IMDb > Casino Royale (2006) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Casino Royale
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Casino Royale More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 5 of 231: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]
Index 2308 reviews in total 

21 out of 32 people found the following review useful:

Waist of Time

1/10
Author: st2006 from United States
25 December 2006

Long, boring, not intelligent at all movie. Strip "James Bond" label from the movie, it will not make C-. It is not the "Bond" movie as we like to enjoy - sharp personalty, little sarcasm, sparks in the yeas of Bond. Craig is just another LAPD detective who happens to speak with the funny accent. Obviously, someone was trying to save a back on Brosanan.

We like all Bond's fantastic tools and toys - you will not see any in this movie. There are 2 sets of fights and a sinking house. They are glued to long pointless dialogs and a card game.

I think, it is the END of Bondina.

Was the above review useful to you?

29 out of 48 people found the following review useful:

Worst Bond Movie Ever

1/10
Author: ckeevil from Canada
12 April 2007

This bond was nothing even close to what the Bond character should be and has always been in the previous movies. I understand that they were trying to show how Bond got started as 007, which could have worked out had it been done properly. Him falling in love was just too much like the movie where he got married only to have his wife killed shortly after. The writers must have been able to come up with something a little more original than that if they tried. They removed Q from the movie again like they tried in the 60's and it was as big a mistake then as it was now. Not nearly enough high tech gadgets in the movie this time, which is another feature that has always been an important part of what makes a James Bond movie a James Bond movie. The real kicker was the end of the movie. It makes you feel like half of the movie is missing, like you need to look for disk 2 in the case. They went a completely different direction with this movie and in my opinion it failed. I feel that this was the worst Bond movie ever, a real let down.!! :(

Was the above review useful to you?

32 out of 54 people found the following review useful:

The Worst Bond Movie Ever

1/10
Author: Pete JDed from United States
24 November 2006

First of all this is a two and a half hour sony commercial. Bond is weak, The movie is boring. I wanted to leave several times. The plot is lossy and the emotional chit chat totally against bond character. The new bond is unappealing and his eyes are digitally enhanced. Even the special effects are not what they used to be. We come to expect more from bond, bond is not some lame superhero with a darker troubled side.

For me Sony has totally ruined bond. One cant only hope this is the last we see of this new bond. A sad day for bond fans everywhere. This really even makes me wish they bring back pierce brosnan. Also the opening scene tough arguably the best scene in the movie is a lot less dramatic the normal for bond.

Was the above review useful to you?

35 out of 60 people found the following review useful:

This isn't a bond film

1/10
Author: otterman62 from surrey, england
22 March 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I am a big Bond fan, and this is the first one that I haven't seen at the cinema since Diamonds are Forever in 1971. I saw the DVD yesterday and what a disappointment.

Firstly the good stuff, the locations are original, which is not easy when the franchise has been going round the world for 40+ years, and the photography is excellent ( the cranes against the ocean during the chase, the colours of the sites around lake como)and Judi Dench is always excellent..... and that's pretty much it.

Now the list of moans Daniel Craig is not my idea of Bond, the publicity machine seems to have gone into overdrive about Mr Craig, but nobody that i know who has personally seen the film liked it or him. Craig at times looks more like a down and out rather than a suave agent. He was good in Layer Cake but has zero charisma in this The basic plot (Bond takes on financier for international terrorism) is a good start but has numerous stupid ideas that spoil it for example why would Bond break into M's flat rather than just talk to her in her office? The chronology of the film is all wrong, it clearly shows it's set in 2006 but disregards all his other background, for me this didn't work. the film then drifts off into the overlong card game, with the ridiculous defibrillator scene The villain is rubbish - his "gadget" is an asthma inhaler! my mum could take him out and she's 81! Bond is fooled by everyone, the women, the villain, the bloke who is meant to be helping him, he has to rescued by the bad guys! he gets beaten up loads as well and he gets tortured, and in an embarrassing way, Connery would have bitten through the ropes and killed the guy with the chair! The girls aren't memorable enough some of the lines are pathetic, one is about "if all that was left of you was your hat(?) and your little finger".....embarrassing. Personally I want to go to see escapist Bond, charming the ladies, killing the baddies, always being one step ahead, and always having something witty to say. If I wanted the so called depressing realism I'd look in the mirror. Bottom Line ( no pun intended after the reference to the torture scene)if you didn't have Judi Dench in this, it could pass as just another Bourne/transporter/crank type of average action movie. This is a poor addition to the Bond series. Very disappointing.I hope that they ensure the people who wrote this, don't have anything to do with the next one.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 19 people found the following review useful:

Decent, but definitely NOT a BOND movie.

