*** Spoiler ***
He was introduced in the first ten minutes of the film if you were watching carefully.

Apparently not. I missed (or forgot about) that.

I liked it. Craig did a great job, and the script was well done, however it did have an odd structure to it (which is not bad), but agree that the last scene felt a scene too far. The whole audience seemed to sigh in frustration, "another one?"

And I concur with Jim, Bond bleeds, bleeding is good!!!

Dave

It wasn't a negative, just an observation. I agree that it is a welcome change. Brosnan was too much of a pretty boy.

Sorry for chyming in so late on this thread.

What can I add to these already insightful reviews?

I checked it out on the big screen in a new theater with
an excellent sound system. And boy oh boy was it a
fun ride.

Yes, the film drags a teensy bit by the third act, but it
is all worth it.

Like many, I was turned off by the idea of a blonde hair
blue-eyed James Bond, but man oh man does he pull
it off.

**SPOILERS**

A return to the realism of Ian Fleming's original (and first)
James Bond story. There is no "Q" or "Moneypenny," but
these familiar bookmarks have been replaced with a gutsy,
visceral setting that is sure to revitalize this long-withering
franchise...IMHO.

I highly recommend this film.

Mike

P.S. Holy cow! I've become a senior member. Man. Does this
mean retirement is on the horizon?

Hard to believe that "Dr. No" opened over 40 years ago!

The opening scene, where Bond makes the second of his two sanctioned kills, is quite reminiscent of a scene from "Dr. No." In "Dr. No," Bond sets up an ambush, using pillows to simulate himself asleep in a bed, while he sits playing solitaire in a chair behind the door, his Walther with silencer attached close at hand. Sure enough, one of Dr. No's minions, the British chem lab assayer shows up (the same guy who planted the spider in Bond's bedroom earlier), softly opens the door, and shoots repeatedly into the decoy. Bond makes him drop his silenced revolver (a minor technical oversight), makes him sit, and starts questioning him. Bond appears to be inattentive, and the minion pulls the rug on which his revolver landed gradually closer using his heel (surreptitiously, or so he thinks). But, after he reaches down, grabs his revolver and clicks it uselessly twice, Bond says, "That's a (Smith and Wesson) Centennial Airweight, and you've had your five." Then, Bond shoots him, the minion spins and fall face down on the floor, and Bond shoots him again in the spine (making him arch), just to be sure. That scene alone is more coldblooded than Bond appears in many subsequent films and more like Daniel Craig's Bond.

"Casino Royale" is updated, but much truer to Ian Fleming's novel than many previous Bond films, which often seemed only to share a title with a Fleming novel and little of the plot or setting. Of course, the game involved is Texas Hold'em, rather than Chemin de Fer, but that is understandable, given that this is present day and Hold'em is so widely popular and involves such high stakes and the dramatic "I'm all in!"

It is possible that the movie goes on a little too long. The book ends with Bond saying, "the bitch is dead." But, in the book, Vesper commits suicide with an overdose of sleeping pills because she is a KGB double-agent. Still, Bond had to locate and pay back Mr. White, the movie could not have ended any other way.

In summation, this "Casino Royale" is more realistic, while retaining some spectacular aspects, and the special effects are used with far greater discretion than Bond films have seen in years! Craig's acting is so superb that one must overlook some physical characteristics he does not share with Fleming's Bond.

I'm wondering if Fleming was the first to parlay his experience in intelligence into a writing career? He skated pretty close to violating the Official Secrets Act with his plot for "From Russia With Love," but maybe by then he was so well-known that the British government was reluctant to press the point. Clancy seems to have gotten away with it also. Who knows, maybe there is hope for me!

Apparently not. I missed (or forgot about) that.


It wasn't a negative, just an observation. I agree that it is a welcome change. Brosnan was too much of a pretty boy.

Not only does Mr. White introduce Le Chiffre to his African despot depositor, but Mr. White is the guy who shoots Le Chiffre between the eyes on board the ship where he is torturing Bond. Last-scene character introduction? Not hardly! (I heard you was cheap, but not so cheap you wouldn't even pay attention!)

Hard to believe that "Dr. No" opened over 40 years ago!

The opening scene, where Bond makes the second of his two sanctioned kills, is quite reminiscent of a scene from "Dr. No." In "Dr. No," Bond sets up an ambush, using pillows to simulate himself asleep in a bed, while he sits playing solitaire in a chair behind the door, his Walther with silencer attached close at hand. Sure enough, one of Dr. No's minions, the British chem lab assayer shows up (the same guy who planted the spider in Bond's bedroom earlier), softly opens the door, and shoots repeatedly into the decoy. Bond makes him drop his silenced revolver (a minor technical oversight), makes him sit, and starts questioning him. Bond appears to be inattentive, and the minion pulls the rug on which his revolver landed gradually closer using his heel (surreptitiously, or so he thinks). But, after he reaches down, grabs his revolver and clicks it uselessly twice, Bond says, "That's a (Smith and Wesson) Centennial Airweight, and you've had your five."

Firstly, the assayer is not shooting a silenced revolver, it's an auto-loader. I'm not absolutely positive, but it looks like a S&W Model 52 target pistol, which is effectively a Model 39 with a one inch longer barrel and slide, set up to fire 38 Special wad-cutters. The Model 52 holds eight rounds, but he fires six rounds and you'll notice that the gun is in slide-lock.

When he (the assayer) picks up the gun after sliding the rug, the gun is no longer in slide-lock and it clicks once when he pulls the trigger.

Bond actually says, "That's a Smith and Wesson, and you've had your six." He doesn't say "Centennial Airweight," as there was no S&W by that name back then.

Bond also "screws" the silencer onto his Walther PP (pretending to be a PPK) and after the shooting, he pulls the silencer directly off the Walther.

