Location: Casino Royale Comparison

Discussion: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15Reported This is a featured thread

Showing 1 - 20 of 20  |  Show  posts at a time

JustinAtheropinion
Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 15 2009, 12:59 PM EST | Post edited: Jan 15 2009, 12:59 PM EST
"You must forgive me," he said. "I take ridiculous pleasure in what I eat and drink. It comes partly from being a bachelor, but mostly from a habit of taking a lot of trouble over details. It's very pernickety and old maidish really, but but then whn I'm working I generally have to eat my meals alone and it makes them more interesting when one takes trouble."

Here's a core difference between book-Bond and movie-Bond. And it's one of perception. It's just assumed that Bond is a snob about clothes, food, drink..everything. Actually, he's a planner and works things out to the finest detail, in his work and private life—our reading this week starts with him, taking a considerable amount of time working out the details and permutations of his baccarat duel with LeChiffre.

There was a lot of ground covered in these chapters this week, (and although we should be waiting until Saturday to give everyone time to read the chapters) so I'm starting the thread a bit early to cover all the ground: We get two dinners with Vesper, the naming of the vodka martini, Bond in victory and defeat, a "save" by Leiter, the explanation of "the Bulgars incident," and Bond's inetersting way of dealing with an attempted assassination at the table--which some Bond fans find controversial.

It's a rich meal. Start chewing.
Do you find this valuable?    
QuartermasterQ
QuartermasterQ
1. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 15 2009, 3:12 PM EST | Post edited: Jan 15 2009, 3:12 PM EST
Now that we are finally at the point where they start to play the game I can say this. I always felt that it was bad idea to have them play poker in the movie, though it was a fantastic film. For one, baccarat is a lot more easier to understand than poker, so the audience wouldn't have had trouble with understanding it. All Bond had to do was sit Vesper down at a table and explain the game to her like in the book (I apologize if thats not in 8-15, Sorry!), which was Fleming's way of explaining it to the reader.

My only guess as to why they decided to go with poker is because it is more popular today than baccarat, although they used baccarat in casino scenes up to TWINE (DAD didnt have a casino scene if I recall). Does anyone else think baccarat should have been in the movie instead of Texas Hold 'Em. Whenever I think about "Texas Hold Em" and Bond it makes me think he's a redneck, because of the word Texas, though I apologize for being so stereotypical.
Do you find this valuable?    

JustinAtheropinion
2. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 16 2009, 12:01 AM EST | Post edited: Jan 16 2009, 12:01 AM EST
I'm one of the few people who thought it was an improvement over the baccarat game.

Why? Suspense. The casino scenes in the Bond films have been throw-aways. There is no challenge to Bond in them, merely the pretext for some pointed banter. The games themselves are lackluster affairs. Bond turns over cards. Wins. That's it.

Poker offers the possibility of bluff. And whole movies ("Big Hand for a Little Lady" "The Cincinatti Kid") have been built around all-in poker games. Baccarat is the luck of the draw. Poker is the luck of the draw and the strength of the players. It's much richer dramatically than a baccarat game.

Now, Fleming was able to mine suspense out of it in the book by his prose-style and the minutiae of the descriptions. But visually, movie-wise, baccarat is dull--not even Terence Young could do anything with it. I think poker is the better game to visually generate tension.
Do you find this valuable?    
joshiorio
joshiorio
3. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 16 2009, 10:57 AM EST | Post edited: Jan 16 2009, 10:57 AM EST
" it makes me think he's a redneck, because of the word Texas, though I apologize for being so stereotypical."
i'm currently in texas... >:(

but i think you're right. baccarat gives an element of glamour or of the exotic. texas hold um, while it does have its own lingo ("river", "flop', etc.) just doesn't have the same ring as the french "banco" or "suivi". there's an element of baccarat's non-familiarity that really contributes to the atmosphere in the casino, which is ruined as i imagine guys like Chris Moneymaker or "Jesus" Ferguson at the table with Bond. I've said this before, but I see the switch as cashing in on the whole commercialization of texas hold um, not really that people would be more familiar with it. when it comes down it, it's a much more complex game (both in the general rules and the strategy) than baccarat. baccarat could have been explained to one of the characters. hold um couldn't have been.
Do you find this valuable?    
joshiorio
joshiorio
4. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 16 2009, 11:13 AM EST | Post edited: Jan 16 2009, 11:13 AM EST
"I'm one of the few people who thought it was an improvement over the baccarat game.

