Casino Royale

2006 "Everyone has a past. Every legend has a beginning."
8| 2h24m| PG-13| en| More Info
Released: 17 November 2006 Released
Producted By: Columbia Pictures
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website: https://www.mgm.com/movies/casino-royale-2006
Synopsis

Le Chiffre, a banker to the world's terrorists, is scheduled to participate in a high-stakes poker game in Montenegro, where he intends to use his winnings to establish his financial grip on the terrorist market. M sends Bond—on his maiden mission as a 00 Agent—to attend this game and prevent Le Chiffre from winning. With the help of Vesper Lynd and Felix Leiter, Bond enters the most important poker game in his already dangerous career.

... View More
Stream Online

Stream with Prime Video

Director

Producted By

Columbia Pictures

Trailers & Images

Reviews

theresamgill I love love love the opening to Casino Royale. It's a perfect blend of infusing classic Bond while showing the world hey, this is the new direction we plan on taking this series. Admittedly, Daniel Craig is an unconventional look, but his charm will win you over. The parkour of the action sequence is really fun to watch (and Johnny English Reborn basically spoofs it and it's hilarious), but it's the opening scene that puts this as the best intro. The theme is a good song, not great, but fits well; the animation is clever and works well, and that's what puts "You Know my Name" as the 2nd best theme.It doesn't matter who you are, if you prefer blondes over brunettes, or whatever it may be. Eva Green is the best Bond Girl in the Craig franchise. She brings the wit to match the man in the tux at every step. I'm a fan of Mads Mikkelsen, and he would be the best villain if it weren't for the #1 pick. Judi Dench is a solid choice, and she actually is reprising her role as M from the previous series. Jeffrey Wright also brings quality to the film, so I believe we've settled that the cast works well.As far as story is concerned, there is a lot of good and a little bad. If you have establishing shots of well-known areas, putting title cards to tell you where the characters are currently at is cheap and dubs down the audience; this is something this film avoids even if it's brought into Quantum of Solace solely to make sure that sequel was a disappointment. The point is that you'll almost always see me praise subtlety. That really isn't the case here. I'd probably recommend subtitles actually for this film because details are sometimes given in low voices that's hard to pick up. The plot moves to a new action scene, or the characters suddenly display new motivations; and if you aren't paying attention to everything going on, chances are there will be something confusing. In fact, this was probably around my third viewing of the film and I picked up on new ideas while still being in the dark about others-- there are movies like Inception and The Prestige that work these details and foreshadowing effectively (both obviously Christopher Nolan films), but it's more of an annoyance here. And as we're on the topic of story, the writing and dialogue gets half-credit. The movie is way too choppy, but there are still some great quips:Bond: Vodka-martiniBartender: Shaken or stirred?Bond: Do I look like I give a damn?And my favorite:Vesper (Eva Green): Am I going to have a problem with you, Bond?Bond: No, don't worry. You're not my type.Vesper: Smart?Bond: Single.On a final note for the story, I'm a sucker for well-constructed scenes like the development of the poker hands, and the torture scene is one of the best in any film. The confusion I've been referring to is mainly in the last 30 minutes. I'll say no more than that, but it's kind of hard to put a finger on what the goal was or what went wrong. These closing scenes aren't bad-- the climax is an awesome set-- but I don't believe it works to the degree the movie hopes for. Overall, the cast is all solid, but it's not the film's fault that the #1 pick has a better ensemble; what really brings the film down to the 2 slot is some choppy scenes and a confused plot. And if those are the critiques I have to give it, that should tell you that this really is a good film. It gets my recommendation, and if you're somebody who hasn't seen a Daniel Craig James Bond film, there's no better place to start than here. You can find this review and dozens of others at gillipediamoviereviews.blogspot.com