Ken V.

Bond actually says, "That's a Smith and Wesson, and you've had your six." He doesn't say "Centennial Airweight," as there was no S&W by that name back then.

Bond also "screws" the silencer onto his Walther PP (pretending to be a PPK) and after the shooting, he pulls the silencer directly off the Walther.

Ken V.

Dr. No was written in 1958 and Major Boothroyd recommends in the book (and to Fleming earlier by mail, hence his appearance in the novel) that Bond switch to the Walther in 7.65 mm for concealed carry (over the Beretta .25) and the S&W Centennial Airweight for long-range [It only carries five, but when they're gone, somebody's dead. (Words to that effect)]. Don't think Boothroyd would have recommended a revolver that had not been designed yet.

Still, you are right about the dialog from the movie, plus the silencer and slide faux pas.

Dr. No was written in 1958 and Major Boothroyd recommends in the book (and to Fleming earlier by mail, hence his appearance in the novel) that Bond switch to the Walther in 7.65 mm for concealed carry (over the Beretta .25) and the S&W Centennial Airweight for long-range [It only carries five, but when they're gone, somebody's dead. (Words to that effect)]. Don't think Boothroyd would have recommended a revolver that had not been designed yet.

Yep . . . you're right. I was thinking of the modern Model 642 "Centennial AirWeight." The "Centennial Airweight" you mention, was a 5-shot DAO with a grip safety chambered in 38 Spl., produced from 1954 to 1974.

Still, you are right about the dialog from the movie, plus the silencer and slide faux pas.

And it looked like the baddies gun was ejecting a case that was considerably longer than a 9-mm. It sure looked like a 38 Spl. to me.

Ken V.

And it looked like the baddies gun was ejecting a case that was considerably longer than a 9-mm. It sure looked like a 38 Spl. to me.

Ken V.

According to Answers.com, List of James Bond's guns, under Dr. No (film), an FN 1910 is listed. This pistol comes in 7.65 mm (7 in the magazine) or .380
(9-mm kurz, 6 in the magazine). My memory doesn't suggest in what scene he uses it, but the silouette does resemble the Walther PP somewhat. Could this be the pistol he actually used to shoot the assayer/lab manager? We both seem to agree is was not the Walther PPK. Unfortunately, the pistol used by the assayer is not listed, only the ones used by Bond himself. Since S&W is referred to in dialog, and it was a semi-automatic, your judgement is better than mine.

At least, we don't see Bond holding a semi-automatic in one shot and a revolver in the next, as has happened in other films.

According to Answers.com, List of James Bond's guns, under Dr. No (film), an FN 1910 is listed. This pistol comes in 7.65 mm (7 in the magazine) or .380
(9-mm kurz, 6 in the magazine). My memory doesn't suggest in what scene he uses it, but the silouette does resemble the Walther PP somewhat. Could this be the pistol he actually used to shoot the assayer/lab manager? We both seem to agree is was not the Walther PPK. Unfortunately, the pistol used by the assayer is not listed, only the ones used by Bond himself. Since S&W is referred to in dialog, and it was a semi-automatic, your judgement is better than mine.

It looks like a model 52, but I wouldn't swear by it. It doesn't seem to have the high rear sight that the "52" has, but it's definitely an auto-loader, and in one short scene, you can see the case ejecting. It's a long case which could be a 38 Spl., and the only auto of that era (it went into production in 1961) that I know of which fired such a long cartridge was the S&W model 52.

I take that back. Some gunsmiths had converted Colt 1911's which were chambered for 38 Super, to shoot 38 Spl. wadcutters.

Nuts! Now I'm not so sure. Have to see the movie again.

Somebody on the board recently started a thread where he tells of the gun used by Sean Connery in Dr. No, being sold at auction. It definitely was a Walther PP.

At least, we don't see Bond holding a semi-automatic in one shot and a revolver in the next, as has happened in other films.

Are you referring to Raiders Of The Lost Ark? In the fight scene in the bar in Nepal, he shoots his revolver, a Colt 1911, his revolver again, and finally what looks like a Browning Hi-Power. (Or something close to that order.)

Bizarre.

Ken V.

It looks like a model 52, but I wouldn't swear by it. It doesn't seem to have the high rear sight that the "52" has, but it's definitely an auto-loader, and in one short scene, you can see the case ejecting. It's a long case which could be a 38 Spl., and the only auto of that era (it went into production in 1961) that I know of which fired such a long cartridge was the S&W model 52.

I take that back. Some gunsmiths had converted Colt 1911's which were chambered for 38 Super, to shoot 38 Spl. wadcutters.

Nuts! Now I'm not so sure. Have to see the movie again.

Somebody on the board recently started a thread where he tells of the gun used by Sean Connery in Dr. No, being sold at auction. It definitely was a Walther PP.



Are you referring to Raiders Of The Lost Ark? In the fight scene in the bar in Nepal, he shoots his revolver, a Colt 1911, his revolver again, and finally what looks like a Browning Hi-Power. (Or something close to that order.)

Bizarre.

Ken V.

I watched part of "Dr. No" this weekend (on Spike TV), right through the scene where the metallugist meets his downfall. First thing I noticed is that while Bond is screwing on the silencer, there is a close up of his hands. The FN (Fabrique Nationale) emblem is plain on the right-side grip panel. Therefore, the pistol he uses must be an FN 1910, as answers.com stated. It does look a lot like a Walther PP. Bond takes several revolutions to screw the silencer on, but when he takes it off, it looks like maybe a half and then he pulls it free.

The metallurgist fires six shots into the bed and the dialog is just as you said it was, plus how the empty, locked-open pistol recocked itself once he dropped it on the rug (also as you stated).

No Walther PP is listed on answers.com for Dr. No.