Casino Royale - Preview

Discuss this movie on our message board!

Rated: PG-13

Distributor: MGM

Release Date: 2006-11-17

Starring: Daniel Craig (James Bond, 007), Dame Judi Dench (M), Mads Mikkelsen (Le Chiffre), Jeffrey Wright (Felix Leiter), Eva Green (Vesper Lynd), Giancarlo Gianni (Mathis), Catalina Murino (Sologne), Tobias Menzies (Villiers), Ivana Milicevic (Valenka)

Directed by Martin Campbell

Produced by Barbara Broccoli, Michael G. Wilson

Written by Neal Purvis, Robert Wade, Paul Haggis

Visit the movie's Official Site!

Previewed by Josh Tyler : 2006-10-19 14:52:18

Daniel Craig stars as “007” James Bond, the smoothest, sexiest, most lethal agent on Her Majesty’s Secret Service in Casino Royale. Based on the first Bond book written by Ian Fleming, the story, which has never been told on film until now, recounts the making of the world’s greatest secret agent.

James Bond’s first “007” mission leads him to Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen), banker to the world’s terrorists. In order to stop him, and bring down the terrorist network, Bond must beat Le Chiffre in a high-stakes poker game at Casino Royale. Bond is initially annoyed when a beautiful British Treasury official, Vesper Lynd (Eva Green), is assigned to deliver his stake for the game and watch over the government's money. But, as Bond and Vesper survive a series of lethal attacks by Le Chiffre and his henchmen, a mutual attraction develops leading them both into further danger and events that will shape Bond’s life forever.

A much older actor is cast to play a much younger Bond. Does that make any sense? Look forward to seeing craggy-faced Daniel Craig in heavy, heavy makeup if Casino Royale screenwriter is serious about his Bond being a younger, 28-year-old version of the character. Thing of this as "James Bond Year One" or "James Bond Begins", minus the scientologist, not-gay actor's girlfriend. Bond can do better than Katie Holmes.

This is the first Bond film actually based on one of Ian Flemings books since 1987. 21st in the series, it also marks the return of director Martin Campbell, the guy who first repopularized the whole franchise in the first place with the excellent Bond movie Goldeneye. It's been downhill from there ever since.

Sure, some of the other 007 movies have been fun (I had a really good time with Die Another Day) and sure, Pierce Brosnan has been spectacular (for my money even better than Connery), but the scripts haven't been up to snuff with some of James better stuff. With a screenwriter of Paul Haggis caliber doctoring the script and a proven 007 director, maybe Casino Royale stands a chance, even if their blonde Bond casting doesn’t make a lot of sense.

upcoming movie

Latest Previews:

Image Gallery for Casino Royale

Comment on “Casino Royale”

Note: This website is not meant for use by minors. The views expressed in the comments section below are not our own. This section is intended for discussion of the topic in the post above. Disagreement is encouraged, however comments which attack, insult, or threaten the author in a personal manner won't be published. Similarly, comments that we deem to be poorly worded, or wildly off topic will also not be approved and may be mocked. For free, uncensored, unfettered, and possibly dangerous discussion visit our forum.

Iron Cow Says:
May 2nd, 2006 at 11:00
Craig is a great actor but that's not the issue. Philip Seymour Hoffman is a great actor too but I wouldn't cast him as Batman. Still, Craig should be given a chance. It's the recasting of Dench as M that kills me. If you want to start over, wipe the slate clean. I predict that if this movie bombs, they'll be asking for Brosnan to come back.

Rob Says:
May 2nd, 2006 at 14:17
That last shot of Craig in the tux must have had even sony executives wincing.I'm sure Craig is a pleasant chap and a competent actor but it's laughable to even imagine him as Bond.Fleming's character was 6'1,darkly handsome and something of a snob.The argument that Craig harks back to the literary character is false.He isn't Cubby's movie Bond or Fleming's literary creation.He's Barbara's Bourne/Jason Statham/Mr GQ man Bond and she can keep him.

Marzi Says:
May 2nd, 2006 at 23:01
Craig will need more than heavy makeup for this role. He'll need Botox and class in large amounts. I question his being a great actor. This is propaganda from the Broccolis and wishful thinking. Also, he never had to play an upper class spy before, so this will be a stretch.

Kitn Says:
May 3rd, 2006 at 00:43
This movie will bomb big time! They should have listened to the fans...we want Pierce and will Boycott Casino Royal!
Daniel Craig is NOT Bond...he is ugly and can't act either. And his remarks about not giving a damn about his fans says it all.
BOYCOTT CASINO ROYALE!!!!!!!!!!!
craignotbond.com

James Says:
May 3rd, 2006 at 12:45
I think you should all get pff the back off daniel craig. I think he's a decent enough actor and although brosnan will be a difficult act to follow, i think judging by something as simple as the movie poster, Craig is gonna be a success. I mean he cant be any worse than the truly abysmal Moore. Goodluck Craig with you career as bond and can't wait to see Casino Royale in the cinema.

