User Score
8.1

Universal acclaim- based on 871 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 85 out of 871
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Anna
    Nov 27, 2006
    9
    Craig is impressive as Bond. And finally a Bond story worth telling is brought to the screen. N,o he's not Connery, but he's close.
  2. Hélène
    Nov 27, 2006
    5
    This is exactly what Bond didn't need: more "realism". Or actually more violence I should say. Now let us proceed to the examination of the ten points that make a good James Bond movie, and rate the film accordingly. 1) The gun barrel sequence: has been removed (!!!) Shame. A very clumsy attempt to include it at the end of the flashback introduction, but in very poor taste. 2) The This is exactly what Bond didn't need: more "realism". Or actually more violence I should say. Now let us proceed to the examination of the ten points that make a good James Bond movie, and rate the film accordingly. 1) The gun barrel sequence: has been removed (!!!) Shame. A very clumsy attempt to include it at the end of the flashback introduction, but in very poor taste. 2) The "Bond, James Bond" line. Last line of the movie. OK. 3) The "vodka martini, shaken not stirred" line. It appears, but in a very iconoclast way. Let's count half a point. 4) The Moneypenny scene. No trace of her in the whole movie. Shame. 5) The hotel scene (someone, girl or enemy, awaits for Bond in his room): well let's say it's there - quite a lot happens in hotels. 6) The casino scene. No problem for that point, the main plot being Bond playing against the bad guy. 7) The Q briefing. No trace of Q nor R in this film. Shame. 8) The bit of nonsense: the Medipac scene is quite enjoyable in that respect but we can feel in general that the producers fear that things appear too unrealistic, whereas it is precisely the point in Bond movies. We want unbelievable, cheesy things! 9) The funny lines: eternal shame on Eon Prod for having given birth to a humourless James Bond. No funny line AT ALL. 10) The "James Bond will return" quotation at the end of the credits: doesn't appear, and I sincerely hope this James Bond will NOT return! Total: 4,5/10, which I round up to 5 because I'm good. Expand
  3. ChrisH.
    Nov 27, 2006
    9
    I loved this movie, acion scenes were great. Bond got his ass kicked but still saved the day..almost. Daniel Craig is the man. Go all in and see this movie while it is still in theatres.
  4. NatyN.
    Nov 28, 2006
    4
    As a Bond Movie fan, very dissapointed. A new human Bond??? Who asked for it???? We Bond fans are still fans for the gadgets, the women, the funny lines.....very dissapointed.
  5. Raphael
    Nov 28, 2006
    9
    This is one of the best Bond-Movies ever to hit the big screen. For me it is right up there with Goldfinger, Goldeneye and a view to a kill. Daniel did a great job, and wore his tux just as nicely as Sean would do!! And whoever mentions the lack of gadgets again, is an utter fool! BOND IS NOT ABOUT GADGETS, BUT ABOUT PURE ACTION AND THRILLING MOVIES!
  6. RachitS.
    Nov 29, 2006
    9
    Not bad for a new bond movie. I really like the action. its pretty raw. But the ending is a little wiered.
  7. RoyG.
    Nov 29, 2006
    10
    The gadgets and plots of the previous Bond movies were over the top and cartoonish. Craig's Bond is more believable, the stunts realistic, the double and triple crosses dizzying and the conclusion left me wanting more. Great movie!
  8. BMR
    Nov 29, 2006
    6
    Lot's of shiny cars and beautiful locales but not much of a compelling storyline. Worst of all; the main character is misogynistic, unsympathetic and one dimensional. If you' re between the age of 13 and 21 and you enjoy watching the hero beat everyone's asses and spout off cheesy on liners, than you MIGHT enjoy this movie.
  9. DerekG.
    Nov 29, 2006
    9
    This was EXACTLY what Bond needed. I always thought the newer ones were kind of cheesy. This new one is exactly the de-cheesing the franchise demanded to stay alive. The way the book imagined him.
  10. ToddM.
    Nov 29, 2006
    1
    There are two moments of hope for this new "Bond", the opening scene stolen by the gravity defying black actor, and the coloring of the opening scene of the car chase in which disappointment is deepened by the wreck of a beauty by the avoidance of the other "wanna" be. With innane dialog, horrific acting (Dench exempt), no Q or Money Penny and complete lack of English suave, this is the There are two moments of hope for this new "Bond", the opening scene stolen by the gravity defying black actor, and the coloring of the opening scene of the car chase in which disappointment is deepened by the wreck of a beauty by the avoidance of the other "wanna" be. With innane dialog, horrific acting (Dench exempt), no Q or Money Penny and complete lack of English suave, this is the worst bond ever! OMG, they have destroyed the bond cache in one stroke. Sad! Expand
  11. ANeil
    Nov 30, 2006
    9
    Best bond in decades. Funny that the people who panned it basically complained that all the cliches werent included. Hey, how about the fact that it was the way flemming actually wanted Bond to be? Connery's early movies didn't have all the silly gadgets either. Back then they were actually realistic. A garrot in a watch? Okay. An invisible car? Gimme a break. Great to see them Best bond in decades. Funny that the people who panned it basically complained that all the cliches werent included. Hey, how about the fact that it was the way flemming actually wanted Bond to be? Connery's early movies didn't have all the silly gadgets either. Back then they were actually realistic. A garrot in a watch? Okay. An invisible car? Gimme a break. Great to see them go back to a raw Bond, the way a secret agent should be. 3 or 4 movies like this and Craig will become Connery's equal. Expand
  12. SteveH.
    Dec 11, 2006
    0
    This was a rip off of Austin Powers. They should just gone the usual way and highjacked nuclear weapons, at least that would be a plot. Way too many action scenes and my favorite moment: Bonds supposedly gorgeous girlfriend comes into the casino to distract the players. She succeeded in scarying everybody with all that makeup.
