Columbia Pictures | Release Date: November 17, 2006
8.5
USER SCORE
Universal acclaim based on 1235 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
1,082
Mixed:
64
Negative:
89
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characteres (5000 max)
0
Duke_NukemOct 13, 2015
Connery is the ultimate Bond, Moore is the funny Bond, Dalton is the cool Bond, Brosnan is the suave Bond and Craig is... the ugly Bond?

I have no idea why they came up with the ludicrous idea to pick Craig as the new Bond and why they
Connery is the ultimate Bond, Moore is the funny Bond, Dalton is the cool Bond, Brosnan is the suave Bond and Craig is... the ugly Bond?

I have no idea why they came up with the ludicrous idea to pick Craig as the new Bond and why they decided to make Bond movies so dark and boring.

The scene in the casino should be a return to the old Bond, remember the first scene in the first Bond movie was featuring Sean Connery in a casino. But in this movie they succeed in making the scene so slow and boring it hurts. It even makes the villain's eye bleed, can you blame him? Watching this movie made me wanna poke my eyes with a pencil too.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
frozen82Jan 3, 2015
Why is this so highly praised is one of universe mysteries to me.
Its one of the most boring dull stupid films I have ever watched in my entire life.
I have never had to force myself to sit through a film with multiple pauses to breath and
Why is this so highly praised is one of universe mysteries to me.
Its one of the most boring dull stupid films I have ever watched in my entire life.
I have never had to force myself to sit through a film with multiple pauses to breath and rest my brain from boredom. Only worse movie experience for me was "Give them hell Malone" its that bad.
The black guy chasing scene...omfg...its so long and so pointless and so stupid.
Its not a Bond film, Craig is an ok actor but he's all the opposite of Bond. He looks like a construction worker, more like a bad guy from Bond films than main character. I got some feedback that he's attractive to women in that lumberjack sort of way so that's the appeal...ok, to each their own but Bond is not a lumberjack.
Even as a "not Bond action film" its shallow uninteresting and stupid. Everything rolls around tracing cell phones, the main bad guy is totally forgettable, the plot is pointless...getting money for terrorism ( not something explicit but terrorism as an occupation maybe ? lol ) by playing high stakes poker..i mean wtf? who come up with that **** lol
Only redeeming quality is Eva Green, beautiful woman ( not that great of on actress but still) but even she is poorly used.
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
3
KimomarudotcomDec 29, 2012
I did not like this movie at all. The action scenes are waaaaaaaaaaaay too long, so long that you'll forget how and why they're even happening. Bond jumps all over the place, so much so that he reminds me more of Super Mario than anythingI did not like this movie at all. The action scenes are waaaaaaaaaaaay too long, so long that you'll forget how and why they're even happening. Bond jumps all over the place, so much so that he reminds me more of Super Mario than anything else. The plot is difficult to appreciate, there's just nothing the viewer is able to relate to in this movie. The only bright spot is Judy Dench, who is wonderful in any role she plays. Maybe this movie is worth watching just for her scenes. Daniel Craig is good, too, but the movie doesn't take advantage of his strong screen presence. Hopefully Skyfall will be better? Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
0
IamMensaMay 28, 2012
This movie was as laughable as they come. They un-naturally included all the present trends at the time i.e. par-core and texas hold em (in which they in detail had to explain through script what was going on to heighten the atmosphere of theThis movie was as laughable as they come. They un-naturally included all the present trends at the time i.e. par-core and texas hold em (in which they in detail had to explain through script what was going on to heighten the atmosphere of the anti-climatic card game for those watching who didn't know even the basics of texas hold em.) And the scene where it's supposed to portray Bond as a sex symbol women love and men want to be is a slow mow of him emerging from the ocean looking like a **** old man will get an audible hardy bellow every time. For the older generation Connery will always be untouchable, for mine its Bronson. And that's it/ This movie truly is hilarious. Best Comedy of 2006. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
0
Fail1Mar 3, 2011
An absolute complete waste of time. This film is terrible anybody who has rated this film as good is more than likely drunk on drugs or just plan retarded. Its the worst film I have ever seen. The director want to be shot as soon as possibleAn absolute complete waste of time. This film is terrible anybody who has rated this film as good is more than likely drunk on drugs or just plan retarded. Its the worst film I have ever seen. The director want to be shot as soon as possible Daniel Craig is just a joke (His acting is that of a 15 year old yob) and the rest is just a fail. I feel that strongly about this film that I have created an account just to slate it. Destroyed the bong legacy, and replace it with rubbish!!!! I am disgusted Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