Chayna Says:
May 3rd, 2006 at 12:46
Craig doesn't fit the Bond of the books, no matter how much Eon say he does and although a good actor in other roles, I don't think he's right as Bond. It's very obvious that using shadowed photos there's going to have to be a lot of 'alterations' to this film to make him look better. He doesn't look good in a tuxedo at all either.

Chayna

Bosco Says:
May 6th, 2006 at 10:49
Moore was the ultimate pathetic Bond, and no one here gripes about that -- and we had to suffer through 10 bad movies until he was what, 83 ??

Craig is a very good actor; he has screen presence; the only Bond since Connery with a convincing build for the escapades of the character. His hair is light brown, not blonde, open your eyes pinheads.

Face up that Brosnan, while holding up well and I like him, is getting too old for the part.

Give Craig a chance. If he's a loser, I'll be the first to call for his head.

Illya (Man from UNCLE) Smith Says:
May 6th, 2006 at 10:55
I have grown up on the Bond films. I was for the longest time a purest who believed there was only one Bond, Sean Connery.
It must be quite challenging for these actors to step into the shoes of their predecessors, especially if the previous shoes were big. But lets be honest, shoes get worn out!
Over time, I have learnt to appreciate change and truly believe if something is going to survive the test of time, it needs to grow and adapt. This is certainly true of the Bond franchise.
It is refreshing to see how each new Bond actor rises to the challenge by holding true to the essence of the character yet making it their own.
If James Bond is going to continue, he is going to have to continually evolve.
Daniel Craig is what this franchise needed. His body of work is solid and I have no doubt in my mind that he will bring to this character the direction it needs to move further.
If we stayed in the past, Bond would still be slapping his women on their rears. Times are a changing!

Ste Rooke Says:
August 15th, 2006 at 06:34
This film is going to be amaaazing! I can't believe they stepped outside the box and cast a really good actor with a great distinctive look. He's not a pretty man no, but I don't want Bond to be pretty, his sex appeal should come from his unusual blend of hard-edged brutality with a refined veneer and Daniel Craig has that in spades. His voice is awesome and he moves really well.

They are FINALLY making GOOD Bond film. If all you want is a crummy, silly film with a charicature pretty fool going around in black tie drinking martinis then to each their own I guess, I like good films.

Daniel Craig IS a really good actor, it's not propaganda.,...why would they cast an average actor who didn't look like Bond? He has been well known for years in British cinema and stage for being one of the UK's finest actors. He stepped into hollywood with a supporting role in Tomb Raider and hated it and he's never done much since until he decided to do this as the script was so brilliant. Munich is a great film, heavy but great and Craig is awesome in it.

Michael Says:
September 24th, 2006 at 19:54
I think Craig will be a great Bond. The images I've seen look really cool. He's going to be a real kick ass bond. Give it a chance, they wouldn't ruin the franchise if they didn't think he was right for the role. He'll be good, the film will be deeper and I can't wait to see it.

Adios

Vannessa Says:
November 16th, 2006 at 22:48
Pierce Brosnan made the BIGGEST mistake in his life by not accepting the offer to do the latest Bond series, Casino Royale...the movie is much better than the previous Bond series (that's just my opinion.)
I really hope that Brosnan is not regretting his decision...

Vannessa Says:
November 16th, 2006 at 22:48
Pierce Brosnan made a BIG mistake by not accepting the offer to do this latest Bond series...the movie is sooooooooooooo nice...He should've accepted it, anyways...not because of the amount that he'll be getting but, the story is good...better than the previous Bond series...Hopefully, by now, Brosnan's regretting his decision...A SUPER BIG MISTAKE he made in his entire life...

Darth Vader Says:
November 20th, 2006 at 14:37
Vanessa, Brosnan did not quit the series. The producers didn't want to pay him the money and instead went with a cheap replacement.

Crompton Says:
December 6th, 2006 at 11:17
This movie is a real big bore!

I dunno why I wasted my money on it. Watching the trailers looked as if the new bond had arrived. But once in the theaters..Yeeks!!

Except for the first fifteen minutes of high adrenaline action - the movie has nothing to offer.

They could have had more such action scenes. Moreover, what made the director make us sit through the silly card game. Big Time wasted. It seemed to drag on and on.

Besides, I found there was no continuity at all in the movie.

There was hardly anything in the movie - some freaks have posted the new bond has arrived. Man, this movie real sucks.

Seriously, I don't care about his looks, but he could have played a better villian. Hope the producers/story writers and the director gives a better movie next time around.

Crompton

007 fan Says:
March 17th, 2007 at 05:29
I thought I was watching a different movie.
The bond brand is a miss.
To dark and needed the bond music tone throughout the movie.

Sorry but this movie would of been better if it weren't titled James Bond.
I have been a fan for over 30+ years.
The movie is not the worst but didn't feel the bond tone.

Sorry.

Anmoldeep Singh Chahal Says:
July 16th, 2008 at 16:51
I think that there should be more 007 movies with only Daniel Craig because he did a better job than the old school 007 movies. The old school 007 movies sucked and they are was a F+.

Back to Casino Royale

Casino Royale - Preview

Comment on “Casino Royale”

Leave a Reply