Author Topic: Solo, you going to any late night stores at midnight to pick up CASINO ROYALE? (Read 15239 times)

Bloodwake · « **Reply #120 on:** March 18, 2007, 01:35:44 PM »

Quote from: Solo on March 14, 2007, 02:37:30 PM

November 2008. 2 years all told. Not too bad.

God, I'm so pumped. Thank god they made Bond awesome again.

David Arnold did pretty good. The music in Casino Royale, where it repeats the movie's main theme, reminded me of the older films where you heard the original theme 80 times throughout the film. John Barry, though, would be a godsend.

I'm not too critical of Goldeneye's music. There's parts like the tank chase that are pretty good.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #121 on:** March 18, 2007, 01:36:25 PM »

I like David Arnold. He's pretty good.

Cheebs · « **Reply #122 on:** March 18, 2007, 01:37:00 PM »

I LOVED hearing the title thing repeated throughout the movie. That was something lacking from Bond movies for a long time, I loved that it returned.

Solo · « **Reply #123 on:** March 18, 2007, 01:37:58 PM »

His CR score is good, but its still not enough to make me forget about his bad ones from TND and TWINE.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #124 on:** March 18, 2007, 01:38:24 PM »

I think Arnold more or less did that because he couldn't blast out the full on Bond theme 'till that very special point, and opted to go that route instead. It wouldn't surprise me if he returned to his old ways with the next film.

Solo · « **Reply #125 on:** March 18, 2007, 01:40:08 PM »

TWINE's score was especially bad. What the hell was that techno garbage during the Thames chase? CR actually had a strong theme, which I enjoyed hearing whenever it was reprised.

Bloodwake · « **Reply #126 on:** March 18, 2007, 01:42:15 PM »

Quote from: Solo on March 18, 2007, 01:40:08 PM

TWINE's score was especially bad. What the hell was that techno garbage during the Thames chase? CR actually had a strong theme, which I enjoyed hearing whenever it was reprised.

Believe me, I agree. The music in the three films before this were complete garbage. Arnold definitely redeemed himself with Casino Royale though.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #127 on:** March 18, 2007, 01:43:29 PM »

Arnold, from what little I know of him, is a very soldier-like composer. He doesn't really come up with new material as much as stuff is mandated to him from the producers and whomever helms the production. I wouldn't be surprised if he was told, "Put some techno garbage in this scene!"

Also, I don't get how they royally fucked up The World is Not Enough. Y'know, with some good casting and better direction and tightening of the script, that movie could've been a great Bond film. The concept is great, even for the villain, and in terms of world destruction plots, it's one of the more plausible ones.

Bloodwake · « **Reply #128 on:** March 18, 2007, 01:45:05 PM »

Quote from: Willco on March 18, 2007, 01:43:29 PM

Arnold, from what little I know of him, is a very soldier-like composer. He doesn't really come up with new material as much as stuff is mandated to him from the producers and whomever helms the production. I wouldn't be surprised if he was told, "Put some techno garbage in this scene!"

Also, I don't get how they royally fucked up The World is Not Enough. Y'know, with some good casting and better direction and tightening of the script, that movie could've been a great Bond film. The concept is great, even for the villain, and in terms of world destruction plots, it's one of the more plausible ones.

Exactly. The movie was a pretty good concept. I enjoyed it, but it still wasn't holy shit awesome like it could have been.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #129 on:** March 18, 2007, 01:46:00 PM »

I think the casting really undoes most of the film.

Solo · « **Reply #130 on:** March 18, 2007, 01:46:05 PM »

TWINE's bigest problem for me is its far too long and bloated. Should have been 20 mins shorter.

CR is too long too, but its actually, you know, good, so its run time doesnt bother as much.

Himu · « **Reply #131 on:** March 18, 2007, 01:49:08 PM »

Can someone explain this supposed continuity in the films now?

