my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews   » Casino Royale 2006 (Page 4)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5

Author Topic: Casino Royale 2006 Jennifer Pan THE JEN! Posts: 1219 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: Nov 2003 posted 02-12-2007 02:12 AM                        This is the first Bond film that I have actually seen the whole way through. I have only caught bits and pieces from previous films. I'd have to say that I really enjoyed it. It felt slow in a lot of scenes but Daniel is so hot it didn't matter. The lead actress was just plain annoying but she made up for it in the last reel or so. I was expecting more action, just a tad more... but oh well its still worth watching. I look forward to seeing more Bond films in the future, as long as they have Daniel starring them. out of 5  |  IP: Logged Tony L. Hernandez Expert Film Handler Posts: 158 From: Windsor, CO, USA Registered: Dec 2005 posted 02-12-2007 02:25 AM                     I am with Jenifer. Its the first Bond flick I ever saw the whole way thru. Daniel was hot considering his age but the other actors and actress' were kinda lackluster in their performances. I dunno, Bond films are a little too chauvinistic for my taste. It was entertaining and by no means boring but I am not hard to please (there are only 2 movies I have ever seen in my life that I actually disliked). It also does not help that my ex was crazy about James Bond and I would have to listen to him rattle on and on about thoes damn films so even the title makes me think of my less than wonderful ex. The only reason I ever even saw it is cause it was part of a weekly film series at a performing arts center where I am trying to get the manager to let me in as a projectionist....  |  IP: Logged Mike Schindler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1039 From: Oak Park, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 02-12-2007 07:51 AM                     Tony, what are the 2 movies you disliked?  |  IP: Logged Tony L. Hernandez Expert Film Handler Posts: 158 From: Windsor, CO, USA Registered: Dec 2005 posted 02-12-2007 12:16 PM                     "Man on Fire"...I hated this one...for some reason, I found the violence VERY disturbing...I walked out of the theater for it. and the whole LOTR trilogy just bored me greatly. Nothing negative about those other than that...  |  IP: Logged Jennifer Pan THE JEN! Posts: 1219 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: Nov 2003 posted 02-12-2007 11:34 PM                        I walked out on Man On Fire as well. It was a screening at my old job and I walked out about 15 minutes into it.  |  IP: Logged Michael Schaffer "Where is the Boardwalk Hotel?" Posts: 4143 From: Boston, MA Registered: Apr 2002 posted 02-15-2007 02:41 AM                        I liked "Man On Fire" a lot. Actually, I watched that twice. I liked the non-Hollywood over-the-hill anti-hero not-continuously-grinning character Washington played ("like a big sad bear" in the words of the little girl), and I liked that SPOILER the movie doesn't have a "happy end".  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 03-18-2007 05:23 AM                        Free rentals from the high-class Blockbuster chain of video stores enabled me to view this on DVD this fine evening. I must say that this seems the same as every other James Bond movie, only different. Daniel Craig isn't too bothersome, but why the hell does Judi Dench keep popping up in these movies? Somebody needs to tell her that nobody likes her and maybe she'll stay home next time. Whore. The plot was OK. Actually I didn't really care about the plot until it finally started, nearly an hour or so into the movie. [SPOILERS!!! If you don't like spoilers, don't read!] I loved the first hour which was mostly action and stuff. That was good. Then it is about some fucked-up boring ass poker game. Who plays poker like this? Mentally deficient people, maybe. Real men don't play cards. Real men play Pokemon. The editing in this sequence pissed me off. Here we are, and 007 comes back to the table for the first time after MURDERING people because they were not of his race, and ol' drippy eye says "You changed your shirt Mr. Bond. WTF?" Then it immediately cuts to brain-numbing scene of 007 and his bitch sitting in the shower fully clothed for no reason whatsoever. Then it immediately cuts back to the poker game where everyone is all dry and shit. WHAT. THE. FUCK? I hope whoever made the decision to include that scene hits an extra red light on the way home from work next Wednesday. And then maybe while he/she is sitting at the light, they can get arrested for editing while retarded. For the next 4 or 5 hours we watch this lame ass poker game. Gee, I was so surprised at who won! Then we finally get to some action scenes, but they are all half-assed compared to the first hour with no running up the sides of buildings and the like. Also, why were there no space shuttles in this movie like other James Bond flicks? Unacceptable. The car wreck was really cool when he rolled that Ass-ton or whatever it was (I really don't give a shit about car makes and models). The ending was pretty stupid, but overall I'd say it was worth watching at least once. out of 5.  |  IP: Logged Michael Schaffer "Where is the Boardwalk Hotel?" Posts: 4143 From: Boston, MA Registered: Apr 2002 posted 03-18-2007 05:42 AM                        quote: Joe Redifer The editing in this sequence pissed me off. Here we are, and 007 comes back to the table for the first time after MURDERING people because they were not of his race, and ol' drippy eye says "You changed your shirt Mr. Bond. WTF?" Then it immediately cuts to brain-numbing scene of 007 and his bitch sitting in the shower fully clothed for no reason whatsoever. Then it immediately cuts back to the poker game where everyone is all dry and shit. WHAT. THE. FUCK? The "shower scene" is a flashback. It happened after he killed the two agents. Then he changed his shirt (and everything else, too, I guess, and blow-dryed his hair) and went back to the game. Is a swayze a point or a minus point?  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 03-18-2007 05:54 AM                        That was the shittiest flashback I've ever scene, and completely unnecessary. Why didn't the blood wash off in the shower?  |  IP: Logged Mike Schindler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1039 From: Oak Park, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 03-18-2007 12:39 PM                     quote: Joe Redifer Actually I didn't really care about the plot until it finally started, nearly an hour or so into the movie. It's funny you should say that because in the book, all that stuff in the beginning is just back story which is summed up in about a page. quote: Michael Schaffer The "shower scene" is a flashback. I was under the impression that it was the next break in the poker game. If it's not a flashback, it still feels too rushed. But if it is a flashback, then it doesn't make any sense, structurally.  |  IP: Logged Mike Heenan Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1896 From: Scottsdale, AZ, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 03-18-2007 01:10 PM                     Joe's review cannot exist in this forum as the film has left theaters and is now on DVD, so therefore Joe must be severely punished by watching 24 hrs of poker with no interruption or bathroom breaks.  |  IP: Logged Mike Schindler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1039 From: Oak Park, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 03-18-2007 01:44 PM                     It's still playing at the Brew & View here in Chicago.  |  IP: Logged Mike Heenan Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1896 From: Scottsdale, AZ, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 03-18-2007 01:55 PM                     Well it's on DVD and he reviewed it from a DVD so...  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 03-18-2007 06:06 PM                        But this is the "Movie Reviews" forum, not "Movies viewed at Movie Theaters Reviews" forum. I watch all of my movies on DVD because the technical presentation is better than any theater here in this town. Sure, I may be restricted to wimpy 480p right now, but the sound is much better than any theater here.  |  IP: Logged Mike Heenan Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1896 From: Scottsdale, AZ, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 03-18-2007 06:23 PM                     To quote this Forums subtitle: See what "reel" people have to say about the movies currently in theatrical run. (No video reviews please. See next forum.)  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.