SimonJack Daniel Craig's premiere as James Bond also marked a revision of the character on film. "Casino Royale" is the first serious production of Ian Fleming's first novel that created agent 007 of the British Secret Service, MI6. Where the tenures of Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan had moved more toward more humor in dialog and scenes, this film returns to the original serious and dark nature of the subject and character. This is James Bond in the beginning. It's Bond in the raw, showing his flaws and weaknesses as well as his quick thinking and physical abilities. And, it shows his struggle with the conflicting clashes of morality, emotion, and cold-hearted facts of duty. This film follows the modern trend of nearly non-stop action with several sequences of harrowing physical action and encounters. And, it has the most daring and harrowing personal pursuit of any film to date. That happens in the opening segment when Bond pursues Mollaka in a chase that tears through crowds and buildings, and leaps from cranes in construction sites. Mollaka is played by Sebastien Foucan, co-founder of parkour, a free-running sport that jumps, dodges and hurtles through urban and commercial settings.Bond falls in love in this segment and loses his wife. In later stories - filmed in the past, reference is sometimes made to his having been married before. Roger Craig provides a more ruggedly handsome Bond, a return to the character as played originally by Sean Connery. It was only natural that in later episodes, Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan would show a much more polished and even sophisticated Bond. In this revival of the character from the start of the series, it wouldn't seem as natural for Craig to have such worldly taste and knowledge yet as to comment on the vintages of wines. That's something that Moore and Brosnan could do so naturally and believably. The production of this film is superb in all aspects. It clearly is the best of all the Bond films - including those that followed to date. Here's my favorite line in the film. Bond says to Vesper, "Why is it people who can't take advice always insist on giving it?"
Tkbn3812 I hadn't watched any Bond movies other than the most recent Spectre, and I decided to go back to Daniel Craig's first outing as Bond back in 2006. Quite honestly, I enjoyed the movie, just not enough.Casino Royale sees James Bond get his 007 status before going on a sinister mission to take down a man running a ''high-stakes poker game'' that has been betting against big world corporations. Honestly, I enjoyed a large part of the film. The first half of the film is enjoyable, quality, smart action that breezes by you spectacularly. I highly praise both the chase in Uganda and especially the airport scene. Daniel Craig plays Bond as a matter-of-fact, smug agent for this half of the movie (and, actually, the entire movie really). It's just the second half of the film that really gets too drawn out and confusing for me. James Bond goes to Montenegro with Vesper Lynd, going to participate in the poker game with Le Chiffre. Everything after this becomes slow and drawn out. Honestly, I would be fine with this slow pacing, except the whole plot felt a bit confusing for me. Maybe I'm just dumb, because this movie got universal acclaim, but it just felt like too much at times for me. That's not to mention that this movie is 2 hours 20 minutes, and for the entire last half hour I was just waiting for the movie to end. The best of the action is over by about the one hour mark in my opinion, and the entire remainder of the movie just feels boring. The little action that is left is, albeit, good, just not enough.Okay, so this movie doesn't need to just be non-stop action; that would be unreasonable. But the casino scene is just boring for me, which was a shame since it takes up a large part of the second half of the movie. Still, I digress; Casino Royale is a good movie. I enjoyed every bit of it, even if not the second half as much as the first half. Daniel Craig shines as James Bond, and the film is visually stunning. I have high hopes for the entire franchise going into the future. Maybe this film didn't wow me as much as it did others, but I still thought it was a good, enjoyable movie.
Johnny H. Casino Royale is a truly fantastic take on the classic British super-spy; and it's THE elixir James needed after the previous mistake that was Die Another Day (2002). And the FABULOUS twist to the whole 'Bond-gun-barrel-opening' sequence is important to the film's actual introduction. We see Bond shoot a guy in a bathroom as the opening credits play before us. And then the kickass song 'You Know My Name' by Chris Cornell plays to motifs heard later throughout the film. And THAT song is probably the most underrated of all the modern Bond songs. And it reflects and honors Bond's return to the big screen in 2006 perfectly. This film is visceral and believable. It's the antithesis of the Roger Moore films and the Pierce Brosnan ones. Daniel Craig is the Bond for the post-9/11 generation!