Bloodwake · « **Reply #132 on:** March 18, 2007, 01:53:00 PM »

Quote from: Willco on March 18, 2007, 01:46:00 PM

I think the casting really undoes most of the film.

The only good cast was Sophie Marceau.

In other words, I agree.

Ichirou · « **Reply #133 on:** March 19, 2007, 02:43:36 AM »

Quote from: In Limbo on March 18, 2007, 01:49:08 PM

Can someone explain this supposed continuity in the films now?

The films gave up any pretense of cohesive continuity long, long ago. It's such a mess, it's better to not even bother with it.

Personally, I don't see why anyone would try to get into Bond...there are a few really cool Bond movies, but most of them are really terrible and have aged really badly. All the Roger Moore ones are hokey, the Brosnan ones are uniformly terrible aside from Goldeneye...so what you're left with is the Connery ones that have aged well (From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, Thunderball...and that's it), the two Dalton ones, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, and Casino Royale. That's...7 movies out of 21.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #134 on:** March 19, 2007, 02:45:32 AM »

No, he's talking about the continuity that will exist between Casino Royale and its sequels, but I've already explained it to him!

Solo · « **Reply #135 on:** March 19, 2007, 08:24:14 AM »

Quote from: Ichirou on March 19, 2007, 02:43:36 AM

Quote from: In Limbo on March 18, 2007, 01:49:08 PM
Can someone explain this supposed continuity in the films now?
Personally, I don't see why anyone would try to get into Bond...there are a few really cool Bond movies, but most of them are really terrible and have aged really badly.

I didn't try, personally. I just happened to grow up watching the movies and reading the books, and now its just part of my personality. I will fully admit that at least half of the movies are stinkers, yet I still have nothing but love for the series. I guess its just one of those things. Everyone has theirs.

Bloodwake · « **Reply #136 on:** March 19, 2007, 08:35:39 AM »

Quote from: Solo on March 19, 2007, 08:24:14 AM

Quote from: Ichirou on March 19, 2007, 02:43:36 AM
Quote from: In Limbo on March 18, 2007, 01:49:08 PM
Can someone explain this supposed continuity in the films now?
Personally, I don't see why anyone would try to get into Bond...there are a few really cool Bond movies, but most of them are really terrible and have aged really badly.

I didn't try, personally. I just happened to grow up watching the movies and reading the books, and now its just part of my personality. I will fully admit that at least half of the movies are stinkers, yet I still have nothing but love for the series. I guess its just one of those things. Everyone has theirs.

After GoldenEye 007 came out for N64 I watched all the movies. It was a large part of my childhood.

Even most of the shitty ones I like because of nostalgia reasons mainly. Octopussy, however, and Die Another Day have never been among those films I liked.

Cheebs · « **Reply #137 on:** March 19, 2007, 08:49:25 AM »

I remember when I was about 7-8 I rented every movie one by one each week. Which is why even now I "enjoy" watching Diamonds Are Forever, Moonraker, Live And Let Die...etc. Some I can't bear to watch though but those are just a few. A View To A Kill & Die Another Day are the only ones I can't sit down and enjoy to a certain extent.

Ichirou · « **Reply #138 on:** March 19, 2007, 08:57:04 AM »

I know what you guys mean. I grew up with both Dalton movies and he's still my favorite Bond, so I have a lot of affection for those particular entries in the franchise.

But I think, if you didn't grow up with it, you shouldn't bother trying to get into the series as an adult, because it's really not all that good, aside from a few entries. Better to start off fresh with the brilliance of Casino Royale and look ahead instead of looking back.

Solo · « **Reply #139 on:** March 19, 2007, 08:59:41 AM »

This is true too. I wouldnt go out and try to "recruit" fans for the series. I think that if you dont have some personal attachment to the films, then you would be much better served to just see the series highs, then move on to other films.

Most huge Bond fans I have met basically have the same background - they started watching the movies at a very young age, and they just clicked with them and they have been pretty much lifelong fans since. I dont hear much of people just randomly picking up the series later in life.