  13. UD
    Dec 11, 2006
    9
    Daniel Craig puts on a tour de force performance rivaled only by the historical importance of the Connery era Bond films. The filmmakers have taken the lure of the Bond universe as a base to create not only the best action film of 2006, but also, far and away the best 007 movie ever. Everything here seems to work perfectly and the producers were right to relieve Bond of his silly, Daniel Craig puts on a tour de force performance rivaled only by the historical importance of the Connery era Bond films. The filmmakers have taken the lure of the Bond universe as a base to create not only the best action film of 2006, but also, far and away the best 007 movie ever. Everything here seems to work perfectly and the producers were right to relieve Bond of his silly, cartoonish persona in favor of an actual human side with depth. All in all, a movie not to be missed. Expand
  14. AB.
    Dec 10, 2006
    0
    This new Bond movie was dreadful to say the least. Credit to Daniel Craig for bringing a different dimension to the Bond character, but that was marred by poor action sequences (where people have said 'great action', I want to know: WHERE?!?!), poor use of dialogue, weak 'super villian', incomplete continuation and confusingly rubbish storyline. Oh and it dragged on This new Bond movie was dreadful to say the least. Credit to Daniel Craig for bringing a different dimension to the Bond character, but that was marred by poor action sequences (where people have said 'great action', I want to know: WHERE?!?!), poor use of dialogue, weak 'super villian', incomplete continuation and confusingly rubbish storyline. Oh and it dragged on too long and it was one of the WORST endings I have seen ever ... EVER! Note to people: Do not waste 2+ hours of your time watching this film. It's awful. Expand
  15. JustinP.
    Dec 10, 2006
    9
    A superb prequel, with great plot, action, and intrigue - even if at times it seems somewhat predictable. However, the filmmakers have taken the film in a brave direction, opting to have a less suave Bond, a gritty man with more under the surface - the man before he became the legend. The classic James Bond theme music is also conspicuously absent from the film until the climax - the A superb prequel, with great plot, action, and intrigue - even if at times it seems somewhat predictable. However, the filmmakers have taken the film in a brave direction, opting to have a less suave Bond, a gritty man with more under the surface - the man before he became the legend. The classic James Bond theme music is also conspicuously absent from the film until the climax - the moment when Bond starts stepping into the shoes of the 007 that we have all come to know and love. Beautiful! Expand
  16. DavrosD.
    Dec 16, 2006
    4
    Average story and boring Bond girls. Daniel Craig only just cuts it, maybe if there was a better plot, it would improve it somewhat.
  17. SteveC
    Dec 19, 2006
    8
    I finally saw the film. I was shocked at the complete and total boldness in risks taken by the filmmakers. My hat is off to the risk takers and it was well worth it. If you had told me that they would make a Bond film with a blonde Bond and discard most of the bond standards from the music to the usual lines including all the tongue in cheek campy stuff and a lack of gadetry and action I finally saw the film. I was shocked at the complete and total boldness in risks taken by the filmmakers. My hat is off to the risk takers and it was well worth it. If you had told me that they would make a Bond film with a blonde Bond and discard most of the bond standards from the music to the usual lines including all the tongue in cheek campy stuff and a lack of gadetry and action sequences with cars, boats, planes or other mobile wonders, I would say that the movie would fail big time. I would be wrong. This film throws those standards back in your face and announces that this is a NEW Bond. It does this right up to the end when it shocks you back into Bond heaven with the final line and the roll of the credits that screams that Bond is back. This is a fantastic ressurection capable of extending the series for years to come. Well done. Expand
  18. KenT.
    Dec 19, 2006
    4
    This move is OVER RATED, this is the worst 007 I've seen. The only good part was the begining, though the whole move, I was waiting for more action. I will not buy this when it comes out on DVD.
  19. JensS.
    Dec 2, 2006
    1
    This is probably the worst Bond movie ever. Hopefully Craig will be a one time appearance. Each Bond actor over the decade had it's own style. We had the gentleman style Sean Connery (probably the best Bond ever), the charming Roger Moore and many more. Some with more style, others with less. What has Craig to offer? His style is violence no matter what. Very sad. Bond movies used to This is probably the worst Bond movie ever. Hopefully Craig will be a one time appearance. Each Bond actor over the decade had it's own style. We had the gentleman style Sean Connery (probably the best Bond ever), the charming Roger Moore and many more. Some with more style, others with less. What has Craig to offer? His style is violence no matter what. Very sad. Bond movies used to be so much. Tension, car chases, action, humorous dialog and a lot more. What do we have now? Sad car chases in cars nobody wants to see. Bond in a Ford? Please, I don't even want a Ford from a car rental place if I can avoid it... The parking lot in front of the hotel was another funny scene. Cheap American cars where ever you look. Please, we are supposed to be in Europe! Rich people in Europe don't even think about American cars in their nightmares... What was the producer thinking? I mean think about it. Bond is meeting with people to play in a multi-million dollar poker game and nobody had any money left to get a nice car!? What a joke! The dialog was also pretty sad. I mean where did the funny lines go? Where were the gadgets? Where was Q? I am suspicious he didn't want to give any gadgets to Craig to avoid him returning for another "Bond on Crack" movie... I had high expectations and I was disappointed all the way. My good advise to people: If you haven't been unfortunate enough to have already seen it, skip it. Trust me. You want to keep Bond in a better memory than this movie... Expand
  20. StephenM
    Dec 2, 2006
    9
    Bound to be an instant Bond classic. Detractors will say no CGI or gadgets makes a Bond movie not, but they have no roots in the franchise. Go back and watch Dr. No, From Russia with Love and On her Majisty's Secret Service. Realism, limited gadgets and great stories. Just like Casion Royale.
  21. BamdadS.
    Dec 2, 2006
    10
    One of the best movies ever! Awesome Cast, Awesome Story! Just watch it!
  22. G.C.
    Dec 20, 2006
    9
    Simply amazing. good fun.
  23. JackB.
    Dec 23, 2006
    9
    More than a good addition to the Bond series; an excellent film.
  24. Mike
    Dec 27, 2006
    0
    How did this movie get so many positive reviews? There are numerous illogical moments in this movie, Why does every "action" movie have to be so dumb?
  25. LukeTheDuke
    Dec 28, 2006
    10
    A great new Bond. Daniel Craig takes Bond to a new level. Once again, another great James Bond film.
  26. Kevin
    Dec 3, 2006
    8
    This was a much better Bond flick than the last few have been. One thing I couldn't help but thinking about the whiners who bitched and moaned about Daniel Craig: they are all fools with lots of egg on their face. He did a GREAT job. The opening scene was my favorite in the movie, very video-game-esque, but in a good way. Not a perfect flick, but very entertaining, and much more This was a much better Bond flick than the last few have been. One thing I couldn't help but thinking about the whiners who bitched and moaned about Daniel Craig: they are all fools with lots of egg on their face. He did a GREAT job. The opening scene was my favorite in the movie, very video-game-esque, but in a good way. Not a perfect flick, but very entertaining, and much more characterization than what you'd expect. Expand
  27. anandk.
    Dec 30, 2006
    10
    awesome gr8 movie of bond, specially daniel craig to watch.
  28. AndyS.
    Dec 3, 2006
    9
    I was very impressed with the movie in nearly all aspects, especially Daniel Craig, who is phenomenal as Bond. I think Ian Fleming would be proud of this movie.
  29. PeterB.
    Dec 4, 2006
    9
    This movie is one of the best Bonds films ever! Craig is brilliant as Bond, bringing new life to a dying character. Eva Green and Mads Mikkelsen are equally impressive as one of the only intelligent Bond girls and one of the creepiest villains respectively. Judi Dench is also magnificent as M. The only complaint is that the film might be a bit overlong.