Why? Suspense. The casino scenes in the Bond films have been throw-aways. There is no challenge to Bond in them, merely the pretext for some pointed banter. The games themselves are lackluster affairs. Bond turns over cards. Wins. That's it.

Poker offers the possibility of bluff. And whole movies ("Big Hand for a Little Lady" "The Cincinatti Kid") have been built around all-in poker games. Baccarat is the luck of the draw. Poker is the luck of the draw and the strength of the players. It's much richer dramatically than a baccarat game.

Now, Fleming was able to mine suspense out of it in the book by his prose-style and the minutiae of the descriptions. But visually, movie-wise, baccarat is dull--not even Terence Young could do anything with it. I think poker is the better game to visually generate tension."
i completely agree with everything you've said, but i would have loved it if they could have used some directorial innovations to make baccarat suspenseful. as you point out, it would take more craft to bring in the suspense of the novel, but i think that's been what's missing from the more recent films. the "craft" is by and large imitating others' techniques, and there's already a nice model of how to make hold um suspenseful because of all the tv coverage of the world series of poker.

i think the other thing that i have a problem with is the juxtaposition of a bunch of people wearing tuxes, in motenegro, playing a game that originated in the rural american southwest. it just doesn't fit for me. people who play hold um wear t-shirts and sponsors jackets. they play hold um in basements and on porches. the image that the popular media has created for hold um is one were any random joe can get on the internet, win their way into a tournament in vegas, and go make their millions. this just doesn't seem to fit with Bond or with the setting at the casino royale.
Do you find this valuable?    
QuartermasterQ
QuartermasterQ
5. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 16 2009, 11:22 AM EST | Post edited: Jan 16 2009, 11:22 AM EST
"this just doesn't seem to fit with Bond or with the setting at the casino royale. "
Agree.
Do you find this valuable?    

JustinAtheropinion
6. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 17 2009, 2:26 PM EST | Post edited: Jan 17 2009, 2:26 PM EST
We-ell, Texas Moneymaker wasn't at the table and they weren't playing on someone's front-porch or the Internet, and no one was outfitted in a "wife-beater." The evidence is what's on-screen, not by pre-conceptions.

Terence Young couldn't bring any intrigue to baccarat (or as I like to call it "Black-jack"), and intrigue and suspense are the names of the game (er..um) if the story centers around a green baize table.

Is there some other aspects of Chapters 8 through 15 we might want to talk about? There's an awful lot of story going on in those chapters.

Pinging off of this discussion: A writer on another forum (pre-"Casino Royale" release) was opining that Bond's method of handling the "night-stick" problem was "un-Bond-like" and horrible as it made Bond look like a fool at the Big Table, and Bond would never do that. I thought there was a major disconnect there as Fleming wrote it in a novel--the first novel--and that is my measure of Bond.
Do you find this valuable?    
QuartermasterQ
QuartermasterQ
7. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 17 2009, 5:06 PM EST | Post edited: Jan 17 2009, 5:06 PM EST
"Pinging off of this discussion: A writer on another forum (pre-"Casino Royale" release) was opining that Bond's method of handling the "night-stick" problem was "un-Bond-like" and horrible as it made Bond look like a fool at the Big Table, and Bond would never do that. I thought there was a major disconnect there as Fleming wrote it in a novel--the first novel--and that is my measure of Bond. "
Bond does what he has to do. He could either die or look like a fool. If I remember correctly, he knew it would cause a scene, he knew it wasn't his normal behavior. So yeah, it is unlike Bond, but Bond realized it had to be done, or he would die.
Do you find this valuable?    