Ichirou · « **Reply #140 on:** March 19, 2007, 09:04:39 AM »

I have my guilty pleasures too - I used to think Star Wars was just brilliant, and look what a clusterfuck that turned out to be.

I own about a dozen of the Bond movies on VHS, but Casino Royale is the first one I'm planning to buy on DVD...if the UE's are sold in stand-alone versions I might get the Dalton ones and maybe a couple of the Connery ones, as well as the Lazenby one, but that's it.

I mean, I like the original Trek movies and all, but the only ones I own on DVD are II, III, IV and VI - the others are awful, and I have no desire to be a completist...same with Bond. I'll get the ones I really like, but no desire to complete the series.

EDIT: VI, not V! The Undiscovered Country, not The Final (shitty) Frontier.

Cheebs · « **Reply #141 on:** March 19, 2007, 09:53:10 AM »

Quote from: Ichirou on March 19, 2007, 09:04:39 AM

I mean, I like the original Trek movies and all, but the only ones I own on DVD are II, III, IV and V - the others are awful, and I have no desire to be a completist...same with Bond. I'll get the ones I really like, but no desire to complete the series.

What the fuck? Star Trek VI is considered the best one alongside II(and for many IV). The fact you own V and not the one that is arguably nearly as good as II is absurd.

Ichirou · « **Reply #142 on:** March 19, 2007, 09:55:04 AM »

Quote from: Cheebs on March 19, 2007, 09:53:10 AM

Quote from: Ichirou on March 19, 2007, 09:04:39 AM

I mean, I like the original Trek movies and all, but the only ones I own on DVD are II, III, IV and V - the others are awful, and I have no desire to be a completist...same with Bond. I'll get the ones I really like, but no desire to complete the series.
What the fuck? Star Trek VI is considered the best one alongside II(and for many IV). The fact you own V and not the one that is arguably nearly as good as II is absurd.

FUCK, that was a typo. I own II, III, IV, and VI. I DO NOT OWN STAR TREK V. I think it's an AWFUL movie.

Cheebs · « **Reply #143 on:** March 19, 2007, 12:14:00 PM »

My view is V is under-rated. It had fantastic kirk/spock/mccoy banter. My rankings and ratings of the 6 would be:

1. II (10/10)
2. VI (9.5/10)
3. IV (9/10)
4. III (8/10)
5. V (7.5/10)
6. I (6/10)

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #144 on:** March 19, 2007, 01:12:49 PM »

No, Star Trek V is not underrated. It is horrible and a sin against God.

Cheebs · « **Reply #145 on:** March 19, 2007, 02:49:17 PM »

I like watching kirk, spock, and mccoy run around the enterprise for 2 hours chatting with eachother. So sue me.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #146 on:** March 19, 2007, 02:50:47 PM »

I won't sue you, but God will!

Cheebs · « **Reply #147 on:** March 19, 2007, 02:51:22 PM »

Come on Kirk trying to out-logic God = film greatness

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #148 on:** March 19, 2007, 02:51:53 PM »

He used lightning powers on them? What the fuck - is he Emperor Palpatine?

Cheebs · « **Reply #149 on:** March 19, 2007, 02:53:43 PM »

He sent out rock monsters as well! But that scene got cut out lol

Solo · « **Reply #150 on:** March 19, 2007, 02:57:41 PM »

I have never watched a full episode of any of the Star Trek shows, nor a single frame of any of the movies.

Oogami, the UEs ARE being sold as singles. Have been for a while now.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #151 on:** March 19, 2007, 03:46:48 PM »

You should watch Wrath of Khan and a few others, Solo. They're good films and don't rely on anyone being a Trekkie to enjoy them.

Cheebs · « **Reply #152 on:** March 19, 2007, 03:55:18 PM »

The even numbered Treks(outside Nemesis) are all very good sci-fi action films regardless of its franchise. Well other than IV, thats just a fun comedy.

