Casino Royale – review (9/10)

Daniel Craig is Bond, James Bond in Casino Royale

Casino Royale

Daniel Craig is soooo hot.

I didn’t write that. Did I just write that?

This is the first Bond film that is more interesting for women than for men. Gosh, where shall I start.
It’s action from start to finish, but there is space for drama too.
There are some enormously witty one liners and there surely is humour too.
Daniel Craig has the world’s most beautiful blue eyes. (Steady now).
There are some moments where I was close to crying, yes real drama in a Bond film.
Daniel Craig is a truly fantastic actor, who is the first to put real character in the Bond character.
Danish hunk Mads Mikkelsen is as cold as ice as villain Le Chiffre. It’s great to see him in a big film like this.
Jesper Christensen (also a great Danish actor and also playing a baddy) is in it too.
Daniel Craig has a truly gorgeous body (stop it, now!)

Both Mads Mikkelsen and Daniel Craig are not beautiful in the typical American actor sense of the word. They both have some very characteristic faces, and are very interesting to watch. (Watch Mads’ lips). Pleasing for the eye, that is.
Let’s not forget to mention the always delightful Judi Dench as M.
But don’t expect Moneypenny, Q or loads of gadgets, they are gone.
Which is for the better, as there is more space for character development.
It’s a long film : 2 hours and 24 minutes.
The fact that you can mention the word character development in a piece of writing about a Bond film is the reason why this is a great film.
That and Daniel Craig’s blue eyes.
I’m sold.

Go see it for Daniel Craig, ladies.
And for the guys, there is always the Aston Martin, sexy mobile phones and a truly beautiful Bond girl.

Now, where is my Wodka Martini.

Shaken or stirred?
Do I look like I give a damn?

14 thoughts to “Casino Royale – review (9/10)”

  1. It really is a worthwhile film. I saw it together with my colleagues, and most of us want to see it again. It’s absolutely great.

    Only a week to wait ’til it gets to Portugal, something to look forward to!

    @Paul: I hadn’t realized what this name meant until you mentioned it, brilliant name for a poker player indeed. (It is indeed from the novel)

  2. I can’t wait to see the movie, though I think 2 hours and 24 minutes is quite long for a Bond-movie. It is supposed to play before ‘Dr. No’, so why did they cast Dame Judy Dench as ‘M’ ? Don’t get me wrong, Judy is a hell of an actress, but I think they should have asked someone else for the job.
    Every ‘new’ Bond has his own charmes. But for me there is only one real James Bond and that is Sean Connery but I don’t think he could be persuaded to become JB ones more.

  3. @Pedro
    2 h 24 is definitely not too long for this movie.
    Yes you can always nag about things like why did they cast Judy Dench as ‘M’, well their answer was – if you can get Judi Dench as M you would be really stupid not to cast her. I agree on that one. She is great in this one.

    You could also nag about the fact that this film is situated in present time (2006) which doesn’t fit either if this is supposed to be the first Bond movie. And that Daniel has blond hair.

    Time to stop nagging, including the “Sean C. is the one and only Bond” because Daniel Craig is going to blow everybody away with his excellent acting, and people won’t even remember Sean Connery having played Bond after this one. That was in a previous century, this is now, time to move on.

    Sorry, I got carried away a bit.

  4. Hmmmmmmm…zucht ! He’s soooo hot. I actually posted that on my Hyve today hahaha.
    Can’t wait to see Daniel, sorry, the movie ;o)

  5. I don’t mind you got carried away. Everyone has a right to his own opinion.
    It looks like DC has turned the Bond-movie into a chick flick.

  6. I really want to see this but how can I say this to a family of three men when I have always moaned when they watch all the old Bond movies on TV. How am I going to explain this away………..

  7. Well neither of my teens would be seen dead at the cinema with me and my husband hasn’t set foot in a cinema since Jurassic Park (the movie, not the period but then again…) so I shall have to find a pal to ogle Daniel with;)

  8. “to ogle” what a beautiful expression, I hadn’t heard about it until now. I ogle a lot. But I suggest you go with a girl pal. Men probably won’t ogle that much at Daniel.

  9. Oh, ogling is a good old British tradition!LOL
    My usual film buddy hates violence though, so she won’t go and the other one is in the States at the moment so I might have to wait for the blue trunks experience:)

Comments are closed.