- Messages
- 1,627
- Reaction score
- 2
- Trophy Points
- 51
Well, I jsut got back from Casino Royale, and it was definately the best Bond I've seen. The opening title sequence was on of the best I've seen since, probably Die Another Day. The action was a bit over the top, and one scene in the begining was remincent of the Russian Climber or the Free Runner. The poker game was good, even though I didn't know what the hell was going on. Maybe if I understood poker more I would have enjoyed the game more, but the action that took place inbetween the game rounds more than made up for it (remember kids, keep a defribulator in your car). The Bond girls this time around were very sexy, however, it didn't appear that he actually, well, you know, didn't, uh, do them. We also see where Bond takes up his liking for the vodka martini, shaken, not stirred. This time around, he's clumsy. He's definately not as graceful this time around. But since this one is technically a prequel, it makes it all the more powerful. Gone are the white circles that we usually see at the begining, and the gunbarrel sequence is different, but in a good way. The opening scenes (before the credits) are in black and white, as well as a fairly whitewashed grainy look, which does add to the atmosphere.
Daniel Craig was very good, although (and maybe I'm wrong) it didn't appear that he talked as much as Bond does in the others. Judi Dench was good, and I can safely say I've never seen her so pissed, spouting out curse words like she did. The Bond girls (Eva Green and someone else) were both very good. Mads Mikkelson was also good.
It was good, my showing didn't go off as well. The projectionist sucked. Saw the "end" of the reels several times. Also, either the lense or the print was dirty. Maybe both. The screen wasn't in the best condition, either. Then again, it's an old theater, so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for the screen, but there is no excuse for a bad projectionist or a dirty print or lense. The print also appeared to have a slightly high level of contrast, making it feel a bit washed out. Though not too distracting, it did take away from the experience. I blame the theater, no one else, for this.
All in all, a very good movie, although, the problems with the projector/projectionist and such, did take away from the experience. I'll ahve to go see it again at the better theater in my old hometown (not 15 - 20 minutes a way). Definately good, and definately worth seeing at least once.
5/5
EDIT: Oh yeah, I must say I am EXTREMELY envious of Mr. Craig, getting to cuddle with all those hot women
Daniel Craig was very good, although (and maybe I'm wrong) it didn't appear that he talked as much as Bond does in the others. Judi Dench was good, and I can safely say I've never seen her so pissed, spouting out curse words like she did. The Bond girls (Eva Green and someone else) were both very good. Mads Mikkelson was also good.
It was good, my showing didn't go off as well. The projectionist sucked. Saw the "end" of the reels several times. Also, either the lense or the print was dirty. Maybe both. The screen wasn't in the best condition, either. Then again, it's an old theater, so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for the screen, but there is no excuse for a bad projectionist or a dirty print or lense. The print also appeared to have a slightly high level of contrast, making it feel a bit washed out. Though not too distracting, it did take away from the experience. I blame the theater, no one else, for this.
All in all, a very good movie, although, the problems with the projector/projectionist and such, did take away from the experience. I'll ahve to go see it again at the better theater in my old hometown (not 15 - 20 minutes a way). Definately good, and definately worth seeing at least once.
5/5
EDIT: Oh yeah, I must say I am EXTREMELY envious of Mr. Craig, getting to cuddle with all those hot women
