I watched Casino Royale for the first time around when it came out. A short while later, I read Fleming's book. Then, during last week I re-read the book, then watched this directly after finishing reading. From the typical stance, I think this must be the most loyal Bond movie to the books, although I'll have to finish re-reading the rest and re-watching the rest to honestly hold that opinion. The Spy Who Loved Me, was, in the novel, a girl at a motel who met Bond. Nothing to do with some entrepreneurial havoc maker stealing submarines. From what I can remember, the older Bond movies were mostly all about humor, girls, and gadgets. Daniel Craig's interpretation of Bond is a lot closer to Fleming's vision. As Judi Dench's M says, "arrogance and self-awareness seldom go had in hand" - this Bond manages it.
Which sadly isn't to say that this is a truly loyal movie. Is it about gambling? Yes. So it's already more loyal than most other Bond films. However, here's a brief list of the differences between novel and movie:
Vesper now works for the treasury instead of the PA to the Head of Section S. Why?
Because unless the Soviets live in the jungle, Le Chiffre is no longer a short and 'stout' member of SMERSH who poured their money into brothels that became illegal, he paid terrorists to destroy an airplane prototype so as to exploit their stock value.
Yes, Le Chiffre is now trying to make up lost money gambling, but now it's at poker rather than baccarat.
Bond's car is keeping in line with the movie series' canon as an Aston Martin rather than a Bentley.
The car chase still happens. Though in the movie Bond swerves to avoid Veser lying across the road rather than... I think they were spikes in the novel? Whatever they were, they certainly weren't female.
There were more than a few similarities though. The basics of the plot, ignoring the first 40 or so minutes of the film after the reasonably similar prologue exhibiting the earning of his 00 status (no marksmanship across skyscrapers in New York to be seen here), are similar. If the spoiler warning over this wasn't enough warning, don't read on if you don't want the movie properly spoiled. Vesper is a double agent as in the novel, though her motives aren't quite as clear and personal (simply blackmail, as explained by M), and her suicide is one containing hope for survival (wow, Bond certainly can hold his breath...) rather than the discovery of death that has already happened. In the novel, the discovery of death also left a suicide note addressed to Bond, explaining her motives. I did smile at Craig just about quoting "the bitch is dead", although the smile dropped when the Mr. White storyline interrupted.
I do wonder if a true-to-the-novel Casino Royale movie would be profitable, if even 'Hollywood worthy', but I wish I could make one. Oddly enough, I'd cast Craig and Green, as they can play their roles as Fleming wrote, they just need to be given the script to match their talent. Overall, this is certainly worthy of being labelled a Bond movie and the deviations from the novel aren't as far-fetched or unrelated as in other Bond movies. The characters were spot on, the plot was just a little off.
Review by Alice HawkeVIP OG 12BlockedParentSpoilers2013-08-03T03:16:40Z
I watched Casino Royale for the first time around when it came out. A short while later, I read Fleming's book. Then, during last week I re-read the book, then watched this directly after finishing reading. From the typical stance, I think this must be the most loyal Bond movie to the books, although I'll have to finish re-reading the rest and re-watching the rest to honestly hold that opinion. The Spy Who Loved Me, was, in the novel, a girl at a motel who met Bond. Nothing to do with some entrepreneurial havoc maker stealing submarines. From what I can remember, the older Bond movies were mostly all about humor, girls, and gadgets. Daniel Craig's interpretation of Bond is a lot closer to Fleming's vision. As Judi Dench's M says, "arrogance and self-awareness seldom go had in hand" - this Bond manages it.
Which sadly isn't to say that this is a truly loyal movie. Is it about gambling? Yes. So it's already more loyal than most other Bond films. However, here's a brief list of the differences between novel and movie:
There were more than a few similarities though. The basics of the plot, ignoring the first 40 or so minutes of the film after the reasonably similar prologue exhibiting the earning of his 00 status (no marksmanship across skyscrapers in New York to be seen here), are similar. If the spoiler warning over this wasn't enough warning, don't read on if you don't want the movie properly spoiled. Vesper is a double agent as in the novel, though her motives aren't quite as clear and personal (simply blackmail, as explained by M), and her suicide is one containing hope for survival (wow, Bond certainly can hold his breath...) rather than the discovery of death that has already happened. In the novel, the discovery of death also left a suicide note addressed to Bond, explaining her motives. I did smile at Craig just about quoting "the bitch is dead", although the smile dropped when the Mr. White storyline interrupted.
I do wonder if a true-to-the-novel Casino Royale movie would be profitable, if even 'Hollywood worthy', but I wish I could make one. Oddly enough, I'd cast Craig and Green, as they can play their roles as Fleming wrote, they just need to be given the script to match their talent. Overall, this is certainly worthy of being labelled a Bond movie and the deviations from the novel aren't as far-fetched or unrelated as in other Bond movies. The characters were spot on, the plot was just a little off.