? up the crane? in the airport scene? the ladder fight? the sinking house in Venice? those scenes needed a lot of stunt work.
Those grandiose stunts like TSWLM skiing jump, MR fall without parachute, FYEO climbing fall, GE dam, would seem out of place nowadays. Visually photorealistic CGI visuals took their place.
The way I see it, it's not about how much action a movie has, but how it's used.
I've no issues with the action in CR, and it's respectable that Craig does his own stunts.
I think Dalton was the only other Bond to do so.
Dalton's and Craig's Bond films have had more realistic and less grandiose stunts. And those stunts aren't as memorable as the ones that necessitate stuntmen. The best stunt in the Craig films is one that Craig didn't do himself: the DBS barrel roll. Craig has yet to have a Contra Dam-type stunt. But for the kind of action Craig's Bond films have, using a stuntman the way Roger Moore so often did wouldn't work.
Do you think you're seeing Daniel Craig the whole time in CR? up the crane? in the airport scene? the ladder fight? the sinking house in Venice? those scenes needed a lot of stunt work.
Those grandiose stunts like TSWLM skiing jump, MR fall without parachute, FYEO climbing fall, GE dam, would seem out of place nowadays. Visually photorealistic CGI visuals took their place.
Craig was in some of those shots some of the time. Roger Moore never was.
I much prefer the old stunts whether they be simple or huge to any CGI equivalent. Much more thrilling to see Rick Sylvester ski off the cliff than that CGI Craig on the motorbike in SF.
Still, CR's crane sequence (aside from Daniel's shirt) is probably my favorite example of a contemporary Bond film using old style stunt work. I could easily see Dalton in that type of situation.....or even a 57 year old Moore.
Taking out the airport scene would severely hurt the pace of the movie. In a movie without a tons of action it would be very hard to take that out and keep audience satisfied.
Yet, I find that scene incredibly boring and I think it really slows down the film. Somehow this action scene does that for me. It's like the car chase in DAF in that it goes nowhere. Do you find films without action to all lack in pace? FRWL is brilliant and doesn't have much action.
The airport scene is actually the incident that puts in motion the whole CR story. Until then LeChiffre's scheme goes as planned. The novel starts precisely there, LeChiffre has lost a lot in his investments. It's a key plot point in the movie.
Taking out the airport scene would severely hurt the pace of the movie. In a movie without a tons of action it would be very hard to take that out and keep audience satisfied.
Yet, I find that scene incredibly boring and I think it really slows down the film. Somehow this action scene does that for me. It's like the car chase in DAF in that it goes nowhere. Do you find films without action to all lack in pace? FRWL is brilliant and doesn't have much action.
The airport scene is actually the incident that puts in motion the whole CR story. Until then LeChiffre's scheme goes as planned. The novel starts precisely there, LeChiffre has lost a lot in his investments. It's a key plot point in the movie.
I understand that. I just would have preferred to LeChiffre to have lost his money in a more similar way to the novel, and not involve a drawn-out action sequence.
Yet, I find that scene incredibly boring and I think it really slows down the film. Somehow this action scene does that for me. It's like the car chase in DAF in that it goes nowhere. Do you find films without action to all lack in pace? FRWL is brilliant and doesn't have much action.
The airport scene is actually the incident that puts in motion the whole CR story. Until then LeChiffre's scheme goes as planned. The novel starts precisely there, LeChiffre has lost a lot in his investments. It's a key plot point in the movie.
I understand that. I just would have preferred to LeChiffre to have lost his money in a more similar way to the novel, and not involve a drawn-out action sequence.
The novel doesn't go into details. M just tells Bond that LeChiffre lost money, so it would have been two minutes of screen time. The airport scene is key in CR. Of course, it could have been done some other way, like LeChiffre investing and losing money in a Rupert Murdoch style news empire that wants to start a war with China, and Bond aborts those plans. No, on second thought, that would have been ridiculously far fetched...
The airport scene is actually the incident that puts in motion the whole CR story. Until then LeChiffre's scheme goes as planned. The novel starts precisely there, LeChiffre has lost a lot in his investments. It's a key plot point in the movie.
I understand that. I just would have preferred to LeChiffre to have lost his money in a more similar way to the novel, and not involve a drawn-out action sequence.
The novel doesn't go into details. M just tells Bond that LeChiffre lost money, so it would have been two minutes of screen time.
I understand that. I just would have preferred to LeChiffre to have lost his money in a more similar way to the novel, and not involve a drawn-out action sequence.
The novel doesn't go into details. M just tells Bond that LeChiffre lost money, so it would have been two minutes of screen time.
I would have really preferred this.
You realise you're not only getting rid of the airport scene, but also the whole buildup up to that scene, which is basically the whole movie, don't you?
The novel doesn't go into details. M just tells Bond that LeChiffre lost money, so it would have been two minutes of screen time.
I would have really preferred this.
You realise you're not only getting rid of the airport scene, but also the whole buildup up to that scene, which is basically the whole movie, don't you?
That would be only half the movie. The other half (Fleming's half) is so much better.
Comments
So how would you know that Le Chiffre needed the money and could be found at Casino Royale? They had to show the jetstar surviving?
