Columbia Pictures | Release Date: November 17, 2006
8.5
USER SCORE
Universal acclaim based on 1249 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
1,095
Mixed:
65
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 characters (5000 max)
6
ShaunSDec 26, 2006
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
PatM.Dec 24, 2006
I loved this movie---from the initial graphics to the ending scene!!!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
susanaw.Dec 23, 2006
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
JackB.Dec 23, 2006
More than a good addition to the Bond series; an excellent film.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
KatyaS.Dec 23, 2006
Craig certainly makes his bond debut a splash, this is exactly what the bond movies needed to bring the younger generation back to them.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
thommythomDec 22, 2006
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 andthis 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
G.C.Dec 20, 2006
Simply amazing. good fun.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
SteveCDec 19, 2006
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
KipM.Dec 19, 2006
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
KenT.Dec 19, 2006
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
HeathQ.Dec 18, 2006
Although Daniel Craig is not who I would say was the obvious choice (Clive Owen), he plays a kick ass Bond. Dark, mysterious, evil, and all while he is still learning the ropes. What everyone has to remember is that this story was written as Although Daniel Craig is not who I would say was the obvious choice (Clive Owen), he plays a kick ass Bond. Dark, mysterious, evil, and all while he is still learning the ropes. What everyone has to remember is that this story was written as the ORIGINAL Bond Story, before he became a double 0 agent. Yes, Bond is a suave character in the films we have all grown to love, but this is the unexperienced Bond, lover of women, but night quite as slick as he is yet to become. Great film, can't wait for Bond 22. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JoeA.Dec 17, 2006
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. 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
CobiWanDec 17, 2006
I am sorry but I was really disappointed...not much of a love story and a long poker game...lacking real bond action.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
4
DavrosD.Dec 16, 2006
Average story and boring Bond girls. Daniel Craig only just cuts it, maybe if there was a better plot, it would improve it somewhat.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ThomL.Dec 15, 2006
Most well thought out Bond film since from Russia with Love. Certain people on this post don't know anything. Steve H, just so you know, this is a loyal adaptation to the first Bond novel Ian Fleming ever wrote, so chronologically, it Most well thought out Bond film since from Russia with Love. Certain people on this post don't know anything. Steve H, just so you know, this is a loyal adaptation to the first Bond novel Ian Fleming ever wrote, so chronologically, it can't be an Austin Powers rip off, and for once, a Bond girl gave a great performance. They took a bold move and threw ridiculous gadgets to the curb to make a superb, believeable espionage thriller. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MaganY.Dec 14, 2006
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
PeterDec 14, 2006
Best James Bond movie to date. Daniel Craig really roughened up Bonds character yet still kept the cool suave aspects that make Bond...Bond.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
UDDec 11, 2006
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 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
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
5
DerrickHDec 11, 2006
I am a James Bond fan and this was the lamest Bond I have ever seen!!! Where were the gadgets, the cars, the suspense. Wait for the DVD, better yet, tv. I could have saved my 9.50.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
10
RD.Dec 11, 2006
Very good movie. I can't compare it with other Bond movies as I have not seen them. But this is a great entertainer.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
JustinP.Dec 10, 2006
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 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
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
6
AlexG.Dec 9, 2006
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
OrielDec 9, 2006
Captivating. Casino Royale hearkens back to the early days when Bond, played by Connery, was Ian Flemming's creation. Over the years, the Bond franchise had been reduced to fluff with irrelevant but money-making sequels. A huge thanks Captivating. Casino Royale hearkens back to the early days when Bond, played by Connery, was Ian Flemming's creation. Over the years, the Bond franchise had been reduced to fluff with irrelevant but money-making sequels. A huge thanks to the filmmakers who helped bring an old childhood friend back. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
JoeB.Dec 9, 2006
After entering the theater to see what was supposed to be the best Bond film ever made, I came out with the satisfaction of seeing an O.k. action movie. The only parts that I thought were Bond-worthy was the beginning free running segment After entering the theater to see what was supposed to be the best Bond film ever made, I came out with the satisfaction of seeing an O.k. action movie. The only parts that I thought were Bond-worthy was the beginning free running segment and the fuel truck incident. I know its supposed to be the beginning for Bond thus the reason for no gadgets, Q, Moneypenny, and why he starts out in a Ford. But really I don't think anyone cares about how Bond obtained these items or met these people in the first place. And the product placement got annoying at times. The producers need to change something--either get rid of Daniel Craig or make a movie that is true to the rest of the franchise. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
DanaM.Dec 8, 2006
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
grantcowansDec 8, 2006
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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
NicholasB.Dec 8, 2006
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
MarloweDec 8, 2006
It was good, full of action. But I'm still not sure where it ended. Was it the torture scene, or final scene in the movie? Maybe I just need to see it again to understand it, but it just seemed like they ended it, because they were It was good, full of action. But I'm still not sure where it ended. Was it the torture scene, or final scene in the movie? Maybe I just need to see it again to understand it, but it just seemed like they ended it, because they were running out of time. When M, mentions about the girl; it reminded me of the Austin Powers 2 line, "we knew all along sadly (about Ms. Kensington)." And there were a lot of long, quiet moments, I found myself wondering into my A.D.D. world during them. But it was good, worth a matinee. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
A.MartinezDec 8, 2006
One of the best Bond films. More mature, visceral, overall a great movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DazDec 8, 2006
Probably the best bond movie ever. The biggest compliment I can give the movie is that it reminded me more of the Bourne films than any old Bond flick. Well done Mr Craig!!