  30. PatC.
    Dec 4, 2006
    8
    A splendid tour de force for the Bond series, even if breaking into his boss's house was over the top.
  31. HappyKillmore
    Dec 7, 2006
    2
    Pathetic. No charm, no class, no hot Bond girl, weak villain, non-stop beatings, awful fight scenes, sadistic beating, no Q, no wit, no jokes, no MoneyPenny, use of cell phones, product placement. Simply awful.
  32. NicholasB.
    Dec 8, 2006
    9
    I have never been a Bond fan, ever. The last Bond movie I saw in the theatres was Goldeneye and to say the least it was disappointing. The thing that makes this movie great is that Daniel Craig plays Bond as a secret agent first and a tuxedo wearing, womanizing cad second. I like to think of this movie as the "Bourne Identity" Bond.
  33. grantcowans
    Dec 8, 2006
    10
    i think it was brill between me and u if i wasnt bovared what people think i would have a big cry over it because when his girlfreinf died a the end it was sad i think it explains everythink about him and why he uses his girlfriends i give 5 stars
  34. DanaM.
    Dec 8, 2006
    9
    Great entertainment. Worth the $10 I paid to see it. Slows a little in the middle and happens to be a tad long but still is a must-see if you like Bond movies. Don't pay attention to the nay-sayers.
  35. AlexG.
    Dec 9, 2006
    6
    This movie is quite over-rated as seen by its score on metacritic. The consensus that seems to be going around is that this is a grittier, darker Bond is actually an illusion. Sure we see Bond get his arse kicked, but that doesn't make it darker, grittier etc. The fight scenes are still over the top- typical of all Bond movies. The use of the bulldozer at the start by Bond reinforces This movie is quite over-rated as seen by its score on metacritic. The consensus that seems to be going around is that this is a grittier, darker Bond is actually an illusion. Sure we see Bond get his arse kicked, but that doesn't make it darker, grittier etc. The fight scenes are still over the top- typical of all Bond movies. The use of the bulldozer at the start by Bond reinforces this point, there was really just no need for him to pursue his foe in it. Another really annoying thing in this move was the product placement. The close up of the cell phones in particular are just embarrassing. 'The Departed' featured no such advertising on its close up cell phone shots if i recall correctly. It wouldn't have beeen so bad if it was discrete, but its obvious everything was placed in specific ways to get a good shot in by the camera. The poker scenes during the middle of the film were just so silly and slowed the movie down. An example of this is shown in the deciding hand when there was a four-way all in on the flop, and we see hands like full houses, flushes, all to be beaten by Bonds straight flush- what a joke. I don't understand why the film needed such stupid hands- audiences are not that dumb. After all, don't 50 million people in America play poker? Aside from these negatives, I can't fault Daniel Craig here, who gives a solid portrayal of James Bond. Peirce Brosnan's efforts look terrible compared to this. The love story is also effective. This could have been such a good movie, and a chance to finally revitalize the franchise much like 'Batman Begins' did. Unfortuantely this really isn't the case. Expand
  36. JoshL.
    Jan 11, 2007
    9
    Another James Bond movie made, another classic to add to your video collection. Nowadays, who isn't a fan of James Bond? This time, we have a new actor in the place of James, a British man by the name of Daniel Craig. I believe that he did a fantastic job as the main role, and they are already filming a new Bond movie with the same actor. Casino Royale is very different from your Another James Bond movie made, another classic to add to your video collection. Nowadays, who isn't a fan of James Bond? This time, we have a new actor in the place of James, a British man by the name of Daniel Craig. I believe that he did a fantastic job as the main role, and they are already filming a new Bond movie with the same actor. Casino Royale is very different from your average Jame Bond flick. The action isn't as cartoonish, and the movie has a much darker feel than the others. For some, it's good news, and for others, it's bad news. First the bad news, some girls will not have a fun time watching the movie. As they seldom look for dark, violent, and serious movies. I think that Casino Royale may have lost some female James Bond fans. I also think that the movie is missing a bit of emotion, as the new Bond is nearly emotionless. Which isn't a bad thing, I don't mind empty emotions in my movies, as long as the storyline and acting make up for it. But I'm not talking about my personal preference. The bottom line is that this year's Bond, is nothing like the previous Bond. Some will like him, and some will not. It all depends on what you expect from a movie. In a nutshell, the one's who crave emotions from the main characters, may not like this movie. The ones who like more action, less talk, this film is for you. I have a lot more to tell you on the good side of the film, before we get into the actual plot. There isn't as much action in the movie as all of the other Bond films, but it's more violent and ferocious. The storyline might be a little hard to follow, but after a few viewings, you gain the complete knowledge. Think of it like this: Each time you watch the film, you learn something that you didn't know from the previous viewing. A good amount of the movie takes place at a poker table. It may be a bit boring for some, but not for me. After all, who doesn't like to sit down and watch a very dramatic version of World Series of Poker? I didn't think so. The film takes place in many different locations. From the Bahamas, all the way down to Europe. The locations make the theme of the movie change pretty rapidly. So why is the movie 2 and a half hours long? It's simply because a lot of things take place in the movie, various action scenes, information being discovered, which all leads from one thing to another, until the very dramatic ending, which I won't tell you. The main villian is very strange, and his role is more realistic than any other 007 film. What makes this film more realistic than the others, is how all of the events can actually happen in reality. Nothing over the top, and the events are similar to real life. No other action film I have seen contains such realistic events. Overall, this is one of the better films of the James Bond series. It is one of the most unique action films I have seen, and I would definately recommend it to action movie fans, and James Bond fans. People from all over the world can enjoy this film, as it is likeable by many people. Casino Royale has been in theatres for 2 weeks, and has made a total of $94.2 Million, and is one of the most successful Bond films. If you are going to see an action movie in theatres, what can be better than this? Nothing. Expand
  37. MikeB.
    Nov 19, 2007
    0
    Dreadful film to watch as a bond movie watcher I found it without any plot to follow or decent dialog Bond movies have always been good to watch up to now, but this film lets the side down.
  38. AnonymousMC
    Dec 3, 2007
    10
    Possibly the best Bond movie there has ever been. Great acting by everyone and a Bond that actually gets hurt once in awhile is much better. The only reason why people won't give good reviews is because they can't deal with change. How many times can you do the same movie over and over? Saying this movie is a failure couldn't be farther from the truth. From criticalPossibly the best Bond movie there has ever been. Great acting by everyone and a Bond that actually gets hurt once in awhile is much better. The only reason why people won't give good reviews is because they can't deal with change. How many times can you do the same movie over and over? Saying this movie is a failure couldn't be farther from the truth. From critical acclaim to the best box-office results for a Bond, it's anything but a failure. My personal favorite movie, can't wait for the next one.. Expand
  39. ReidF.
    Jan 27, 2007
    8
    With this film, Daniel Craig has re-invented Bond into a gritty, intelligent action character. Let
  40. zephosf.