M could have told Bond that Le Chiffre lost his money in a poor investment like in the novel.
Or they could have had Le Chiffre actually invest his money into the airline, only for the new aeroplane to actually be blown up (without Bond's involvement) and lose his investment. Something to that effect.
Also if you blow up the aeroplane - then the terrorists have won. Le Chiffres gamble that something nasty happens to the aeroplane works and he inherits a fortune. Therefore there is no reason to go to Casino Royale.
The whole thing depends on the aeroplane surviving
You didn't read my whole post. My point was that Le Chiffre should have made a poor investment with the airline like how he makes a poor investment in the novel, rather than a poor bet against the airline.
No. We actually see the "poor investment" up on screen which makes it realistic...
I would have preferred the investment to have been a bad investment on its own and not something so forced. Bond should not have been the reason for Le Chiffre to end up at Casino Royale. The film's story tries way too hard to set it up, all through boring action scenes.
Got to have the last word eh Matt S?
Not buying it. Your changing your tune too often.Lets agree to disagree
8-) 8-)
Okay, we'll end it. I haven't been changing my tune, I just have so many problems with the film.
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
Yet, I find that scene incredibly boring and I think it really slows down the film. Somehow this action scene does that for me. It's like the car chase in DAF in that it goes nowhere. Do you find films without action to all lack in pace? FRWL is brilliant and doesn't have much action.
But it does go somewhere, it sets up the whole reason for the rest of the film. That's a pretty huge SOMEWHERE.
But you can't make a Bond film like that anymore, the transition would be too great and audiences would walk out. CR was a fine balance between that and the action film audiences have come to expect.
No I don't find films without action to lack in pace. I love all types of movies. But when an audience goes to a Bond film they are expecting action. So when a Bond movie goes a long time in between action scenes it could mess with the audience.
I have no problem with less action scenes. CR is one of my favorites. As is FRWL. As long as the movie is great I don't care if it's not action packed. But I feel to completely omit the airport scene would mess with the pace. Because the movie was already at a long point in between an action scene. And would be awhile again for another. But hey your opinion. That's what makes it fun.
I've no issues with the action in CR, and it's respectable that Craig does his own stunts.
I think Dalton was the only other Bond to do so.
New 2020 ranking (for now DAF and FYEO keep their previous placements)
1. TLD 2. TND 3. GF 4. TSWLM 5. TWINE 6. OHMSS 7. LtK 8. TMWTGG 9. L&LD 10. YOLT 11. DAD 12. QoS 13. DN 14. GE 15. SF 16. OP 17. MR 18. AVTAK 19. TB 20. FRWL 21. CR 22. FYEO 23. DAF (SP to be included later)
Bond actors to be re-ranked later
Dalton's and Craig's Bond films have had more realistic and less grandiose stunts. And those stunts aren't as memorable as the ones that necessitate stuntmen. The best stunt in the Craig films is one that Craig didn't do himself: the DBS barrel roll. Craig has yet to have a Contra Dam-type stunt. But for the kind of action Craig's Bond films have, using a stuntman the way Roger Moore so often did wouldn't work.
Wow! Someone else shares my opinions on the film! But unlike you, these things really sink the film for me.
Great analysis of one of the best action sequences in the whole series. It also has the suspense of not actually knowing what happened with the bomb; the close ups don't let you see where it actually is until the terrorist activates it. When he does, we see a close up of Bond smiling when he sees the explosion. Now, that is superb filmmaking.
Do you think you're seeing Daniel Craig the whole time in CR? up the crane? in the airport scene? the ladder fight? the sinking house in Venice? those scenes needed a lot of stunt work.
Those grandiose stunts like TSWLM skiing jump, MR fall without parachute, FYEO climbing fall, GE dam, would seem out of place nowadays. Visually photorealistic CGI visuals took their place.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Craig was in some of those shots some of the time. Roger Moore never was.
" If you think it's me, then it's me !"
Yep, I agree. Hopefully they'll improve to the point when you just can't tell anymore.
Still, CR's crane sequence (aside from Daniel's shirt) is probably my favorite example of a contemporary Bond film using old style stunt work. I could easily see Dalton in that type of situation.....or even a 57 year old Moore.
The airport scene is actually the incident that puts in motion the whole CR story. Until then LeChiffre's scheme goes as planned. The novel starts precisely there, LeChiffre has lost a lot in his investments. It's a key plot point in the movie.
I understand that. I just would have preferred to LeChiffre to have lost his money in a more similar way to the novel, and not involve a drawn-out action sequence.
The novel doesn't go into details. M just tells Bond that LeChiffre lost money, so it would have been two minutes of screen time. The airport scene is key in CR. Of course, it could have been done some other way, like LeChiffre investing and losing money in a Rupert Murdoch style news empire that wants to start a war with China, and Bond aborts those plans. No, on second thought, that would have been ridiculously far fetched...
I would have really preferred this.
You realise you're not only getting rid of the airport scene, but also the whole buildup up to that scene, which is basically the whole movie, don't you?
That would be only half the movie. The other half (Fleming's half) is so much better.