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
9
JBDec 7, 2006
Great job. Film: excellent, if a little over long. Craig: Superb, the best since Connery. I notice that almost all the low marks in the user comments come from people who seem to have missed the point of this film, no gadgets, no Q etc etc. Great job. Film: excellent, if a little over long. Craig: Superb, the best since Connery. I notice that almost all the low marks in the user comments come from people who seem to have missed the point of this film, no gadgets, no Q etc etc. This is a prequal film to all other Bonds after all, did they not even notice the entire start of the film being about him getting promoted to 00 status? As for the person who suggests Steven Segal as a Bond. I mean really. A sadly overweight, aging (he has many years on Brosnan, and people thought him too old) American has-been, it would be charity to offer him a bit part as a hench man, let alone Bond. Well done, with that one suggestion you validate everything else you wrote as coming from someone totally clueless. Hurrah to Craig for reinventing the franchise. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JonM.Dec 7, 2006
What a return for Bond, what a debut in the franchise for Daniel Craig. The movie is excellent, dramatic set pieces, tension building plot and clever scripting. This only misses a strong 9 due to slightly overlong love story in the last What a return for Bond, what a debut in the franchise for Daniel Craig. The movie is excellent, dramatic set pieces, tension building plot and clever scripting. This only misses a strong 9 due to slightly overlong love story in the last third of the film. Craig is genius, bettering Brosnan's comic caricature of Bond. His physical presence, charm and wit mean the chases flow, fight scenes crunch like no bond before, and his vocal sparring with enemies and love interests is as sharp as knives. Gone is the Brosnan-Moore cheese fest, a new era of Bond has finally arrived to save the legend! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
GauthamSDec 7, 2006
Raw, formidable and absolutely humane ! One of the best James Bond Movie .
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DougM.Dec 6, 2006
I would rate this as second only to "Goldfinger" among Bond movies. If your only criteria is character realism, it is even the best one. Daniel Craig seems, so far, second only to Connery whose performance was so subtly brilliant that people I would rate this as second only to "Goldfinger" among Bond movies. If your only criteria is character realism, it is even the best one. Daniel Craig seems, so far, second only to Connery whose performance was so subtly brilliant that people sometimes, unfortunately, took it for granted. Craig is more like Timothy Dalton, playing it completely seriously but the film requires that. I don't think he is "better" than previous Bonds. If you look at how ridiculous those movies were in Moore's era, it made perfect sense to play them for laughs. But Craig is perfect to play a three-dimensional Bond. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
PauletteA.Dec 6, 2006
Daniel Craig topless looked like Popeye and his pouty lips were annoying. Fast energy, interesting twists and turns in plot.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
PatC.Dec 4, 2006
A splendid tour de force for the Bond series, even if breaking into his boss's house was over the top.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
PeterB.Dec 4, 2006
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 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. Expand
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
8
LouisM.Dec 4, 2006
One of the best Bond movies ever. Not just a great Bond movie, but an excellent movie, period. Bond is a real person and his well-being comes under threat more than once. Enough to create a true sense of concern and tension. This is One of the best Bond movies ever. Not just a great Bond movie, but an excellent movie, period. Bond is a real person and his well-being comes under threat more than once. Enough to create a true sense of concern and tension. This is something which lacks in most Bond movies. He is an actual 3 dimensional character. The only gripe is that the romance part is too long at a point when one thinks the movie is wrapping up. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
AndyS.Dec 3, 2006
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JasonL.Dec 3, 2006
Best Bond movie in years. After watching Craig in action, I wonder why Pierce Brosnan didn't get shafted to the cheese factory years ago. This movie has renewed my faith in the whole Bond franchise, which was starting to go into death Best Bond movie in years. After watching Craig in action, I wonder why Pierce Brosnan didn't get shafted to the cheese factory years ago. This movie has renewed my faith in the whole Bond franchise, which was starting to go into death throes. Craig has saved Bond from the garbage bin. When I tell my friends this is a good movie, they all moan until they have actually watched it, just goes to show you how tired that whole disturbing comedy trash (with John Cleese of all people) was becoming. Thank god for this movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
KevinDec 3, 2006
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. 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
CornCDec 3, 2006
Bond is presented as a "realistic", sentimental, anti-hero. Rather in bad taste if you ask me.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
AzaE.Dec 3, 2006
Great, but where was Q?