    Oct 27, 2007
    9
    I can't help but laugh at the low rankings here that procede to call Craig a betrayal of the Bond name. You fellows may need to actually do your research. Much like Batman Begins, this revitalizes a character who had become something of a cartoon back to his gritty human roots. That alone made this a great film, but of course everything else is carried out with finesse. Its telling I can't help but laugh at the low rankings here that procede to call Craig a betrayal of the Bond name. You fellows may need to actually do your research. Much like Batman Begins, this revitalizes a character who had become something of a cartoon back to his gritty human roots. That alone made this a great film, but of course everything else is carried out with finesse. Its telling when the crd agme central to the movie is more exciting than the generic over the top combat seen in the recent Bonds prior to this. Bond is alive again, and I couldn't be happier. Expand
  41. LarryM.
    Dec 9, 2007
    1
    By far the worst Bond ever. EVER.
  42. Luke
    Mar 12, 2007
    6
    Overrated...not like a true Bond movie, seems to be more about FX. Plot seems to fall on its face and never goes to where it should.
  43. MariaE.
    Mar 12, 2007
    0
    Bad Bond, Bad movie. Most uncharming Bond, movie was not the typical Bond (calm, cool & collected) movie. Where is Pierce??? Bring him back!
  44. JohnB.
    Mar 15, 2007
    9
    Gotta love the old-fashioned Bond fans trying to trash this film. I rate it for what it is: an outstanding thriller. The makers threw away all the Bond cliches and focused on making a terrific action film instead. Who gives a damn if Daniel Craig isn't a typical Bond, which is the only criticism I think can be mustered against him? He is fantastic in this role. Eva Green is a perfectGotta love the old-fashioned Bond fans trying to trash this film. I rate it for what it is: an outstanding thriller. The makers threw away all the Bond cliches and focused on making a terrific action film instead. Who gives a damn if Daniel Craig isn't a typical Bond, which is the only criticism I think can be mustered against him? He is fantastic in this role. Eva Green is a perfect Bond Girl, extremely sexy while being more than Bond's match in wits. Ignore the trolls ripping this film unless they come up with criticisms beyond comparisons to the tired Bond films of the last several years; this is a fantastic move and will be remembered as one of the decade's very best action films. Expand
  45. SimonM.
    Mar 26, 2007
    1
    Worst Bond ever. No charm, no humor and what Bond would ever leave a hot woman in a hotel room alone ! No wit, no "Q", no cool gadgets, no panache. What we have is Robbocopp who moves like Star Trek and speaks 30 words in the first 30 minutes. They stuck a Ford Taurus (for 14$million) - what Bond would drive a Ford ?! I think this movies was made for teenage girls to see Daniel Craig Worst Bond ever. No charm, no humor and what Bond would ever leave a hot woman in a hotel room alone ! No wit, no "Q", no cool gadgets, no panache. What we have is Robbocopp who moves like Star Trek and speaks 30 words in the first 30 minutes. They stuck a Ford Taurus (for 14$million) - what Bond would drive a Ford ?! I think this movies was made for teenage girls to see Daniel Craig (whose face looks like he's Russian and run over by a truck) getting out of the water. Lousy in all respects. A dumb action movie no imagination. Expand
  46. KevinB.
    Apr 17, 2007
    10
    Best Bond movie ever, I never thought anyone could be better than Sean Connery until now. Daniel Craig is the best. Excellent.
  47. RobertS.
    Jun 17, 2007
    2
    Finally George Lazenby has been stripped of his title as the worst bond. Daniel Craig offers a new brand, which betrays the classic mold and conventions of the genre. Bond is an idealised hero not a human being. This attempts to give him a human side just makes his false and stale. And the relationship between him and the leading lady attempts to be meaningful but is pretentious and Finally George Lazenby has been stripped of his title as the worst bond. Daniel Craig offers a new brand, which betrays the classic mold and conventions of the genre. Bond is an idealised hero not a human being. This attempts to give him a human side just makes his false and stale. And the relationship between him and the leading lady attempts to be meaningful but is pretentious and banal. The increasingly elaborate gadgets of bond are detracting from the excitement, and the action sequences which have always been over the to top are now becoming so bizarre that can not truly enjoy them anymore. As another review said nearly or the classic trademarks have been abandoned from the walter ppk to the classic aston martin and poker is not sophisticated enough for bond. And the humour lacks the wit and well timed placement of its predecessors. Indeed drastic measures are needed to salvage the bond formula. A start would be firing Craig and maybe considering making a period film so you could justify in the audiences mind returning to the glorious roots. Collapse
  48. ConorS.
    Jun 27, 2007
    6
    The film isn't bad for a thriller, but it's not just supposed to be a thriller: it's supposed to be a Bond movie. There's no Q, no Moneypenny, no ironically funny moments, no outrageous action. Too much time is spent at the card table with "Le Chiffre," who seems to aspire to be the least intimidating Bond villain ever. The music is bad as well.
  49. JimL
    Jul 21, 2007
    1
    This was easily the most disappointing Bond film ever. Daniel Craig is just not believable as James Bond, he was totally miscast in the role. The story fell apart in several places and was never able to fully recover. I can't believe that I wasted my money on the DVD. Had I seen it at a budget theater, which I almost did, I would have never bought the DVD. I guess I'll be This was easily the most disappointing Bond film ever. Daniel Craig is just not believable as James Bond, he was totally miscast in the role. The story fell apart in several places and was never able to fully recover. I can't believe that I wasted my money on the DVD. Had I seen it at a budget theater, which I almost did, I would have never bought the DVD. I guess I'll be selling it on ebay for a fraction of what I had to pay for it? Expand
  50. JacobL.
    Nov 15, 2008
    6
    Casino Royale starts out as a promising movie. Early on in the movie you have a great epic chase scene along with James Bond tracking down terrorists which makes the movie really exiciting. However, once we get to Casino Royale the plot gets very deep and hard to follow and eventually starts to drag and become boring. There is a climax at the end of the movie but by then you won't Casino Royale starts out as a promising movie. Early on in the movie you have a great epic chase scene along with James Bond tracking down terrorists which makes the movie really exiciting. However, once we get to Casino Royale the plot gets very deep and hard to follow and eventually starts to drag and become boring. There is a climax at the end of the movie but by then you won't even care about what's going on. What sucks is that Casino Royale could have been a good movie. It had action, mystery, and a cool main character. However, the writers tried to do too much and made what seems like a great movie at first into a dull and uninteresting movie about a guy in a tuxedo who works for the British Secret Service. That being said it's deffinetly worth checking out for fans of the series. But, if this is your first James Bond movie you'd be better off sitting this one out. Expand