0
NilramN.Aug 31, 2009
Plot was Choppy hard to follow. How could Bond have Just been promoted?????? that is on of the many things in this film that Bothered me. Craig was way to serious and without emotion. In Jokes if there were any were hard to catch. Hated it. Plot was Choppy hard to follow. How could Bond have Just been promoted?????? that is on of the many things in this film that Bothered me. Craig was way to serious and without emotion. In Jokes if there were any were hard to catch. Hated it. wont be watching the next one till it makes it to TV....I wont Pay to see this crap again..not even on DVD. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
AndrewPJul 5, 2009
A James Bond film is a classy spy movie with a lot of action and story, but not too much of either to make it unbalanced. Casino Royale is a poker movie. Think about it. It starts with some talking, then there's a (very cool) action A James Bond film is a classy spy movie with a lot of action and story, but not too much of either to make it unbalanced. Casino Royale is a poker movie. Think about it. It starts with some talking, then there's a (very cool) action scene, then...poker. And more poker. And even more poker. Then there's that scene when bond gets poisoned and nearly dies, and then more poker. The over involved plot doesn't have to do with bond taking out the bad guy as normal, instead he has to make him bankrupt in a, no joke here, game of high stakes poker. I think what really does it for me is seeing bond striped naked, tied to a chair, and whipped repeatedly in the area a man does not want to be whipped in. And he doesn't use his whits or cunning to escape, but instead he has to be rescued. Its just insulting. Also, no Q means no cool gadgets. Bond, the franchise that first had the idea of equipping spys with ultra high tech gadgets, suddenly has no gadgets. Personally, when i think bond, two of the first things that come to mind are the laser watch and the Aston with missiles under the head lights and now both of these icons are gone. Its just sad. This movie left me with a hollow, empty feeling that made me go back and watch one of the twenty superior bond films. No charm. No heart. No soul. 0 out of 10. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful
1
DaveApr 5, 2009
Stupid. Boring. Sadistic. Implausible. Charmless. Illogical. Cheesy. Lame. Impossible, etc etc Personally i think we should nuke the earth, maybe a better species than humans will evolve, and movies like this never get past the moronic script stage.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
MDMar 27, 2009
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 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... Collapse
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
BrianCJan 11, 2009
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
RDNov 10, 2008
Terrible. I felt as if I was channel surfing, first a dark and cold blooded assasination, then an action packed areobatic scene, quick onto explosions, oil tankers and aeroplanes no wait switch to a dramatic aka boring casino scene. Time for Terrible. I felt as if I was channel surfing, first a dark and cold blooded assasination, then an action packed areobatic scene, quick onto explosions, oil tankers and aeroplanes no wait switch to a dramatic aka boring casino scene. Time for a sadistic and disturbing torture scene and finally the death of the villian, was he the villain? Who shot him? It wasn't Bond. Oh well but wait there's more an abrupt and unexplainable change to a story of romance and betrayl. Culminating in the death of the bond girl. The plot seemed thrown together from several different ideas none of which came together. Visually unappealing, lacking anything cinematic in the form of special effects. What little I noticed of the musical score grated on the ears. As for the main character Bond was not reinvented or grittier he was just less. Less charming, less intelligent, less talkative. In fact everyone else did the talking for him, they all talked at him while he responded with bored stares. When Daniel Craig did talk as many others have mentioned he mumbled, making a discontinuous plot even more disjointed. Definately yet another example of current movie makers ruining a long standing franchise, ie. Star Trek, Star Wars, Indianna Jones, etc etc. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
ZackShannonOct 21, 2008
how the hell does this movie have universal acclaim? this killed bond for me. horrid story line and lets talk about that for a second. how the hell is it about when bonb first started and it takes place in fkin 2006? so i guess all the otherhow the hell does this movie have universal acclaim? this killed bond for me. horrid story line and lets talk about that for a second. how the hell is it about when bonb first started and it takes place in fkin 2006? so i guess all the other bond filmsd ont count? also he is the worst bonb i have seen yet.. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
NilsLOct 14, 2008
