Alicia I love this movie so much

Lucybespro It is a performances centric movie

Moustroll Good movie but grossly overrated

Derrick Gibbons An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Mort Payne I remember loving this film years ago. Unfortunately, it has not aged well. The humor does not work. Aside from a few near misses, the jokes rely on blindingly obvious innuendo and over-padded wackiness (with Benny Hill style musical accompaniment, which gets annoying very, very fast). The women in the story are sex objects to the extreme. The script makes the sexploitation flicks of the early 70s look feministic. Most of the female "actors" were worse than amateur, but they were pretty, and each of their characters was in desperate search of a man to use them sexually. This hit a low when Bond's daughter implied an attraction to her father. Disgusting. Peter Sellers, once considered a genius, is more difficult to stomach every time I see him. The sound of his voice and his high-toned-grease accent are like nails on a chalkboard. I think what makes him even harder to take in this is that he was trying to play his part seriously (no kidding, folks: he wanted this to be an action flick, starring himself). The cinematography looks like it was done by a rich film student: very slick but laughably overdone. One scene cuts back and forth between Ursula Andress and Peter Sellers during a conversation, but the shots of Sellers show him speaking while sitting down, and the shots of Andress are slow motion shots of her doing awkward contortions while speaking. The effect is to make the scene look like the wrong shots of her were intercut with the right shots of Sellers. I gave it about 45 minutes before I realized I was laughing out of sympathy for the embarrassingly bad humor, and that the only reason to keep watching was the futile hope I might catch a flash of skin from one of the brainless bimbos that constantly flitted around the background in skimpy outfits or obscured partial nudity.

Myriam Nys There are many things wrong with this movie. The main one is the fact that the movie was made at all. Somewhere in the middle of the 1960's a number of directors and producers should have invited the various artists and collaborators to a meeting. Then they should have addressed their audience as follows : "Good people, we're giving up on the project. We've tried everything and anything : a plan A, a plan B, a plan C and even a plan D. However, nothing seems to work. So we're stopping activities as of today. Please be so kind as to go home. Mrs. Murchison from Accounting will pay you your fee, together with a hefty compensation for wasting your time and jeopardizing your fine reputation".Tragically, none of this happened and the result is the long, bloated, incoherent and pretentious mess known as "Casino Royale".It's deeply galling that the movie assembles so much talent and then goes on to spoil it with all the reckless abandon of a three-year old. Have you ever met one of those awful people who will elbow their way to the buffet, load their plates with the finest delicacies (salmon, truffles, crab meat, anything rare and expensive) and mix their food into a weird-looking heap ? And then they'll eat just a tiny, tiny spoonful ? Well, translate the process to the movie industry and you'll end up with this "Casino".Still, I've got to admit that the music is nice. And the line about Mata Hari's bed - "the German army was very large in these days" - can still make me laugh like a maniac.

Benedito Dias Rodrigues Casino Royale l watched for first time in 1984 and found it weak...around DVD's advent l saw one more time and the taste was more palatable...now more carefully with a open mind,its a delightfully watchable seeing those gorgeous and sexy goddesses graceful along the picture,its already pay itself....more a entire galaxy in the casting allow to us is quite unique and few times we'll see in movie's history.....this a extravagant culture from psychedelic sixties....but enjoyable and sexy movie indeed....Barbara Bouchet....Jacqueline Bisset....Joanna Pettet...oh my God!!!Resume:First watch: 1984 / How many: 3 / Source: TV-DVD / Rating: 6.5

jim_skreech There was little that was duller than a Sunday in late 80s rural southwest England. And being at a boarding school from Monday to Saturday meant Sunday was my only free day - bookended by church in the morning, the Top 40 on the radio in the evening, and not much to do in-between. The video shop was far away, and the Arnie and Sly films that my schoolmates raved about were most definitely banned by my mother. Bond films were permitted though, and until the next film would get an airing on TV, I took to the films and TV shows from the 1960s that trailed on 007's success. The mapcap psychedelia displayed in the Flint and Matt Helm films was a colourful zany antidote to the greyness of the current era, and to the perplexed reaction of my 80s fixated classmates, I developed a real hunger for that specific genre. As it turned out, these films tended to be a Sunday afternoon TV staple, and became the colourful highlight to my weekend.Casino Royale has been viewed negatively by critics - incoherent, chaotic, indulgent, and worst of all, an unfunny comedy. It was certainly more enjoyable as a 12 year old than it is now. Much of the humour seems to stem from the older generation trying to lampoon Bond and the swinging mid-60s counterculture, whilst not really understanding their targets and subsequently coming out somewhat fusty and out of touch. As for the plot, there really doesn't appear to be one - with 6 directors working on the film, the story has no flow or point, and the film is best considered instead as a series of sketches.So why my 6 out of 10? The film still looks as great as is did when I first watched it, and is a real monument to the bigger-is-better creativity of mid-60s. My personal favourites are the darkly psychedelic scenes in East Berlin, the hugely stylish villain's lair at the end of the film, and especially the seductive meeting of Peter Sellers and Ursula Andress, soundtracked by Dusty Springfield's 'The Look Of Love', which stands out simply as a piece of 60s cinematic genius. It is a scene that certainly left 12 year old me frustrated that I had not been born a few decades earlier; I'd have the chance to be a dapper playboy when I'd be older, but not in such fine style. As I grew older I moved on from worshipping the 1960s, and it became clear to me that for 99% of the population, that decade was probably even more drab than the 1980s. But there is a 12 year old me still there that feels joy at catching zany old swinging films from the 60s, and whilst Casino Royale certainly did not represent the youthful, modish zeitgeist of the mid-1960s, it is a stunning display of that era's 'sky's the limit' visual flair and creativity, and for 60s aficionados, it's absolutely worth sitting through the poor jokes.