Posted Anonymously
8. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 17 2009, 7:51 PM EST | Post edited: Jan 17 2009, 7:51 PM EST
The poster's line was : "Bond is always cool. He wouldn't risk embarrassment by making such a risky move." My reply was: "He has a gun at the base of his spine, and the guy holding the gun is counting down. How are YOU going to get out of it?"

And the response was: "I dunno, but it wouldn't embarrassing."

I moved on to another discussion.

As I do now. The "Bulgar episode:" We find out what caused the explosion outside the Hotel Splendide (Supposedly this is based on a real incident that Fleming heard about during WWII--with his customary embellishments, I'm sure). We've never seen it in a Bond film. Why not, do you suppose? Is there something that comes close?

I've always remembered the sentence where Fleming said the air smelled of high explsoives, burnt wood and...roast mutton.
Do you find this valuable?    

JustinAtheropinion
9. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 17 2009, 7:52 PM EST | Post edited: Jan 17 2009, 7:52 PM EST
"The poster's line was : "Bond is always cool. He wouldn't risk embarrassment by making such a risky move." My reply was: "He has a gun at the base of his spine, and the guy holding the gun is counting down. How are YOU going to get out of it?"

And the response was: "I dunno, but it wouldn't embarrassing."

I moved on to another discussion.

As I do now. The "Bulgar episode:" We find out what caused the explosion outside the Hotel Splendide (Supposedly this is based on a real incident that Fleming heard about during WWII--with his customary embellishments, I'm sure). We've never seen it in a Bond film. Why not, do you suppose? Is there something that comes close?

I've always remembered the sentence where Fleming said the air smelled of high explsoives, burnt wood and...roast mutton."
Sorry. That was me, above...and beyond.
Do you find this valuable?    
QuartermasterQ
QuartermasterQ
10. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 18 2009, 1:18 AM EST | Post edited: Jan 18 2009, 1:18 AM EST
"Sorry. That was me, above...and beyond."
There have been some similar situations, but nothing like that in the book. The only one that comes to mind is at the end of DAF when Wint and Kidd attempt to blow up Bond and Case within feet of them. But that isn't exactly like in the book. All I can think of right now.
Do you find this valuable?    

JustinAtheropinion
11. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 18 2009, 4:19 PM EST | Post edited: Jan 18 2009, 4:19 PM EST
"There have been some similar situations, but nothing like that in the book. The only one that comes to mind is at the end of DAF when Wint and Kidd attempt to blow up Bond and Case within feet of them. But that isn't exactly like in the book. All I can think of right now."
They've also never done anything with the Muntzes--the couple who listen in the "bugs" in Bond's hotel room. Probably because Bond has detectors, would change rooms, all those things he's done in past movies.
Do you find this valuable?    
QuartermasterQ
QuartermasterQ
12. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 18 2009, 5:26 PM EST | Post edited: Jan 18 2009, 5:26 PM EST
"They've also never done anything with the Muntzes--the couple who listen in the "bugs" in Bond's hotel room. Probably because Bond has detectors, would change rooms, all those things he's done in past movies."
Right. And I always thought it was funny/clever the way Mathis handled the situation, coming in to Bond's room babbling useless info about this here radio and then turns it on and becomes serious. A clever way to cover up the mics in the room.
Do you find this valuable?    
Topol
Topol
13. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 19 2009, 8:20 PM EST | Post edited: Jan 19 2009, 8:20 PM EST
Do you guys have day jobs, or do you just sit around doing this all day?! Do you find this valuable?    
joshiorio
joshiorio
14. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 20 2009, 5:38 PM EST | Post edited: Jan 20 2009, 5:38 PM EST
i think this exemplifies how the novels are much more clever in many senses than the films. if you know that the baddies have your room bugged, you could: 1) get a new room, or 2) play around with the baddies. the novels chose the second option (typified by bond saying loudly "bitch" so that mrs. muntz would hear it and presumably be embarassed) while the movies tended to choose the first. although when bond is being held captive on goldfinger's plane, it's pretty nifty how he's able to get some privacy from his "monitor". Do you find this valuable?    
joshiorio
joshiorio
15. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 20 2009, 6:08 PM EST | Post edited: Jan 20 2009, 6:08 PM EST
i was a bit out of commission this weekend (watched my steelers win their way into the superbowl, finish up a book chapter, took a camping trip), so i'm a bit late, but i've got plenty to say. justin's initial questions were great, so i'm going to start by responding to them.