  51. DavidS.
    Oct 31, 2008
    9
    This has to be amongst the best Bond films, if not the best. I'm re-watching them all to try and decide exactly where it sits, but it's definitely top three material. I've read through these reviews, and it's amazing. The anti- ones are riddled with spelling mistakes, refer to Craig as being 'un-Bond like', want a return to Moore-esque cartoonery, complain This has to be amongst the best Bond films, if not the best. I'm re-watching them all to try and decide exactly where it sits, but it's definitely top three material. I've read through these reviews, and it's amazing. The anti- ones are riddled with spelling mistakes, refer to Craig as being 'un-Bond like', want a return to Moore-esque cartoonery, complain about product placement, complain about the shortage of gadgets, and complain about missing characters who weren't even in the book. Craig's portrayal is the truest to the books yet. Flemming's Bond was never the suave Rat-Pack connery Bond, or Moore's Seventies playboy caricature (incidentally my favourite Bond, after Craig). Product placement has always been there. Jinx's dreadful car in Die Another Day. The car Moore took from a showroom in The Man with the Golden Gun. Brosnan's Omega watch. Moore's Seiko watches. Smirnoff vodka. In any case, branded products were an importnat indicator of Bond's tastes and social standing in the books. There are plenty of gadgets in the film, but our expectations have gone up. EVERYBODY these days has a mobile phone, probably with a built in camera, maybe GPS, access on their computer to satelite images of anywhere in the world, etc etc. It's just harder to impress us with gadgets these days. The gadgets he does have are far more beleivable, and his having them is easier to accept-he isn't 'coincidentally' issued with exactly the right tool for the any unlikely scenario he finds himself facing. Read the books. Re-watch the films. And if you're going to critisise, at least put a little thought into it. Expand
  52. LucasW.
    Feb 16, 2008
    6
    I thought the story line was much to random and it dragged on for a bit, but nevertheless its a James bond movie.
  53. BrianC
    Jan 11, 2009
    0
    Incredibly boring, uninvolving mess. As a standalone film, it would get 2 stars. Measured as a Bond film, it doesnt fit. Bond films can be rewatched and rewatched. Casino Royale is the exception. It invokes an immediate and visceral response to see what else is on. Daniel Craig does mumble, making an overly involved script that less coherent.
  54. MD
    Mar 27, 2009
    2
    As an action movie, I would give it a 4 or 5, taking multiple points off for unconvincing and unlikable actors, but as a Bond movie I give it a very sad, dissapointed zero. DC is a fine actor, but never looks, acts, or sounds like James Bond should. After the first third of the movie, he is clearly a mean sociopath with no charm and no interest in using his brain. I endured the rest of As an action movie, I would give it a 4 or 5, taking multiple points off for unconvincing and unlikable actors, but as a Bond movie I give it a very sad, dissapointed zero. DC is a fine actor, but never looks, acts, or sounds like James Bond should. After the first third of the movie, he is clearly a mean sociopath with no charm and no interest in using his brain. I endured the rest of the movie, but was pretty much repulsed by the movie by then. I guess I'll watch the new Q of S movie, but only because I've been a Bond fan since the 70s. Very sad... Expand
  55. AnthonyF
    Jul 16, 2009
    7
    Casino Royale is the film the producers wanted to do for so long. I want to say "too little to late" to them because James Bond is a cold war relic. Now that they've changed him into something different may not be easy to deal with by some fans. It will be hard for me to deal with but I still enjoyed the film before it last half-hour, which is a murky mess. Kudos to Craig for playing Casino Royale is the film the producers wanted to do for so long. I want to say "too little to late" to them because James Bond is a cold war relic. Now that they've changed him into something different may not be easy to deal with by some fans. It will be hard for me to deal with but I still enjoyed the film before it last half-hour, which is a murky mess. Kudos to Craig for playing Bond so well. Expand
  56. jamesw
    Sep 13, 2009
    10
    The bond franchise has needed an overhaul for years, and Daniel Craig is the perfect engine. much closer to how Fleming envisioned bond in his books. an assassin, who does his job, without remorse. the first time bond has been portrayed on screen faithfully to Ian Flemming's original vision , bravo Daniel Craig, bravo !!!!
  57. AndyC.
    Nov 15, 2006
    9
    James Bond is ultra cool again at last. He's arguably not been this cool since Goldfinger. The whole cast are excellent, but Daniel Craig is outstanding. He even manages to make Pierce Brosnan seem faintly preposterous and I was a fan of Brosnan. Craig is aided by some cracking dialogue that capture just the right level of sardonic wit - but without the cheese! My big worry is that James Bond is ultra cool again at last. He's arguably not been this cool since Goldfinger. The whole cast are excellent, but Daniel Craig is outstanding. He even manages to make Pierce Brosnan seem faintly preposterous and I was a fan of Brosnan. Craig is aided by some cracking dialogue that capture just the right level of sardonic wit - but without the cheese! My big worry is that without a decent director, Higgis on script polishing and no Flemming book to work from, Bond 22 will be a much lesser affair. But that's another story. Casino Royale is alot better than I expected and leaps directly into my top five Bond films, maybe even top three. Expand
  58. NickE.
    Nov 16, 2006
    8
    A fantastic Bond film. Great acting but may be too slow for those who like the old Moore/Brosnen style. Worked for me though it could possibly have a better final battle.
  59. VR.
    Nov 17, 2006
    9
    This movie is perhaps THE closest to any of the Bond books and this Bond completely fits the tux. In this outing it's more about the man than the mission and for those who can forgive the absence of laser-guided anythings and concentrate on what made the agent who he is - then you will not be disappointed in the least.
  60. JudyT.
    Nov 17, 2006
    8
    It's Bond. Craig is a good one, but it's the same chases, the same formula especially where the love interest is concerned, the same angry boss and the same ugly villian, But it's Bond. Have some fun.
  61. AMovieCritic
    Nov 18, 2006
    4
    One of the most boring "action movies" I've ever seen. Now, I'm not exactly a huge Bond fan, but I've seen a few of them, and in general, they're fun movies. After the last few relied on high tech items and over-the-top situations, the producers here tried to create a more realistic Bond movie this time...it ends up not being any fun AT ALL. The recent Bond movies were One of the most boring "action movies" I've ever seen. Now, I'm not exactly a huge Bond fan, but I've seen a few of them, and in general, they're fun movies. After the last few relied on high tech items and over-the-top situations, the producers here tried to create a more realistic Bond movie this time...it ends up not being any fun AT ALL. The recent Bond movies were exciting. They had action, cool effects, and great situations. Yes, in Die Another Day, it was over the top and implausible that he surfed into the villain's HQ and that the showdown took place in BMW's on the ice...but it was exciting and fun. Casino Royale, in trying to be more realistic, spends almost the entire movie with them sitting around a card table. The villain....doesn't do ANYTHING in the entire movie. The only good action scenes are in the movie's first 45 minutes and by the end, they're totally forgotten. (This is a 2 hour and 20 minute movie, too.) The idea was to make Bond seem more like a real person. No longer is he basically invincible. He gets smashed around, he is almost killed on many occasions, his plans almost always seem to fail, and he seems borderline inept at times. The result is a hero who is just no longer cool. He spends almost the entire movie playfully arguing with the Bond girl, who lacks any of the mystery and seductive attitude that make other Bond girls so appealing. Again, they try to make their relationship realistic and the center of the movie, but it ends up being boring. The locations weren't great (Bourne Supremacy DESTROYS it in this area,) the action scenes (the few that are there) are only okay, the plot is almost non-existant, and unless you know how to play Poker, you will be lost for at least 40 minutes of this movie. Critics seemed to have loved this movie, which is proof that once again, they're out of touch with the average moviegoer. At least, in the theater I saw this movie in, where the crowd was noticeably antsy and unimpressed after this overlong and slow movie ended. Expand