0 of 0 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
10
StormGDec 2, 2006
Outstanding!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
BamdadS.Dec 2, 2006
One of the best movies ever! Awesome Cast, Awesome Story! Just watch it!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
StephenMDec 2, 2006
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, 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. 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
10
PepitaR.Dec 2, 2006
Fantastic film. One word to describe the new bond and the entire film. "RAW". I loved it. The action, the romance, the mood has lingered with me through the night up to this minute.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
GlenCDec 1, 2006
As young boys back in the Connery days of Dr. No and Goldfinger, we used to exchange James Bond movie cards. Big thing back then. I've been a lifelong Bond fan, but I must confess that the recent films were beginning to lose me. Too As young boys back in the Connery days of Dr. No and Goldfinger, we used to exchange James Bond movie cards. Big thing back then. I've been a lifelong Bond fan, but I must confess that the recent films were beginning to lose me. Too many techno gadgets, explosions, and hyperaction left us wondering if we were watching actors on film or video games. Thank God (and Ms Broccoli) for the newest Bond. I must say this already ranks among my very favorites, and IMO, one of the best movies of 2006. Daniel Craig is awesome. His character reminds me of Connery, perhaps a bit more vulnerable and less humorous and charming, but we understand this is the beginning all over again. As for those critics who say the movie was too long, didn't their mothers tell them NOT to smoke crack? God forbid that we should ever be given a 90-minute Bond movie! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
PaulDec 1, 2006
This movie is great. I took my parents last night (my second viewing), and they loved it, too. At the end my pop said "This is the best Bond movie I have ever seen". No disrespect to Mr. Connery, who is the best---I have to agree with my This movie is great. I took my parents last night (my second viewing), and they loved it, too. At the end my pop said "This is the best Bond movie I have ever seen". No disrespect to Mr. Connery, who is the best---I have to agree with my pops. Any movie where you want a repeat viewing is a 10! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
JadaG.Dec 1, 2006
This film action packed from beginning to nearly end then end. There was one moment that lasted a good 5 minutes that was too long, but everything else meet or exceeded standards. Go and see for yourself.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
AbiA.Dec 1, 2006
Excellent action by cast and in particular by Craig. He has graduated handsomely into 007 slot
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
BenJ.Dec 1, 2006
Hats off to Daniel Craig for brining the right amount of (much needed) grit to the role. However his achievements, coupled with some great set pieces, are runied by a ridiculous running time, and a terribly hammy final quarter. Drop the Hats off to Daniel Craig for brining the right amount of (much needed) grit to the role. However his achievements, coupled with some great set pieces, are runied by a ridiculous running time, and a terribly hammy final quarter. Drop the drawn out ending, shave 40 minutes off the films length and you'd have a great film. Sadly, this is only average. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
ANeilNov 30, 2006
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
BMRNov 29, 2006
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
DerekG.Nov 29, 2006
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
AdamM.Nov 29, 2006
Hands down my favorite bond movie! It just goes to show how important charactor is in any film!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
RachitS.Nov 29, 2006
Not bad for a new bond movie. I really like the action. its pretty raw. But the ending is a little wiered.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
RoyG.Nov 29, 2006
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!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
TommyM.Nov 29, 2006
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DebbieY.Nov 29, 2006
Amazing.
