AeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 18904 posts, RR: 64 Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1558 times:
DeltaGator From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 6341 posts, RR: 16 Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1536 times:
I heard he wouldn't be driving an Aston Martin in the movie but instead some sort of Ford. Seeing how AM is now owned by Ford perhaps it was the media screwing things up again like calling planes an Boeing Airbus 747.
"If you can't delight in the misery of others then you don't deserve to be a college football fan."
YOWza From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 4781 posts, RR: 17 Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1518 times:
Looks wicked I'll be seeing that the day it comes out (or before ) for sure. BTW was any part of this shot in Dubai? A glimpse of somewhere in Deira seems to be in that trailer, or it could just be my imagination.
Airwave From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1117 posts, RR: 3 Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1475 times:
Geez that is one big-a$$ trailer--thanks for holding up my system resources, lol. Not that it wasn't worth it. Eva Green as Vesper Lynd = über-Bond Girl.
Definitely cool how it starts in b/w--gives the feel that the franchise is going back to its roots, as it were. Also, I loved how the 007 logo segues to become part of the "Casino Royale" titles--very very cool. Does anyone remember the "Matrix" and "Batman Begins" trailers? This one gives off that same sort of feeling of grit and venture, IMHO.
Quoting YOWza (Reply 6): BTW was any part of this shot in Dubai?
Nope, they shot in South Africa, though, as well as Italy and Prague. That's all the location shooting I remember (save for stuff done in England, of course).
Airwave
Edit: I wanted to add that after watching it again, it seems to me that one or two of the shots look like they were done specifically for trailers and associated media. The best example is the zoom-across-the-table-to-Bond shot there at the end.
[Edited 2006-05-05 00:42:22]
When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
MSYtristar From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 6242 posts, RR: 51 Reply 10, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1433 times:
It looks like this one is getting "back to the basics". No stupid invisible cars like the one in Die Another Day. Just from the trailer it looks like the best one since Goldeneye.
Thom@s From Norway, joined Oct 2000, 11949 posts, RR: 50 Reply 16, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1373 times:
Bond movies have been more or less crap since they tried to follow up after Goldeneye... And I don't think I'll ever consider this new guy to "be James Bond". But I'll probably watch the movie sometime... though not in a cinema.
Thom@s
"If guns don't kill people, people kill people - does that mean toasters don't toast toast, toast toast toast?"
As much as I thought he was the consummate Bond--not necessarily the *best* Bond, mind you--he *has* gotten a bit too old for it. It's like Harrison Ford returning as Indiana Jones--not the greatest idea. Not only that, but we've seen Brosnan carry on his Bond schtick to other films as well, which dilutes the novelty of it, I think.
Quoting Thom@s (Reply 16): Bond movies have been more or less crap since they tried to follow up after Goldeneye
Very true. But I think it was more because of an ever-escalating use of (and dependence on) gadgetry and pithy humor (why else bring in an ex-Parrot...er...*Python* for the new Quartermaster?) than because of any intrinsic plot exaggerations. I thought, by and large, the plots of TND, TWINE, and DAD were believable within the realm of the Bond universe; but the more you zoom in, the less the characters, gadgets, &c stood up.
Of course, without global enemy superpowers (or their remnants) or supervillians to fight, and an ever-escalating PC front, what is there left for Bond to fight that is current and relevant?
Airwave
When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
Slider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6518 posts, RR: 37 Reply 18, posted (7 years 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1329 times:
Quoting Airwave (Reply 17): But I think it was more because of an ever-escalating use of (and dependence on) gadgetry and pithy humor (why else bring in an ex-Parrot...er...*Python* Silly for the new Quartermaster?) than because of any intrinsic plot exaggerations.
I'm a big Bond fan, but you also have to realize that ALL the 007 films have some element of hokey campiness in them. It's hardly a new phenomenon.
Personally, I don't care for this new Bond, but I'll probably see it nonetheless.
FXramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7029 posts, RR: 93 Reply 24, posted (7 years 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1293 times:
Sean Connery and Roger Moore both made Bond films late in their film career, and the pictures were highly successful for the time.
25 LawrenceMck: Casino Royale looks a lot better than I was expecting, so does the new bond, he fits in perfectly, I still prefere Pierce Brosnan though. Lawrence
26 AirPacific747: wrong. It was designed by a Danish car designer named Henrik Fisker also, the bad guy in Casino Royale is a famous danish actor. [Edited 2006-05-06 2
27 SW733: Definitely looks better than I expected. I remember my uncle, a huge 007 fan, telling me the new Bond was going to be more physical and brutal, and it
28 Homer71: As stated in another thread, the infamous torture scene from the novel will be in the movie, so, yes, definitely more brutal
29 Airwave: Which is fine by me. As amusing as John Cleese was as "R" and then "Q", I'd rather have Desmond Llewelyn than Cleese and no Q if no Llewelyn. Besides