bond and vesper have two dinner conversations- one before his "mission" in the casino, and one after. in one sense, they're structured in opposition to one another.

in the first (chapters 8-9), bond has his first extensive conversation with vesper that culminates in a very detailed description of baccarat. The content of the conversation isn't really all that interesting; we get some details about the bulgars and about le chiffre. the ebb and flow of bond's relationship to vesper during this conversation is what's really significant because it serves to set up both bond, and to lesser extent vesper, as multi-faceted and complex characters. bond doesn't just see the beautiful woman, save the day, and then take her back for a nice go in the sack. Bond begins the dinner by thinking how lovely it would be to bed down with vesper. talk shifts to business and bond is reminded of his commitment to the job (CH5: "As a woman, he wanted to sleep with her but only when the job had been done"). when vesper tries to imply that she's developing feelings for bond (CH9: "I'm loving my dinner. It seems a shame..."), Bond's response is clear, and to the point: "If it wasn't for the job, we wouldn't be here... he regretted the intimacy of their dinner". Vesper's reaction demonstrates her feelings: "She felt thoroughly deflated by his harshness". Bond's "warmth" toward vesper was changed to "poison".
Do you find this valuable?    
joshiorio
joshiorio
16. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 20 2009, 6:38 PM EST | Post edited: Jan 20 2009, 6:38 PM EST
In the second meeting, the tables are turned a bit. The second dinner occurs directly after bond has bested Le Chiffre at the baccarat table. at the beginning of chapter 14, bond tells vesper "It's wonderful sitting here with you and knowing the job's finished. It's a lovely end to the day - the prize-giving". bond's statement is a double entendre, where in one case he's literally referring to the prize (money taken from le chiffre). in the other case, the "prize" is vesper in bed. bond had, after all, finished the job. but vesper's response is similar to the response that bond gave her at the end of their last dinner date: "She sipped at her champagne and rarely glanced at Bond. She didn't smile". Bond "accepted her reserve. He thought it came from a desire to protect herself from him, or else it was her reaction to his coolness to her earlier in the evening, his deliberate coolness, which he knew had been taken as a rebuff".

So what do we learn about Bond from these scenes?

1) Bond is committed first to his job. Women are seen as frivolous distractions, which Vesper's character contradicts, to a certain extent.

2) He's not very good at addressing serious, interpersonal issues. Bond's sudden shift from "warm" to "poison" in the first scene was a bit insensitive. Bond tells us in chapter 14 that he was "deliberately" insensitive to her feelings. He was erecting an emotional wall. Vesper just so happened to be rushing toward him when he built it. By the second dinner, Bond reflects on how his actions have effected Vesper, but rather then talk about it, "Bond felt frustrated. He drank a lot of champagne and ordered another bottle". This is in stark contrast to the cinematic Bond who always knows what to say.

What else?
Do you find this valuable?    
joshiorio
joshiorio
17. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 20 2009, 7:03 PM EST | Post edited: Jan 20 2009, 7:03 PM EST
""Bond's interesting way of dealing with an attempted assassination at the table--which some Bond fans find controversial.

