Originally Posted by aphant
I liked Casino Royale. The previous Bond film had a satelite made of diamonds that could shoot lasers, and a car that could turn invisible. Oh, and the villians also had tech that countered the invisible car's invisibility. Like, why bother having an invisible car if they have stuff to detect it? The last few Bond films were like this too, where Bond has this cool gadget that he can't use because somehow the bad guys have counter measures for those cool gadgets, or he gets a useless gadget that ends up being able to turn the tide of a gun fight. Q branch was clearly run by psychics and at the same time infiltrated with enemy spies.

Casino Royale may not have had very many action scenes, but the ones that where there didn't rely on deus ex machina. Made the world of Bond seem much more real. That, and there weren't super contraptions setup to kill Bond in some extravagant fashion that he ultimately ends up escaping from. Hey, bad guys: You captured Bond, you have him restrained, and you're just going to walk away and let your fancy death machine do the dirty work? Just put a bullet in his head and your problem is solved. It really isn't that hard.

 

Originally Posted by Matt Boothman

---

---

Agree that Casino Royale was much better because it used less impossible gadgets. Still had some though, it couldn't be a Bond film without them. Bond films transcend usual restrictions and implausabilities simply because of its history. To make Casino Royale both a good Bond film and a good film full stop was its genius.