1/10
Author: dannytomasso from Canada
26 August 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Let me try an analogy: you go to MacDonald and they have no burgers, they serve no fries, no Coke, they have no mustard or ketchup. In fact they only serve Vegan food, they are dressed in black and green uniforms and the sign in front of the building is a monkey!!! But they are very proud of their MacDonald store!!! Have the producers lost the plot? Do they and the many commentators on this site understand the notion of a "brand" or the "recipe" of a Bond movie? So many commentators here are making "intellectual" commentaries praising this movie and I would agree with quite a few of them IF this would be a generic action movie, but this is supposed to be a Bond movie. How can so many people miss this point? How about a remake of Romeo and Juliet without Romeo and Juliet, without any love story and I'll name the movie Seinfeld? Maybe it would be a good movie, but not a Romeo and Juliet!!!! How about the totally politically correct, perfectly in tune with the UK policy these days, tone of the movie? They started a few movies ago when they appointed a woman for the role of M and now James Bond doesn't flirt with women any more, he is not witty any more, he refuses random sex, he falls in love with the most banal woman in town, he cries like a girl, he crashes his Aston Martin like a beginner in about 30 seconds without being chased by anyone and he runs out of money???? James Bond broke? And people still insist that this movie is a Bond movie? What is this, mass brain washing? James Bond is a chauvinistic, flirtatious, macho, heterosexual man, a modern Don Juan combined with a modern D'Artagnan, with a great love for beautiful women (not blah women), for the best cars, for the best gadgets, that travels the world in the most exotic destinations without concern for money, he's always dressed top notch, he likes the best things in life, best cigars, best drinks, he's extremely quick and witty and flirtatious in his conversations etc. That is the James Bond that I and many like myself would love to see again and unfortunately, Daniel Craig is not him. Although a nice guy and an accomplished actor, he is not James Bond, he's just too rough. Hugh Laurie would be a better Bond, Hugh Grant would be a better Bond and Clive Owen would probably be the best Bond of all times if only Barbara Brocolli would stop messing around and make great BOND movies again.

Was the above review useful to you?

18 out of 27 people found the following review useful:

Bond franchise is dead and dollar business only

1/10
Author: kestanafout from London, England
15 December 2006

Well, no true bond fan can love what it has became. It is not Craig's fault, but the whole thing.

Where has gone the nostalgia associated with the series, the fine humor, the epic/classic soundtrack, the cool pace of romanticism and classic action, etc .... Too much sterile noise, stunts, runs, ... it is the average Hollywood action movie and absolutely nothing else. It could be MI 4 or XXX 3 ... Technology and noise are not movies subjects. Is it made only for Americans and no culture background people ? Boring desolation for 30+ old people out there in the world, better watch Chuk Norris on TV for free. Will we remember this movie in many years, as we do for Moore and Connery ? No.

Was the above review useful to you?

21 out of 33 people found the following review useful:

Casino Royale & Daniel Craig STINKS MAJOR!

1/10
Author: pax910 from United States
2 December 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I want to give this movie a -100 ... but 1 is the lowest score I can give ... so.... What a WASTE of my money. This movie is beyond awful ... it STUNK to HIGH HEAVEN!

The WORST BOND Movie after Die Another Day and Halle Barry crappy casting!

1) Daniel Craig ... he is the WORST Bond ever casted ... the guy looks Phony and Acts Phony ... sorry correction ... Daniel Craig CAN NOT ACT!!!

2) James Bond supposed to be a Gentleman ... since when James Bond calls his women "Bitches"!?!?!?

3) This Bond movie stinked as a whole ... there was hardly any suspense like the good old Bond movies used to have

4) A Ford for Bond's car in 2006 ... come on give me a damn break!

5) And the best gadget they had was a slide out Tray from the Dashboard! Get Real!!!

6) Starting Music STINKS ... was nothing like what James Bond movies are known for … or are the Standard music …

7) Starting Animations was not even anything close to what a Bond Movie supposed to be … what the heck was the Producer, Screen-writer or Director thinking about … AND, whose big idea was the Black & White Crap … so the speak flash-backs all about … it STINKS to high heaven …

8) I am getting TIRED of "Judi Dench" as "M" ... she was not able to carry it before ... and even more so ... now ... get rid of the witch ... PLEASE lets forget about politically correct B.S. and make a decent BOND Movie ...