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
4
NatyN.Nov 28, 2006
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
RaphaelNov 28, 2006
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 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! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
AnnaNov 27, 2006
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
ChrisH.Nov 27, 2006
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
HélèneNov 27, 2006
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
R.R.Nov 26, 2006
A very smart, sophisticated action film with better (albeit uneven) scripting and acting than the previous efforts... but is it Bond? I was horrified from the beginning to hear that Craig got the part, and I have to admit to being more than A very smart, sophisticated action film with better (albeit uneven) scripting and acting than the previous efforts... but is it Bond? I was horrified from the beginning to hear that Craig got the part, and I have to admit to being more than pleasantly surprised. His physical style, a little ungainly if effective, is a take on the character that's pretty close to Fleming's original vision. This James Bond is just starting out, and he's sorting out things as he goes along. The action scenes are all intelligently done, some of the repartee (vide the scene on the train) is brilliant and funny, the dialogue frequently examines and challenges the comfortable Bond myths, and Eva Green is a godsend. And yet, a "true" Bond film requires all of the following: inspired, cutting edge gadgets that, yes, have to be a little on the little-boy-toy side, a gargantuan bad guy whose scope is beyond petty cash (and who preferably owns a base of operations beneath the ocean), and, need I say this, Q and Moneypenny. Seeing as the film shows us Bond's beginnings, I am desperately hoping that its open end, with Bond finally giving us his calling card "My name is...etc. etc.", points to a future film more in the classic vein. Summing up: a refreshingly taught reinvention of a classic that hopefully won't forget its roots in future installments. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
GeorgeC.Nov 26, 2006
The name
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
PhiloR.Nov 26, 2006
it was too long, got boring towards the end. initial chase seem was great, but downhill after that. i would not recommend.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
JackD.Nov 26, 2006
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 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
0 of 0 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
9
NeilW.Nov 26, 2006
Finall, there's a Bond who shows us what it means to actually kill: it's brutal, it's very physical, and it devours your soul. Craig is just that. Apart from that, we finally get to see some true acting (just think of Pierce Finall, there's a Bond who shows us what it means to actually kill: it's brutal, it's very physical, and it devours your soul. Craig is just that. Apart from that, we finally get to see some true acting (just think of Pierce Brosnan's "I have only one facial expression" stance...). One point deducted for extremely annoying Sony product placement. But still - go and see it! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
EliaNov 25, 2006
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
CharlieB.Nov 25, 2006
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
Dr.YesNov 25, 2006
Ah, Russia's Vladimir Putin would be proud!!! Not sure why Time and the Miami Herald are so off in left field on this one. It's more realistic and more violent. The acting is much better too as is the story. He is not suave campy Ah, Russia's Vladimir Putin would be proud!!! Not sure why Time and the Miami Herald are so off in left field on this one. It's more realistic and more violent. The acting is much better too as is the story. He is not suave campy movie Bond...he's real world "I kill people...so part of myself is dying". Not sure how hard of a concept that is to understand. I do have to say the end is a downshift, but necessary to advance the Bond character to more depth in future movies. Amazing timing with the real world ex-KGB spy's poisoning in Britain. The world is slowly drawing up sides again, Keep up the REALITY that we got in this movie...so much better. No more spacy laser beam Bond. Amen. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
BrianY.Nov 25, 2006
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!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
YohannesT.Nov 25, 2006
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
MoiMNov 25, 2006
This is a real "Bond Begins": a way of revitalizing the Bond franchise. Craig is an amazing dark character. I really enjoyed the movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
LoriP.Nov 25, 2006
Not sure how you give it less than 7.5, but not a perfect 10 either. But the movie doesn't have to be perfect to be a must see. I seriously doubted their ability to revive this franchise, but like Batman Begins, going back to the Not sure how you give it less than 7.5, but not a perfect 10 either. But the movie doesn't have to be perfect to be a must see. I seriously doubted their ability to revive this franchise, but like Batman Begins, going back to the beginning works here with a younger, stonger Bond - did I mention darker?? I love that Bond is dark. He is much more human than his predecessors in that he stumbles, bleeds, falls, etc and at the same time is the back to basics - a stone cold killer. He's an assassin. That's what he is at the bottom line although we're usually glossing that over with sex and witticisms which are are missing here, and I for one did not miss them. The only misstep was the super long ending. The romance really took us down a different path too quickly, to a different Bond, to a different story and just seemed a 15-20 minute setup for the inevitable ending. That said... go see this movie! I know you gentlemen will enjoy the feisty, intelligent new Bond Girl so allow me my moment to say... ladies... ummm, naked Daniel Craig... worth the price of admission. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
