11 replies on “Casino Royale Teaser”

  1. GrimSean says:

    He just doesn’t look right
    Am I the only person who thinks the new guy looks more like a villain than a hero?

    And is this supposed to be a prequel? What’s this ‘promotion’ stuff the Dame was talking about?

    • theangrymob says:

      Re: He just doesn’t look right

      Am I the only person who thinks the new guy looks more like a villain than a hero?

      And is this supposed to be a prequel? What’s this ‘promotion’ stuff the Dame was talking about?

      Looking at the plot summary on IMDB, it looks like it may be a prequel of sorts. Maybe even a restart ala Batman Begins.

      • AceCaseOR says:

        Re: He just doesn’t look right

        Looking at the plot summary on IMDB, it looks like it may be a prequel of sorts. Maybe even a restart ala Batman Begins.

        Texas Hold ‘Em and not baccarat? What’s up with that? One of the constant things that have not generally changed with 007 through all the actors are:

          [*]He drinks Vodka Martinis, shaken, not stirred.
          [*]His gun of choice is made by Walther, even if it isn’t a PPK.
          [*]His card game of choice is baccarat. Not blackjack, not poker, not faro, but baccarat.

        I’m still going to watch the movie, and definitely try to watch it in theaters (I have yet to see a Bond film in theaters). However, my expectations are lowered.

        • Antti Helin says:

          Re: He just doesn’t look right
          The change to Hold’em is pretty understandable, however. Joe Sixpack, or me for that matter, has no idea how to play Baccarat. Making for good film with a Baccarat game as a part of the plot won’t work. However just about everyone knows how to play Texas Hold’em, nowadays. Hold’em will also probably allow for pretty interesting scenes. Baccarat would also, I suspect, but everyone would have to be taught how to play it…

          • y42 says:

            Re: He just doesn’t look right

            The change to Hold’em is pretty understandable, however. Joe Sixpack, or me for that matter, has no idea how to play Baccarat.

            Yay! A dummed down Bond! Just what we needed!

            *sigh*

          • choochus says:

            Re: He just doesn’t look right

            The change to Hold’em is pretty understandable, however. Joe Sixpack, or me for that matter, has no idea how to play Baccarat. Making for good film with a Baccarat game as a part of the plot won’t work.

            I thought that was always the point of him being expert at Baccarat. The rules are so complicated that hardly anybody knows how to play it which makes the game (and 007) sophisticated.

            I think that you can be even more mystified by his expertise from a game that you don’t understand – as long as the other characters on screen look like they DO understand it, and are complely amazed by his abilities.

            • GrimSean says:

              Re: He just doesn’t look right

              The change to Hold’em is pretty understandable, however. Joe Sixpack, or me for that matter, has no idea how to play Baccarat. Making for good film with a Baccarat game as a part of the plot won’t work.

              I thought that was always the point of him being expert at Baccarat. The rules are so complicated that hardly anybody knows how to play it which makes the game (and 007) sophisticated.

              I think that you can be even more mystified by his expertise from a game that you don’t understand – as long as the other characters on screen look like they DO understand it, and are complely amazed by his abilities.

              You know, I don’t play Baccarat or Hold’em (I only play Euchre and Blackjack), but I’m more impressed by those that can play Baccarat (Joe Sixpack, on the other hand, irritates me).

              I’ll still be there in November; I just hope I’ll enjoy it. The trailer really reminds me of the first Transporter movie for some reason, and I enjoyed that movie because it was Bond-light. Making an actual Bond movie Bond-light? I’m not sure if that can work.

          • Crazy Monkey says:

            Re: He just doesn’t look right
            Baccarat’s bloody simple – you’re betting on whether the banker or player will hit 9 first, or tie. Even money on the first two, 8-1 on the tie.

            One of the things that’s always bothered me about it is that there is no real way to be ‘good’ at it. It’s a straight odds proposition, and the house always wins. This is also one of the things I like about it; Bond being good at it makes him magic.

            Contrasted with poker, which is played against the other players, with the house taking a cut. There is skill in knowing the odds that your hand is the best, and betting accordingly, and in reading your fellow players betting patterns and tells. It is possible to be good enough at it to make a living, without cheating. So it’s more realistic, but less magic, for it to be Bond’s game.

            I haven’t seen the trailer yet. Do they make it clear that it is his preferred game, and not just something he’s playing as part of a cover, or some other goal?

    • J_W_W says:

      Re: He just doesn’t look right

      Am I the only person who thinks the new guy looks more like a villain than a hero?

      And is this supposed to be a prequel? What’s this ‘promotion’ stuff the Dame was talking about?

      No, you’re not. I was a big fan of Remington Steele, errr Pierce in the role. This new guy doesn’t look quite right for the role.

    • chad says:

      Re: He just doesn’t look right

      And is this supposed to be a prequel?

      Yes, it is a prequel. It covers how he attains double-0 status and gets his license to kill.

      • ViperDriver says:

        Re: He just doesn’t look right

        And is this supposed to be a prequel?

        Yes, it is a prequel. It covers how he attains double-0 status and gets his license to kill.

        I know that given the other…issues with this movie this one shouldn’t bother me that much, but it does. How can they have Judi Dench playing M, promoting Bond to his 007 role, when she’s been seen taking over the role of M with Brosnan playing Bond? They *used* to explicitly address continuity issues regarding who plays M (M and Bond had a brief discussion re: ‘my predecessor’, preferred drinks, gender, etc). Either now they don’t and just don’t care- or worse; now they’re just going to tell us that ‘James Bond’ is a ‘role’ just like ‘M’ is.

        I’m not sure which would piss me off more. But both annoy me a lot.

Comments are closed.