9) Also, why would the Director think it is SMART or SEXY to start the movie by zooming in some "M" Judi Dench's wrinkly and sagging Breasts ... who the hell wanted to get a shot of Dench's pruned up chest ... yuckkkkkkkk!!!

Bottom Line ... This CASINO ROYALE needs to go to the TRASH CAN! And the Producer, Director ... FIRED!

Was the above review useful to you?

30 out of 51 people found the following review useful:

total crap

1/10
Author: alex (doorsscorpywag) from United Kingdom
26 November 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

What in the name of God was this drivel all about? Let's face it Bond was pretty daft in the 60s but nowadays he's as relevant as Rickets. Where do they get the idiots from who wrote the script for this nonsense..............the book was lousy and the film laughable.......I could not make head nor tale of it and still don't know who the baddie was and am even less interested. So my government thinks the best way to defeat terrorism is to play cards with it....can't wait to see Blair and Bush make up a 3 card brag school with Bin Laden and the Taleban............ having worked on building sites for over 30 years I laughed my arce off at the opening sequence as Bond and Spiderman fought it out on off tower cranes and bouncing around on the neatest building site on the planet without snagging themselves on some junk left lying around by a careless navvy........who on Earth writes this garbage. The plot...and I use the word very very loosely...... was too stupid to even care about and the acting worse.......I like daniel craig but he's a bit silly as Bond....nobody can emulate ole Sean here and at least he got a couple of decent story lines in the 60s........what next I wonder a remake where Bond has to play Bowls with Bloefeld or maybe Snakes & Ladders with Largo......Bond has been pretty boring since the 70s but this cobblers was so pitifully dull that I would rather watch Spielbergs abysmal remake of War of the Worlds again.....worst movie of 2006 and lets hope that 'Bond Is Back' becomes a term we never hear again in the 21st century........Yeah I know ......as long as Hollywood is devoid of ideas and people are dumb enough to heap praise on such utter crap as this Dan will be lining up in 2008 with another pointless 2 hours of banal mayhem and martinis....shaken of course not stirred.....

Was the above review useful to you?

31 out of 53 people found the following review useful:

New Bond - it's awful !

1/10
Author: jm-116 from United Kingdom
25 November 2006

Oh my god - how bad is the new bond film

It's quite possibly one of the worst films I've ever seen - I truly wanted to leave the cinema.

I should of left during the opening credits - where were the naked female silhouettes ? The bond song ain't great either, despite having Chris Cornell singing it (ex Soundgarden and Audioslave)

OK I'll be fair - the first 80 mins are pretty good - then it's seems that the exec producer took over the script writing and decided to write another film and a lame (so very lame) love interest - obviously deciding that they had to make some type of chick flick appeal. The story just goes totally off track - it's as 30mins of the film was meant to have been left on the cutting room floor, but somehow it stayed in. And the love interest, was so much better done in "On Her Majesty's Secret Service"

Craig is good (best bond for a long time) but the supporting cast is really poor. Eva Green is dreadful how did she get cast ? I've never got Judy Dench as M - wasn't a good time to replace her with someone that really could fill the shoes of Bernard Lee (the original M)

Continuity was pretty bad and some really slack filming eg it's pouring with rain but it's bright sunshine (happens twice in the film) The jungle scene is shot on the backlot at pinewood - complete with Silver birch trees!

Just how difficult can it be to make a good bond film !!

Was the above review useful to you?

35 out of 61 people found the following review useful:

Nightmare for James Bond

1/10
Author: marinehenry from Beijing, China
18 December 2006

Stop it!!!! I've watched all 20 James Bond Movies. For each one, I have watched more than 20 times. Even there are actors like George Lazenby, it still fits the Bond formula. But this one, Hell, No. No matter what kind storyline we have, we gotta look into the actor who plays Bond. Daniel Craig??? No way! I'd rather have Hugh Jackman, Clive Owan, OR Jason Connery, son of Sean, who also played Ian Flemming in SPYMAKER(1990) and Casablanca Express (1989), Bullet to Beijing (1997). Even Tom Cruise can do better than this Mr. Craig. Now, the storyline. When we talk about James Bond, we do not want a realistic tough guy. We want a legendary suave spy. Girls, Violence, Gadgetry. It gotta follow the certain formula even though we know its not for real. Pre-Title sequence, then the opening, debriefing, Q-Branch, lovely babes, easily turn the girl who works for Bad guy working for Bond. Then the girl is killed. Afterwards, Bond get the job done with style. Thats James Bond Movie. This Casino Royale is just a 2nd Rate action movie, like Dolph's upcoming movie DIAMOND DOG.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 5 of 231: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history