ConstantNov 25, 2006
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
AnonymousMCNov 25, 2006
The only reason you won't love this movie is if you're expecting the usual blow up the secret volcanoe base while still caring about whether or not my drink is shaken and not stirred plot. This is deeper, more exciting, and thereThe only reason you won't love this movie is if you're expecting the usual blow up the secret volcanoe base while still caring about whether or not my drink is shaken and not stirred plot. This is deeper, more exciting, and there isn't just and obvious badguy with a scar and a cat and a maniacal laugh. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
KristinaD.Nov 24, 2006
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
BilB.Nov 24, 2006
I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. Daniel Craig pulls Bond of flawlessly. While there may not be a lot of suave womanizing in this Bond, there is a genuine roughness about him that is more believable than in any other Bond film. A must see.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
RobertxxxNov 23, 2006
though I thought clive owen was the natural choice for the new bond, Craig proves to be sensational in a part that totally redesigns our concept of the master agent...a tad long, but ends with a double bang.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
JAMESN.Nov 23, 2006
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. 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
PaulE.Nov 23, 2006
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 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
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
6
AugustusS.Nov 23, 2006
First off: the best Bond since Connery. Second off: that's not saying much. I don't mind that they're trying to reinvent Bond--not, as some have suggested, transplanting Connery's Bond into the modern day--and Craig does First off: the best Bond since Connery. Second off: that's not saying much. I don't mind that they're trying to reinvent Bond--not, as some have suggested, transplanting Connery's Bond into the modern day--and Craig does a fine job, taking a little from each of his predecessors. The movie is cool, action-packed, suspenseful, but, as all action movies are these days, cheesy. Terribly, terribly cheesy and cliched. "Oh James, if all that was left of you was your smile and your little finger, you'd be more of a man than any man I've ever met." "That's because you know what I can do with my little finger." Who wrote that? Whoever thought of that interchange should be shot. Repeatedly. I had high hopes for this one, I really did, but bad writing ruined it. Think of "Mission Impossible" meets "Syphon Filter" (or any action video game, actually), and you've got "Casino Royale." Not necessarily a bad thing, but will probably be a better game than a movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
RobertH.Nov 23, 2006
This has to be my favorite Bond movie yet, and I've watched every one religiously. The new Bond roars with excitement while at the same time showing that he is human and can let down his defenses to the most dangerous of foes, women. This has to be my favorite Bond movie yet, and I've watched every one religiously. The new Bond roars with excitement while at the same time showing that he is human and can let down his defenses to the most dangerous of foes, women. Craig shines in Casino Royale, proving that even though he doesn't necessarily look the part, he plays it better than any Bond since Connery. The only bad thing i have to say about it is that the Bond girls weren't quite as good-looking as I'd hoped, but the acting and action make up for it in the end. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
RichardSNov 22, 2006
Very good in many ways: Craig, the stunts, the action in general, the dialogue and the brilliant opening credits etc. But it is also flawed: the opening song is absolutely dreadful, even worse than Madonna's abomination. Words cannot Very good in many ways: Craig, the stunts, the action in general, the dialogue and the brilliant opening credits etc. But it is also flawed: the opening song is absolutely dreadful, even worse than Madonna's abomination. Words cannot describe how bad the song is. A few other problems: the repeated use of mobile phone calls to reveal identities becomes grating. Also, the story has too many holes and improbabilities. But overall a success - an excellent start and Craig is superb. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
DrewK.Nov 22, 2006
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
KentE.Nov 22, 2006
As we have seen in Munich and Layer Cake, Daniel Craig has the charm and intensity he needs to be Bond. But Casino Royale has seen him make Bond his own. From the over confident swagger and quick wit to a genuine sense of menace - he got it As we have seen in Munich and Layer Cake, Daniel Craig has the charm and intensity he needs to be Bond. But Casino Royale has seen him make Bond his own. From the over confident swagger and quick wit to a genuine sense of menace - he got it all right. I simply cannot imagine a better Bond than Mr. Craig has given us - contemporary and classic ! That's a real feat ! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
AngelM.Nov 22, 2006
Casino Royale is by far the best Bond film in years, I am extremely happy that the producers decided to take the franchise in this new direction. As for Daniel Craig's James Bond, he has just fit nicely in the shoes of the great Sean Casino Royale is by far the best Bond film in years, I am extremely happy that the producers decided to take the franchise in this new direction. As for Daniel Craig's James Bond, he has just fit nicely in the shoes of the great Sean Connery as the best Bonds on film. By far the best movie I've seen all year. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful