Casino Royale: No CGI, fewer gadgets, no Q, no Moneypenny, etc.




Posted by Klarth

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060310/film_nm/bond_dc_1

...It's still Bond, right...?

:/




Posted by Fate

He's hot.

But that's not the point! Where's all the nifty gadgets? :(

It could work, I think.




Posted by Klarth

I was just looking forward to John Cleese. Now I don't even know if I still want to see it. :(




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

Lame. If I wanted to see a hardass in a jungle battling some non-white dude with boring guns then I'd watch those hundreds of other movies like that. James Bond is basically about some cool English guy with an awesome car, neat gadgets and beautiful women. That's kinda what set it apart from all of those other ****ty action movies...




Posted by Dexter

It is from the director of Goldeneye, though, which happens to be my favorite 007 film. However, that is largely due to the Nintendo 64 game. Zorro was lame.




Posted by Bebop

The reason these are not in this film is because it supposed to be Bond's first mission as a sapy after leaving the SAS (or something). So basically he's a rookie spy. I would imagine only the top dwag spies like older Bond, talk to Q directly or get harder, more dangerous missions where more gadetry is needed.




Posted by Zeta

I stopped watching James Bond when Sean Connery stopped play the role.




Posted by Dexter

Then you're missing out on some of the best Bond moments.




Posted by Bebop

I agree. I don't see what's so good about Sean. Perice was the best I'd say.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: The reason these are not in this film is because it supposed to be Bond's first mission as a sapy after leaving the SAS (or something). So basically he's a rookie spy. I would imagine only the top dwag spies like older Bond, talk to Q directly or get harder, more dangerous missions where more gadetry is needed.


... I guess it makes a bit more sense now... but still. My point stands.


Quoted post: Perice was the best I'd say.


Agreed. He seemed to have fit the role MUCH better.



Posted by maian

I don't know, it could be an improvement, in my eyes. I was really dissapointed, and could even say I hated the last two. Die Another Day was tasteless, dragged on fake action, and so was World Was Not Enough. Just, uh, not as much. I loved Goldeneye to death, and I hope this one might have the same sort of feeling that some other Bond movies have had, rather then the mondo-technology special effects of say, Die Another Day.

Although I loved Pierce, it'll be interesting to see how this one acts.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: and I hope this one might have the same sort of feeling that some other Bond movies have had


By getting rid of everything that made the old movies great? Hm. Usually when people try to fix a series they go back to the roots, not completely change it.