You should see Wrath of Khan and The Undiscovered Country. They are the two Nicholas Myer directed and they are VERY good movies.

brawndolicious · « **Reply #153 on:** March 19, 2007, 08:24:01 PM »

I gave this movie a chance.

It's shit.

Ichirou · « **Reply #154 on:** March 19, 2007, 08:31:26 PM »

Quote from: Solo on March 19, 2007, 02:57:41 PM

I have never watched a full episode of any of the Star Trek shows, nor a single frame of any of the movies.

Oogami, the UEs ARE being sold as singles. Have been for a while now.

Oh, man, I gotta pick up a few of 'em, then: Goldfinger, From Russia With Love, Thunderball, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, Living Daylights, Licence to Kill, and Casino Royale.

TakingBackSunday · « **Reply #155 on:** March 19, 2007, 09:12:31 PM »

Quote from: am nintenho on March 19, 2007, 08:24:01 PM

I gave this movie a chance.

(Image removed from quote.)

It's shit.

Yeah, I'm gonna go with no.

brawndolicious · « **Reply #156 on:** March 19, 2007, 09:17:15 PM »

Quote from: BrandNew on March 19, 2007, 09:12:31 PM

Yeah, I'm gonna go with no.

you do that taco.

TakingBackSunday · « **Reply #157 on:** March 19, 2007, 10:10:08 PM »

Quote from: am nintenho on March 19, 2007, 09:17:15 PM

Quote from: BrandNew on March 19, 2007, 09:12:31 PM
Yeah, I'm gonna go with no.
you do that taco.

It's wonderful to be gay at the moment!

brawndolicious · « **Reply #158 on:** March 19, 2007, 10:17:02 PM »

Quote from: BrandNew on March 19, 2007, 10:10:08 PM

It's wonderful to be gay at the moment!

Seriously, I don't get the praise Casino Royale gets.

All bond movies are either above-average or they suck. As a bond movie, it sucked. Apparantly making the "bond look" a zoolander look is good.

Ichirou · « **Reply #159 on:** March 19, 2007, 10:19:22 PM »

Quote from: am nintenho on March 19, 2007, 10:17:02 PM

Quote from: BrandNew on March 19, 2007, 10:10:08 PM
It's wonderful to be gay at the moment!
Seriously, I don't get the praise Casino Royale gets.

All bond movies are either above-average or they suck. As a bond movie, it sucked. Apparantly making the "bond look" a zoolander look is good.

Casino Royale was a really cool film, dude. I mean, not just as a Bond movie - it's just a really cool movie.

What Bond movies do YOU think are above average?

TakingBackSunday · « **Reply #160 on:** March 19, 2007, 10:21:28 PM »

People just don't realize (I'm now reading the original novel lol) that Casino Royale is the most faithful film to the whole series of novels. That's why it's good.

brawndolicious · « **Reply #161 on:** March 19, 2007, 10:27:41 PM »

I personally didn't like the novels and I liked:

Goldeneye and that's all I can remember.

TakingBackSunday · « **Reply #162 on:** March 19, 2007, 10:39:23 PM »

Quote from: am nintenho on March 19, 2007, 10:27:41 PM

I personally didn't like the novels and I liked:

Goldeneye and that's all I can remember.

Well then I'm forgetting you ever posted in this thread!

brawndolicious · « **Reply #163 on:** March 19, 2007, 10:51:04 PM »

Quote from: BrandNew on March 19, 2007, 10:39:23 PM

Well then I'm forgetting you ever posted in this thread!

Honestly, I don't remember the fucking titles!

It just didn't feel like a bond movie to me. I thin reanimated on OA summed it up the best when he said it felt too much like bourne.

TakingBackSunday · « **Reply #164 on:** March 19, 2007, 10:56:19 PM »

Honestly, I'm fine with that. From reading half of Casino Royale, it does indeed seem to edge the line more towards a Bourne type of story than a campy Goldfinger-type Bond flick. I want it to stay that way. The first two Bond films and Casino Royale seem to be the best because they are sooo much less corny.

brawndolicious · « **Reply #165 on:** March 19, 2007, 10:59:04 PM »

But you have to consider that it wasn't being like the first couple movie that made this series live for so long...