  62. RaymondM.
    Nov 18, 2006
    10
    A darker, deeper and very human Bond is delivered by Craig. Eva Green is more of an exceptional Bond Woman than a typical Bond Girl. As M, Judi Dench finally gets to excersice her acting chops opposite someone (Craig) who can hold his own and take a few bites himself. Great movie, a must see. Best Bond movie in a very, very long time.
  63. TobeP.
    Nov 19, 2006
    8
    It was an awesome film with very good special effects that keep up to bond standards, however i cant seem to wrap my head round the fact that their target audience has been narrowed so much by the torture and drowning scenes. this definitely isnt a PG13.
  64. ChrisKandtKandt
    Nov 19, 2006
    10
    It was a very good movie. I've seen all of them. This one making 21. I came into it critcally tuned but came out pleasantly surprised. Daniel Craig, despite being blond, is worthy of bond in my mind. And though this movie breaks the traditional ending, it is the prequel.
  65. SheilaPechman
    Nov 19, 2006
    10
    I loved the movie. It was an edge of your seat movieand Daniel Craig was an excellent James Bond. It was fun, the plot was exciting and fast moving and Bond looked great. I have seen every Bond movie and this one was exceptional. Can't wait for more.
  66. Gary
    Nov 21, 2006
    10
    What a breath of fresh air to get away from the gadgetry and the fluff of the previous 007 to a hardcore real Secret Service Agent. Daniel Craig where have you been? Instead of the predictable escape with comic touch, there was a real story and suspense that the viewer felt and sat on the edge of his seat. Thank you for reinventing what James Bond used to be. Don't miss this!
  67. JaredBrusky
    Nov 21, 2006
    10
    Wow...thats all i can say about this movie.
  68. CarlM.
    Nov 21, 2006
    7
    Best Bond in eons. A captivating and actually somewhat believable story, and this itteration of the Bond character is actually more real. Every woman will want him. Every man will want to be him.Craig is perfect. If not just a TAD too beefcake. All in all well worth it.
  69. DrewK.
    Nov 22, 2006
    9
    A captivating portrayal of Mr. Bond. While many elements of the film took a turn for the grittier, actually seeing Bond at true moments of weakness was a breath of fresh air. Daniel Craig played the character quite well. There were several lines which made me groan (most by Eva Green's character Vesper), but for the most part the film stepped away from the cliche'd dialogue so A captivating portrayal of Mr. Bond. While many elements of the film took a turn for the grittier, actually seeing Bond at true moments of weakness was a breath of fresh air. Daniel Craig played the character quite well. There were several lines which made me groan (most by Eva Green's character Vesper), but for the most part the film stepped away from the cliche'd dialogue so relentlessly present in all other 007 flicks. A+. Expand
  70. MicahZ.
    Nov 23, 2006
    2
    Daniel Craig desperately tries to be Bond in this new action adventure film, donning the super-spy's tuxedo and attemting to stand in the wake of his predecessors, but his lack of sophistication downplay's his believability as the Legend and brings him a far cry from Sean Connery and Pierce Brosnan. From the rash, thug-like tactics his character is originally supposed to have to Daniel Craig desperately tries to be Bond in this new action adventure film, donning the super-spy's tuxedo and attemting to stand in the wake of his predecessors, but his lack of sophistication downplay's his believability as the Legend and brings him a far cry from Sean Connery and Pierce Brosnan. From the rash, thug-like tactics his character is originally supposed to have to his taste for only married-women, the sudden switch of his womanizing to a true-blue loyal lover is some-what puzzling, and his lack of a debonaire and gracious charm leaves the film feeling gaunt and missleading. There will never be another Bond like Pierce Brosnan, where, even in the last film "Die Another Day" he flawlessly executed the role: even when strolling into the lobby of a 5-star hotel with a ragged beard, long hair and medic-patient attire. There is no doubt in any Bond fan's mind . . . that is James Bond. Daniel Craig doesn't have the looks or the attitude to pull it off, thus no matter how hard he tries, Daniel Craig will never be James Bond. I give this movie a 2 out of 10. Expand
  71. PaulE.
    Nov 23, 2006
    9
    The best Bond movie in many years. I had given up on the franchise after the last several Bond movies, which were all about special effects and pyrotechnics. Casino Royale actually has a story, good characterizations, strong acting, amazing stunts, and great fun. Daniel Craig is a terrific 007, without the camp and charactature of some of the others who have had the role. The only The best Bond movie in many years. I had given up on the franchise after the last several Bond movies, which were all about special effects and pyrotechnics. Casino Royale actually has a story, good characterizations, strong acting, amazing stunts, and great fun. Daniel Craig is a terrific 007, without the camp and charactature of some of the others who have had the role. The only downside for me was the unnecessary torture scene. Also, the length could have been pared a little. Overall, a fantastic film. Expand
  72. JAMESN.
    Nov 23, 2006
    4
    I agree with ALL who gave low ratings about this movie. I am a BIG FAN of Bond. This is the WORST bond movie I have ever seen. Right from the get-go, lousy action, extremely limitted dialogue, no coherent plot (very sketchy) whatsoever. Addtionally, I thought Daniel Craig was severly defficient in class, sophistication and looks. He looked pretty much like a beaten up POW who managed to I agree with ALL who gave low ratings about this movie. I am a BIG FAN of Bond. This is the WORST bond movie I have ever seen. Right from the get-go, lousy action, extremely limitted dialogue, no coherent plot (very sketchy) whatsoever. Addtionally, I thought Daniel Craig was severly defficient in class, sophistication and looks. He looked pretty much like a beaten up POW who managed to escape some detention facility located in the middle of no where, in pursuit of a means of living. The only thing I am a little impressed about the movie is Bond's Car. Action sequence was lousy. Romance scene was pathetic because Daniel Craig is lacking the charm, smoothness and looks. Overall, I was tottally dissapointed and NO WAY does this Bond Movie do justice to the long legacy of Bond characters like Sean Connery, Roger Moore (My favorite Bond), and Pierce Brosnan. I don't know what the director was thinking. Expand
  73. KristinaD.
    Nov 24, 2006
    10
    I thought that this was an amazing James Bond and that Daniel Craig and Eva Green did brilliantly. I own all the other James Bond movies and really enjoy them in general, but i thinnk that this just may become my favourite. It was well made and well acted. It makes me mad that people say that Craig couldn't be Bond because he's blonde... utterly ridiculous, he may just be one of I thought that this was an amazing James Bond and that Daniel Craig and Eva Green did brilliantly. I own all the other James Bond movies and really enjoy them in general, but i thinnk that this just may become my favourite. It was well made and well acted. It makes me mad that people say that Craig couldn't be Bond because he's blonde... utterly ridiculous, he may just be one of the best Bonds. If i could rate this movie higher than a 10, i would. Expand
  74. Constant
    Nov 25, 2006
    4
    First of all this is very violent a film. I suppose you wouldn't expect James Bond to punch like Arnold Schwartzenegger, would you? Well now he does. Where is the wit? Everything is so heavy-handed. This film is so full of flaws. It tries to make the JB series head somewhere else, but this goes nowhere. Would you believe they made a James Bond film without the gunbarrel sequence? First of all this is very violent a film. I suppose you wouldn't expect James Bond to punch like Arnold Schwartzenegger, would you? Well now he does. Where is the wit? Everything is so heavy-handed. This film is so full of flaws. It tries to make the JB series head somewhere else, but this goes nowhere. Would you believe they made a James Bond film without the gunbarrel sequence? Without a proper title song? Without a Moneypenny scene? The first hour or so with the endless fight scenes is totally useless and a pain for the eyes, but I guess that must be what pleases American crowds... The film only starts when it gets to the novel plot, i.e. the casino etc. The only good point I can see to this film is that it sticks fairly to the book, but then who cares since I must have been the only person in the theater having read the novel? Believe me, Bond on screen died long ago. Expand
  75. MoiM
    Nov 25, 2006
    8
    This is a real "Bond Begins": a way of revitalizing the Bond franchise. Craig is an amazing dark character. I really enjoyed the movie.
  76. YohannesT.
    Nov 25, 2006
    9
    Outstanding Movie. The only thing I would have like to see move is probably a little more gadgets. James Bond wouldn't be James Bond with out the gadgets.
  77. BrianY.
    Nov 25, 2006
    10
    Nothing short of spectacular in this one! The only complaint I have is the lack of showcasing of the Bond car and other gadgets. Daniel Craig did a great job and I'm looking forward to future films!
  78. CharlieB.
    Nov 25, 2006
    10
    Definitely a 10 out of 10! The new bond movie is simultaneously a man's and a woman's dream -- it got real action and a really great story line. I used to love Roger More. Now, Daniel Craig is my new favorite Bond. And the movie itself is up there among the best Bond movies ever made.
  79. Elia
    Nov 25, 2006
    7
    007 magic was missing--even though the setting of this movie was as Bond's new status as a double 'OO' agent, I expected a more suave and debonair man, a 'lady killer', more beautiful women, etc. What happened to his wry sense of humor--none here. Not even one good gadget to get him out of a jam. A lot of good action scenes, but again, not even a hint of Bond magic.
  80. JackD.
    Nov 26, 2006
    5
    Just an average movie. The high critical review caused me to anticipate an amazing film. However, the movie just does not deliver. I felt like Bond wasn't Bond at all. He didn't embody an invincible man who is smooth, clever, and likeable. Craig made the character too rough, dark, and unappealing. His new take on Bond may have actually been worse than his acting. Aside from that Just an average movie. The high critical review caused me to anticipate an amazing film. However, the movie just does not deliver. I felt like Bond wasn't Bond at all. He didn't embody an invincible man who is smooth, clever, and likeable. Craig made the character too rough, dark, and unappealing. His new take on Bond may have actually been worse than his acting. Aside from that I didn't hate the bad guy enough. This is due to the poor character development. Also the movie lacks the typical amoiunt of action in a Bond movie as well as the gadgets And where the hell is "Q"? Expand
  81. DebbieY.
    Nov 29, 2006
    10
    Amazing.
  82. TommyM.
    Nov 29, 2006
    6
    It's a good movie, but it's not a James Bond movie. Tho I like Daniel Craig and his acting, but for some reason he's just not right for this role. Maybe it's a very difficult move to replace Pierce Brosnan who was just right for this role. Also, in this one, no gadgets and other typical Bond stuff we got use to. But a good movie overall.
  83. AdamM.
    Nov 29, 2006
    10
    Hands down my favorite bond movie! It just goes to show how important charactor is in any film!
  84. MaganY.
    Dec 14, 2006
    10
    The best Bond film in a while Daniel Craig is unlike any other 007 before him. He may lack the looks of Pierce Brosnan, but he compensates in charisma that rivals Sean Connery.
  85. JoeA.
    Dec 17, 2006
    8
    Minus one point for killing off that acrobatic bomber at the beginning waaay too early (I could've watched him jump around that construction site for the whole movie), and minus one point for losing the plot (literally) near the end. Other than that, a welcome return back to old school Bond-ness. Daniel Craig is the best Bond since Timothy Dalton (I'm not trying to be cute, Minus one point for killing off that acrobatic bomber at the beginning waaay too early (I could've watched him jump around that construction site for the whole movie), and minus one point for losing the plot (literally) near the end. Other than that, a welcome return back to old school Bond-ness. Daniel Craig is the best Bond since Timothy Dalton (I'm not trying to be cute, really) and, of course, the mighty Sean Connery. Invisible cars really were a bit too much. Expand
  86. KipM.
    Dec 19, 2006
    10
    Though I couldn't jump on the bandwagon of hating "Die Another Day," this movie's certainly better than the last effort, and possibly than any others. Time will tell if Daniel Craig will improve on the legend of Sean Connery, but for now we'll just say he's excellent. Kudos for making a story that's almost half-century old completely modern and timely. Like all Though I couldn't jump on the bandwagon of hating "Die Another Day," this movie's certainly better than the last effort, and possibly than any others. Time will tell if Daniel Craig will improve on the legend of Sean Connery, but for now we'll just say he's excellent. Kudos for making a story that's almost half-century old completely modern and timely. Like all Bond films, "Casino Royale" is too long but there's so many wow sequences (like the free-running in the beginning) that you're sure to keep your eyes fixed on the screen. Expand
  87. thommythom
    Dec 22, 2006
    10
    this is great. my favorites comments happen to be "where were all the gadgets" hey fucknut, ever seen from russia with love? and this one "they should have just highjacked nuclear weapons". oh im so sorry that this one had a unique plot and whoever doesnt like the dialogue is just dumb. the man responsible for writing the last two best picture winners wrote that. suck on that you haters.this is great. my favorites comments happen to be "where were all the gadgets" hey fucknut, ever seen from russia with love? and this one "they should have just highjacked nuclear weapons". oh im so sorry that this one had a unique plot and whoever doesnt like the dialogue is just dumb. the man responsible for writing the last two best picture winners wrote that. suck on that you haters. action was great too. fast, brutal, and more real than most bonds Expand
  88. susanaw.