"
here's how it goes down... one of le chiffre's men comes up behind bond while he's playing baccarat and stick a walking stick (which conceals a gun) into bond's back. he tells bond to retire or he will shoot. bond pretends to faint, kicks backward in his chair, and the walking stick is knocked from the man's hand. in the confusion, the man runs off but leaves the stick. bond plays it off, and they get back to cards.

i don't have any idea why this could be controversial.

it clearly replaces the poisoning scene from the film. why the switch? 1) without the poisoning scene, there's no reason for bond to use his "gadget" out in the car, 2) you couldn't get a gun disguised as a cane into a modern casino (although i think this would be a great opportunity for the writers to get creative), 3) the filmmakers were trying to tell us something about bond's character or his relationship to vesper in the whole | poison -> car -> vesper -> return | sequence. the scene from the novel gives us a great look into bond's mind. le chiffre's man gives bond ten seconds. he follow bond's thoughts, second by second, up until seven, when we see bond act. bond surveys his surroundings and then acts simply, precisely, and decisively. if this scene was kept in the film, i can see bond thrusting backward -> knocking the gun away -> landing on the floor -> glancing around -> standing up -> straightening his tie, while smiling and making some witty excuse, and then sitting down for the next hand. for me, this would be a classic cinematic bond moment, that doesn't have to be over-the-top if it's well constructed.
Do you find this valuable?    
joshiorio
joshiorio
18. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 20 2009, 7:13 PM EST | Post edited: Jan 20 2009, 7:13 PM EST
"Bond's method of handling the "night-stick" problem was "un-Bond-like" and horrible as it made Bond look like a fool at the Big Table, and Bond would never do that. I thought there was a major disconnect there as Fleming wrote it in a novel--the first novel--and that is my measure of Bond. "
it's very much "un-Bond-like" IF the basis of "Bond" is in the films. If someone develops their notion of "Bond" from the films, then it would be absurd to think about Bond ever looking foolish. The cinematic Bond is always confident, in control, and suave... even when he's being beaten (SPOILER: Bond really isn't in any shape to be making that witty quip he makes during the torture scene). He's really pretty simplistic... he's more of an archetype in the films, whereas in the novels he's much more layered and complex. I think we're getting at some of that in these discussions.
Do you find this valuable?    

JustinAtheropinion
19. RE: Book Club: Casino Royale Ch.8-15
Jan 21 2009, 9:24 PM EST | Post edited: Jan 21 2009, 9:24 PM EST
"it's very much "un-Bond-like" IF the basis of "Bond" is in the films. If someone develops their notion of "Bond" from the films, then it would be absurd to think about Bond ever looking foolish. The cinematic Bond is always confident, in control, and suave... even when he's being beaten (SPOILER: Bond really isn't in any shape to be making that witty quip he makes during the torture scene). He's really pretty simplistic... he's more of an archetype in the films, whereas in the novels he's much more layered and complex. I think we're getting at some of that in these discussions. "
Exactly. I couldn't fathom why this person thought it was "un-Bond" (it's in the freakin' book, fercryin'outloud! and how would you get out of a situation like that otherwise?) other than they're clinging to some absurd notion that Bond is never less than suave--doesn't sweat, doesn't bleed, never gets dirty, and never, ever goes to the bathroom. As my ex-wife described, "a mannequin"--this was before I dragged her to a couple of movies.

This stuff pays off comedically--think of Bond with a tuxedo under his wet-suit (immaculately dry!) in "Goldfinger," or the way Connery's Bond casually crosses a leg travelling up the outside elevator of The Whyte House. That's comedy. It's funny, and makes a play of the "too-cool-for-school" secret agent.

It's not drama. And I contend the Bond films lose something if they veer to far away from the basic "adventure" formula. B & S purposefully played with these conventions in the early Bonds starting out, but then ignored them, I think, to the series' detriment. They keep talking about going back to the Terence Young days, but usually sacrificing some of the expensive panache that we've come to expect in a Bond film (I'm always disappointed if the stair-ways aren't steel, for instance)

I think the "night-stick" incident is pure Bond. And all I can say is this person must have been VERY disappointed with the torture scene ("Bond doesn;t even kill the guy? WTH!)
Do you find this valuable?    

Related Content

  (what's this?Related ContentThanks to keyword tags, links to related pages and threads are added to the bottom of your pages. Up to 15 links are shown, determined by matching tags and by how recently the content was updated; keeping the most current at the top. Share your feedback on Wetpaint Central.)