Casino Royale seems to be liked because it tries to resurrect Bond by at least trying not to have a crappy storyline and a lot of people liked that (I personally was not a fan of the plot twists) but how long can they keep doing that?

TakingBackSunday · « **Reply #166 on:** March 19, 2007, 11:04:52 PM »

As long as they have writers thats want to capitalize on THAT certain success and don't want to Golfinger the next one up. And get a director who does the same. There are two vital parts of the Bond film origins: The Terrence Young Part and the Guy Hamilton Part. To many Bond fans, Young was the true shaper of the character, and Hamilton was the man who got it to where it is today. Unfortunately, Hamilton was the one who made the series known for its campyness, as awesome as Goldfinger was. With Dr. No and From Russia with Love Young created the two most realistic Bond flicks that to many still hold up as the best. I just want something currently that falls in line with the Young philosphy rather than the Hamilton way.

And I wish Hunt directed another Bond film.

brawndolicious · « **Reply #167 on:** March 19, 2007, 11:09:22 PM »

Maybe if I go into the next bond expecting it to be different I'll appreciate it more but Casino Royale's story never felt it really went anywhere. The plot twists just seemed random. I'd prefer either a so-bad-it's-good story or something very serious.

G The Resurrected · « **Reply #168 on:** March 19, 2007, 11:15:02 PM »

Quote from: am nintenho on March 19, 2007, 08:24:01 PM

I gave this movie a chance.

(Image removed from quote.)

It's shit.

Where the fuck is that scene in the movie? I've seen it several times and not seen that.

brawndolicious · « **Reply #169 on:** March 19, 2007, 11:16:32 PM »

He's talking to M after being fucked up. I don't know.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #170 on:** March 19, 2007, 11:22:58 PM »

I'm pretty sure it's when he goes back to the beach side villa, where the one guy's wife was murdered, shortly after the airport sequence.

G The Resurrected · « **Reply #171 on:** March 19, 2007, 11:23:48 PM »

Oh thats right its just a unusual angle.

Solo · « **Reply #172 on:** March 20, 2007, 06:38:20 AM »

Quote from: am nintenho on March 19, 2007, 10:27:41 PM

I personally didn't like the novels and I liked:

Goldeneye and that's all I can remember.

Goldeneye isn't a Fleming novel. Casino Royale rocks. You do not.

brawndolicious · « **Reply #173 on:** March 20, 2007, 12:59:13 PM »

You suck my dick.

Cheebs · « **Reply #174 on:** March 20, 2007, 01:01:27 PM »

Quote from: am nintenho on March 20, 2007, 12:59:13 PM

You suck my dick.

well he is right there is no goldeneye book in the bond series. It was a movie made from scratch.

brawndolicious · « **Reply #175 on:** March 20, 2007, 01:06:45 PM »

I didn't like Casino Royale that much, mainly because it does a bond movie, which in general are mediocre, wrong. And the story made no sense. WTF was that with the building blowing up at the end?

Vizzys · « **Reply #176 on:** March 20, 2007, 01:52:30 PM »

god youre distinguished mentally-challenged

brawndolicious · « **Reply #177 on:** March 20, 2007, 02:03:22 PM »

Wouldn't I like that if I was distinguished mentally-challenged?

Vizzys · « **Reply #178 on:** March 20, 2007, 02:05:11 PM »

let me explain , those tanks were holding the building up because it was floating on water, they go, the building goes.

brawndolicious · « **Reply #179 on:** March 20, 2007, 02:16:31 PM »

I know that. Why would he blow them up if he's IN THE BUILDING?

News:

Author Topic: Solo, you going to any late night stores at midnight to pick up CASINO ROYALE? (Read 15239 times)