    Dec 23, 2006
    10
    Having watched every bond out there at least 4 to 5 times, this is the best yet for me, Daniel Craig is an actor and if they continue to give him a good script, he will set teh franchise on fire! I have already watched this one 3 times now...can you tell i am a fun! Craig blew me away, he brought the real bond to life...raw and real! bravo craig! The naysayers can go and eat some humble Having watched every bond out there at least 4 to 5 times, this is the best yet for me, Daniel Craig is an actor and if they continue to give him a good script, he will set teh franchise on fire! I have already watched this one 3 times now...can you tell i am a fun! Craig blew me away, he brought the real bond to life...raw and real! bravo craig! The naysayers can go and eat some humble pie now! THat physique.....oh !Yeah! see you next time! Expand
  89. ShaunS
    Dec 26, 2006
    6
    Far to long for it's own good. Trying to hard to be to real, give me a bit of gadgits I say. He still can't touch the master Shaun C.
  90. MichaelR
    Nov 11, 2007
    0
    Its pure crap.Daniel Craig is not believable as James Bond and thats why its practically unbearable to watch.He makes the movie seem boring.Sean Connery or Pierce Brosnan would have been great.I'm a huge James Bond fan.I've watched all 21 of them.Without Sean or Pierce Bond is dead,unless the director searches long and hard for a believable person to play Bond.The person has to Its pure crap.Daniel Craig is not believable as James Bond and thats why its practically unbearable to watch.He makes the movie seem boring.Sean Connery or Pierce Brosnan would have been great.I'm a huge James Bond fan.I've watched all 21 of them.Without Sean or Pierce Bond is dead,unless the director searches long and hard for a believable person to play Bond.The person has to have a certain look for the role you can't give the bond role to just any actor. Expand
  91. CalebM.
    Dec 19, 2007
    2
    For a movie, its all right, but for a bond movie i thought it was terrible. About 3/4 of this movie is him sitting at a table playing poker. Where are the Gadgets? why did he wreck his car after 10 seconds of driving? I can hardly consider this movie a bond movie, it was just another action movie. Plus Daniel Craig isn't bond-like at all. He has no class, hes just all about wrecking For a movie, its all right, but for a bond movie i thought it was terrible. About 3/4 of this movie is him sitting at a table playing poker. Where are the Gadgets? why did he wreck his car after 10 seconds of driving? I can hardly consider this movie a bond movie, it was just another action movie. Plus Daniel Craig isn't bond-like at all. He has no class, hes just all about wrecking things. He isn't even British either. Expand
  92. TashB
    Dec 22, 2007
    0
    I totally agree with Michael R and Jay L. This film doesn't deserve even a "1"! It was a total disgrace, so cheesy at the end too. No-one can beat Sean Connery and Pierce. They completely got the wrong person to play Bond, therefore, they've messed up the whole film. No new gadgets- crashed the Aston Martin! Very disappointing overall.
  93. PhilM
    Nov 19, 2008
    10
    A believable spin on the ridiculous campiness of the older Bond's. Darker, grittier, yet still with the charm, just subtler. Just because somethings not exaggerated to the point of campiness doesn't mean it's not there. The best Bond.
  94. WilliamB.
    Dec 12, 2009
    10
    This is the best Bond film of them all, due in large part to Craig's take on Bond, which is not only masterful, but also unprecedented.
  95. Aug 18, 2010
    9
    Craig's finest effort and a marvel to behold. Casino Royale hits all the notes correctly and by end most will agree it's the best Bond film since Goldeneye.
  96. Sep 15, 2010
    9
    i really enjoyed this bond film i wasn't sure about Daniel Craig as bond at first but he actually performed very well in this film. the plot of the film was also well written better then a lot of other bond films
  97. Oct 7, 2012
    9
    There is quite a lot of action before things focus on the Casino; all of this is well done and features much of the stunt work in the film. I have to say it does appear to get a little lost once the main focus of the film is established. Once we do get there the scenes in and around the Casino are quite compelling and it is here that we actually get a feeling for how Daniel Craig portraysThere is quite a lot of action before things focus on the Casino; all of this is well done and features much of the stunt work in the film. I have to say it does appear to get a little lost once the main focus of the film is established. Once we do get there the scenes in and around the Casino are quite compelling and it is here that we actually get a feeling for how Daniel Craig portrays Bond. He has vulnerabilities that make him appear more human and this in turn gives the audience a chance to understand his motivations. I must admit I really enjoyed Craig Expand
  98. Oct 4, 2010
    9
    Wow! I loved the Sean Connery movies and since then they seem to have deteriorated. This film is definite proof that the Bond series is not lost. A different type of Bond, played by Daniel Craig, was what the franchise needed and the storyline was intriguing throughout the film. Even the one-liners and old Bond jokes which made the original films to entertaining and memorable are presentWow! I loved the Sean Connery movies and since then they seem to have deteriorated. This film is definite proof that the Bond series is not lost. A different type of Bond, played by Daniel Craig, was what the franchise needed and the storyline was intriguing throughout the film. Even the one-liners and old Bond jokes which made the original films to entertaining and memorable are present in this film, much to my delight. You can't miss this film if you're a James Bond fan, and even if you're not, you'll still love it anyway. Expand
  99. Oct 9, 2010
    10
    This is the best Bond movie. Bond is thoroughly human: He's hit, he recoils. He cuts, he bleeds. The series had gone to absurd levels of incredulity through the Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan years. This movie brought the films back to a human scale, and it's all the more powerful. Daniel Craig dominates the movie as Bond.
  100. Nov 26, 2011
    9
    Daniel Craig is a great addition to the many actors that played Bond before him and he was wonderful in this film. It can get a little dull but overall the action sequences and the film as a whole was well worth watching and one of the best in the Bond series.
Metascore
81

Universal acclaim - based on 38 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 37 out of 38
  2. Negative: 0 out of 38
  1. What a relief to escape the series' increasing bondage to high-tech gimmicks in favor of intrigue and suspense featuring richly nuanced characters and women who think the body's sexiest organ is the brain.
  2. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    80
    Craig comes closer to the author's original conception of this exceptionally long-lived male fantasy figure than anyone since early Sean Connery.
  3. This Bond is haunted, not yet housebroken, still figuring out the persona. In Casino Royale, the reset button has been pressed in the manner of "Batman Begins."