The perfect example of bad decisions in film-making. All the charm that made Bond Bond in the previous movies is gone, in a weak attempt to revive the franchise. A less-than perfect stab at realism, coupled with what made the old movies so The perfect example of bad decisions in film-making. All the charm that made Bond Bond in the previous movies is gone, in a weak attempt to revive the franchise. A less-than perfect stab at realism, coupled with what made the old movies so tacky yet endearing: the awful, unintelligent plot twists, unbelievable (and in this case completely unmemorable) villains, and laughable pseudo-psychology all amounts to a movie only the most undemanding will appreciate. That said, the opening sequence was entertaining. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
TomLJun 27, 2008
Terrible film, it detracts from what made all of the other James bond films great, gadgets and cars feature far more minorly than in the other films, gunplay seems less dramatic except for the opening scene which as far as I'm concerned Terrible film, it detracts from what made all of the other James bond films great, gadgets and cars feature far more minorly than in the other films, gunplay seems less dramatic except for the opening scene which as far as I'm concerned was the only part of the dreary fil worth watching, and most seriously of all, Daniel Craig just does not act like a true Bond actor should. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
TashBDec 22, 2007
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, 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
CalebM.Dec 19, 2007
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
DanielA.Dec 15, 2007
This movie is a load of crap. Most bond films weren't killing everyone so violently. He is made out to be a vicious killer. Nothing against violence in movies, But James Bond When you compare the older classic Bond movies This guy This movie is a load of crap. Most bond films weren't killing everyone so violently. He is made out to be a vicious killer. Nothing against violence in movies, But James Bond When you compare the older classic Bond movies This guy doesn't have the Carisma of Either a Roger Moore or a Sean Connery. I'm truly disappointed. I want my money back. Pierce Brosnan did a better job even. Maybe it was the story But I didn't buy in to his character. Truly not my bag baby. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
LarryM.Dec 9, 2007
By far the worst Bond ever. EVER.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MikeB.Nov 19, 2007
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MichaelRNov 11, 2007
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JCampbellOct 17, 2007
The positive reviews of this picture reflects how shallow and frankly stupid people in general are creatively. First, Craig is all wrong for Bond. Since a lot of people are nothing but criminals, no wonder he appeals to them. And he's a The positive reviews of this picture reflects how shallow and frankly stupid people in general are creatively. First, Craig is all wrong for Bond. Since a lot of people are nothing but criminals, no wonder he appeals to them. And he's a poor actor, mumbling his lines. Violent movie from start to finish. The original story by the way has little resemblance to this mess. Should be titled "JAMES BOMB" Casino Royale is a Royale FLOP! Bond is supposed to be a gentleman GQ type. Suave yet physical. Roger Moore was perfect. Good-bye Cubby, too bad your kid drove Bond into the ground in just one movie. If you want to change everything-MAKE ANOTHER FILM! Sasino Royale was not the box-office success it hoped for, and the above reasons are why. Next time, hire the right actor for Bond, and stck with the story that has worked! Oh, the torture scenes-just great to watch, huh! Violent, sleazy movie with Bond an anti-hero criminal. Hmmm, how hip. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
3
JOES.Aug 31, 2007
Casino Royale was meant to be a more down to earth bond film. Too bad it sucked. If the directors really wanted to make a more realistic bond, they should have made a more From Russia with Love type realistic. A bond movie shouldn't be Casino Royale was meant to be a more down to earth bond film. Too bad it sucked. If the directors really wanted to make a more realistic bond, they should have made a more From Russia with Love type realistic. A bond movie shouldn't be totally fake and stupid, (cough Die Another Day cough!) but it shouldn't be so realistic that bond goes through cardiac arrest. Also, Craig just plain sucks! If they wanted a more "realistic" bond, anybody would have been better! (Clive Owen anybody?) The movie is way to long. It is the first time I was actually bored during a bond film. Mads Mikkelsen is simply unimposing and anti-climatic. I think that my 8-year-old-brother could have beat the crap out of him. Also, the casino scene is SOOOOOOO LOOOONG! Bond plays Baccarat, not poker, but that's not important. Daniel Craig mumbles for the whole movie. Also, if they wanted a more plausible film, why then, put in some jamacan guy who has been bitten by a radioactive spider! I know this review is very inconsistent, but the film is so bad that i don't know where to start! Oh, yeah, the only good part was when Bond met Mr. White. Hopefully the next one will be better. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
0
JayL.Aug 21, 2007
