Casino Royale Observations

[epplegacks]

I'm not gonna say this is a review because it isn't too in-depth, more just a smattering of thoughts about the book Casino Royale and how it relates to the film

Comments

WAS THAT SO HARD?

[7171177711]

You're right, though. Not "too in-depth". :P

I prefer the Baccarat game too, but I don't really care too much about them changing it to poker. It's a small way to make the story more current, rather than dated. It's a suspenseful card-game, and in both cases it is effective.

If I weren't so tired, I'd consider giving you a web-spanking for tapping-out like this. Instead, I'll quote Skinny Puppy samples at you in a taunting manner: "It's a wee-bit small, but it'll have to do."

Re: WAS THAT SO HARD?

[epplegacks]

Amber and I were talking about the poker vs. baccarat and she mentioned with world series of poker how it would be more appealing atm and to me it was an amazing opportunity to make baccarat into a huge game. If memory serves fleming does an excellent job at explaining the game as it's happening. It means that the filmmakers read the cliffs notes version of the book some assistant made up for them and just assumed no one would or could understand so they made it poker instead. I agree the direction was excellent, but it would've been similarly excellent had the game been baccarat, it would've been truer to bond, and it once the concept was explained in one of the biggest grossing movies of the year I think you'd see baccarat catch on. They didn't even try, and that's what's frustrating

[7171177711]

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news08/080221i.php