This was the worst of the bond films. Poor action, no gadgets to speak of, and the characters was a poor attempt at best. Unsophisticated, bumbling bond. I was disappointed, and if this is what the Bond will be in the future, then I guess This was the worst of the bond films. Poor action, no gadgets to speak of, and the characters was a poor attempt at best. Unsophisticated, bumbling bond. I was disappointed, and if this is what the Bond will be in the future, then I guess the old statement is true. All good things must come to an end, because this bond would have been better off dying. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
JimLJul 21, 2007
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
BrentRJul 13, 2007
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
RobertS.Jun 17, 2007
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
lousyJun 6, 2007
Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish,Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Rubbish, Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
ZZZZZboringMay 8, 2007
Worst Bond ever!!! Ok this is before Sean Connery and everything, how come he's using cellular phones and driving 2006 Aston martins? The movie is horrible. Craig's input is spending six months in the gym the dialogue is nothing. Worst Bond ever!!! Ok this is before Sean Connery and everything, how come he's using cellular phones and driving 2006 Aston martins? The movie is horrible. Craig's input is spending six months in the gym the dialogue is nothing. The humor is completely gone I mean Bond used to be fun and unrealistic that was the whole point of it. It is one long commercial for Sony and Aston martin. I mean they must have showed off the complete line of Sony Ericsson cellphones and all the wonderful things they have in them. And what kind of pussyass Bond has a defibrillator in his car incredible. Come on Bond doesn't play poker he plays Baccarat every f.cking person in the universe knows that. It's just so sold out Sony controlling Ok we need someone who has spent his life in the gym next to out cellphones. Bond doesn't concern himself with tells. This is the worst movie ever. Anyone would have made a better Bond. Bond is not boring. Homer Simpson would have made a better bond. George bush would have made a better Bond. Any one with intelligence would have made a better Bond. Even Madonna. And I'm guessing the average of people in here is 7. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
3
SparklingApr 2, 2007
Run away. I read a review saying this was a post Bourne Supremacy Bond fim- a film I liked. This film was pants. I had high hopes- such high hopes. Danny-boy is alright, don't get me wrong. Have you not see it yet? You decide.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
GavinB.Apr 1, 2007
Poor, very poor. Not only does this movie fail to live up to anything that has come from the excellent mind that belongs to Ian Fleming, but has destroyed the great legacy of that which is the bond series. Poor acting, poor plot, poor Bond. Poor, very poor. Not only does this movie fail to live up to anything that has come from the excellent mind that belongs to Ian Fleming, but has destroyed the great legacy of that which is the bond series. Poor acting, poor plot, poor Bond. Mr Fleming, we are sorry. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
SimonM.Mar 26, 2007
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
DsdsfTeteteMar 26, 2007
Bond is the bad guy in this movie. He's just an as.hole picking on this guy in a poker game. Plot made no sense. Action was few and far in between. And the story made no sense.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
SylviaR.Mar 19, 2007
Worst Bond I've ever seen. There is no slight humor of the other Bonds, no special effects, a lot of violence. It's just a very hard, everyday cops and robbers movie. No Bond theme, no Bond-gets-the-girl ending. It was VERY Worst Bond I've ever seen. There is no slight humor of the other Bonds, no special effects, a lot of violence. It's just a very hard, everyday cops and robbers movie. No Bond theme, no Bond-gets-the-girl ending. It was VERY disappointing as a Bond movie. Have been loyal Bond watchers of ALL the movies but don't know if we'll watch another one. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
ChristopherS.Mar 14, 2007
In an effort to reinvent the Bond franchise the filmmakers succeeded only in burying it. The best part of this movie ends at the 11 minute mark the ensuing 2+ hours are completely and utterly forgettable. Daniel Craig, an otherwise fine In an effort to reinvent the Bond franchise the filmmakers succeeded only in burying it. The best part of this movie ends at the 11 minute mark the ensuing 2+ hours are completely and utterly forgettable. Daniel Craig, an otherwise fine actor, is comically miscast. His pug face and squat muscular body are totally inappropriate for the role. In fact, apart from Caterina Murino, Casino Royale will be remembered as the Bond film featuring the most unattractive cast ever assembled. My advice; pickup Mission Impossible 3 and leave this waste of time on the shelf. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
0
MariaE.Mar 12, 2007
Bad Bond, Bad movie. Most uncharming Bond, movie was not the typical Bond (calm, cool & collected) movie. Where is Pierce??? Bring him back!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MikeDec 27, 2006
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?
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
SteveH.Dec 11, 2006
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
AB.Dec 10, 2006
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
HappyKillmoreDec 7, 2006
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
carimDec 4, 2006
One of the absolute worst films I've sat through in a very long time. It was painful to say the least.
1 of 3 users found this helpful
0
danw.Dec 3, 2006
As an avid james bond fan i feel that this one has not got any sophistication about him the opening sequence was totally unbelible as james bond would never have had to chase anyone to that extent and would never be seen without a suit on. As an avid james bond fan i feel that this one has not got any sophistication about him the opening sequence was totally unbelible as james bond would never have had to chase anyone to that extent and would never be seen without a suit on. he has not the sexy accent which gives james that magical touch. if you are looking for someone to fit the part of james in another film try Steven Segal as he has all the qualities or some one of simular stance this one is definatly a no go. The intro was also not impressive it should always sung by a woman. not impressed at all and it has not captivated me at all Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
JensS.Dec 2, 2006
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
ToddM.Nov 29, 2006
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
CiaranC.Nov 29, 2006
I did enjoy the first 5 minutes and the inital chase but it deteriated quickly. The Casino scenes were laughable and but the time it reached the climax I'd reached my limit also. How is this considered a good movie by critics I'll I did enjoy the first 5 minutes and the inital chase but it deteriated quickly. The Casino scenes were laughable and but the time it reached the climax I'd reached my limit also. How is this considered a good movie by critics I'll never know. Daniel Craig was dreadful, this movie should never have been made as the story of Casino Royale is substandard. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
KerryNov 26, 2006
I must admit, I went into this with quite a strong prejudice against Daniel Craig, but sadly he was not the main problem with this movie. Don't get me wrong, his lack of timing, delivery and style were awful and with an actor more I must admit, I went into this with quite a strong prejudice against Daniel Craig, but sadly he was not the main problem with this movie. Don't get me wrong, his lack of timing, delivery and style were awful and with an actor more suited to play Bond, perhaps the film could have scored a five. The violence is too graphic. Bond is a fantasy, to bring reality in to the portrayal of the story is ridiculous. It was too long and then when it finally did end there was no resolution to the plot. Equally annoying was the blatant product placements for sony, google, Body Worlds (which btw is even dumber than this film) and about 5 000 other products. Then there was the whole set up to show us 'why Bond can't commit to a woman'. Actually the entire premise of seeing what made Bond the way he is was handled in such a heavy-handed way that you could almost see Freud and Jung standing at the corners of the screen with pointers to ensure that it wasn't too subtle. The line about Bond not caring if the martini was shaken or stirred made me want to slap the writers. Whoever was responsible for the script was given too much freedom and not enough editing. Moneypenny wasn't even mentionned! You could practically see Judi Dench cringing through her scenes. Craig made the best of a script where Bond morphed into the Terminator, relying solely on brawn and ignoring his brain. And to be blunt, I could have done without all the scenes of him in a speedo (or less). I get it, the man is in good shape. That's not the point of a Bond film. Lastly, to add insult to injury, THERE WERE NO GADGETS! This was not a Bond movie. In fact, based on this dreck, I will see another Bond film even if Daniel Craig is in it, because there is no way it could be worse than this one. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
MicahZ.Nov 23, 2006
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
baym.Nov 21, 2006
This is not bond the icon.... this is a very supid bond movie... i don't care about the good ratings of the movie critics... we the public viewer make it a big hits... make it an invincible bond just like the old days... daniel? is not This is not bond the icon.... this is a very supid bond movie... i don't care about the good ratings of the movie critics... we the public viewer make it a big hits... make it an invincible bond just like the old days... daniel? is not invincible in looks, style, and humor as well... that is how an icon is created... by the way he is bond... make him a global icon... u better check out the box office world wide... it is not the same james bond movie that still showing in cinema in almost a month.. but one week maybe... and to the producer... does it concern you? Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
3
timmNov 21, 2006
Ok. so... this movie kinda sux. new and different doesn't mean better when the plot sux and there is no character development whatsoever. i challenge anyone to tell me who the bad guys actually were. and the guy with one sunglass! uhoh! Ok. so... this movie kinda sux. new and different doesn't mean better when the plot sux and there is no character development whatsoever. i challenge anyone to tell me who the bad guys actually were. and the guy with one sunglass! uhoh! he looks scary! and he really wants that briefcase! retarded. i was soooo disappointed, especially with all those good reviews, saying this reinvents Bond. i like the feel of the movie, the aura, bond's character, and nothing else. and what was with that ending? i suppose if there's no plot there can't really be an ending, huh. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
3
JeffF.Nov 20, 2006
The new Bond is a humorless stiff. One long pointless chase is followed by a long pointless fistfight followed by a long pointless card game followed by a long pointless shootout. We know who is going to win the poker tournament just get on The new Bond is a humorless stiff. One long pointless chase is followed by a long pointless fistfight followed by a long pointless card game followed by a long pointless shootout. We know who is going to win the poker tournament just get on with it. The movie just goes on and on and on. Other than Die Another Day this is the worst Bond ever. The thrill is gone. Expand
4 of 9 users found this helpful
1
PatrickW.Nov 19, 2006
Horrible. Absolutely horrible. The movie's too long, boring, has no "enemy," and Craig will never be Brosnan or Connery...Ugh.. Just got the chills thinking about this "movie."
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
BrianP.Nov 18, 2006
This is the worst Bond ever. There was no class to this new Bond, No humor, dark, dark, dark!! Too much violence just for violence sake. I was really disappointed. And I don't want to see any gross torture scenes in the movies any more. This is the worst Bond ever. There was no class to this new Bond, No humor, dark, dark, dark!! Too much violence just for violence sake. I was really disappointed. And I don't want to see any gross torture scenes in the movies any more. Enough said. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
AnonymousMCNov 18, 2006
I can't believe the raving critiques for this film. This was not only the worst James Bond I ever saw, it was also one of the worst film I saw. Everybody over-seriousness, plotless story, gratuitous violence, incomprehensible dialogues.I can't believe the raving critiques for this film. This was not only the worst James Bond I ever saw, it was also one of the worst film I saw. Everybody over-seriousness, plotless story, gratuitous violence, incomprehensible dialogues. An utter waste of (over-long) time and money. I actually feel cheated and robbed. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
NeilV.Nov 17, 2006
Im not sure where all these "A" reviews came from...it truly baffles me! If anyone out there is a true Bond fan, there is no way in hell that this movie could be appreciated. Daniel Craig is the worst Bond I have ever seen...I think the Im not sure where all these "A" reviews came from...it truly baffles me! If anyone out there is a true Bond fan, there is no way in hell that this movie could be appreciated. Daniel Craig is the worst Bond I have ever seen...I think the people that casted him were on crack. Everyone knows 007 is a tall, dark hair, sophisticated, sauve gentlemen. Daniel Craig looks like a beaten up english pauper. This movie was absolutely rubbish. The storyline did not make sense, nor did it flow well at all. Even the opening song was lousy. From the very get go, it was straight up action, with very little dialogue, and feeble storyline. This is an insult to Mr. Sean Connery...the greatest, and only true Bond... Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
jojocaneteNov 16, 2006
its a poor mans james bond. the story doesn't jell together. after seeing all the bond movie. daniel craig is sour to the eyes, very hard to look at. please replace him immidiately. save the franchise before it go bankcrap. there areits a poor mans james bond. the story doesn't jell together. after seeing all the bond movie. daniel craig is sour to the eyes, very hard to look at. please replace him immidiately. save the franchise before it go bankcrap. there are lots of other qualified actors like clive owen. hugh hagman, russel crow, even the old sean connery with a tupay can do the job better Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful