Watch Casino Royale For Free

Why so much hype?

One of my all time favorites.

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

Peter Sellers is entertaining in this movie but he's not enough to keep this film from sinking in its failed attempt to be a standout satire of the James Bond films. Casino Royale wasn't officially adapted to the screen until 2006's Casino Royale. This 'parody' was made to ensure that Eon or so-and-so kept the film rights in spite of THIS version being a comedy having basically nothing to do with the classic character.1967's Casino Royale is... um... a film that exists and you can watch it. There's really not all that much to say about it besides the surprising cast, including Woody Allen, David Niven and Orson Welles (Citizen Kane!?). The script is filled with so-so slap-stick comedy that doesn't live up to any other British comedy film like the Monty Python films; Casino Royale exists because it was a 60s cash-grab to capitalize on the decade's spy-movie craze. And it clearly shows.Hopefully Mystery Science Theater 3000: The Return will review this film to commemorate the release of the next Bond film.

A schizophrenic Bond experience. In this take on Bond everyone is Bond, but this leads to multiple leads competing for screen time and underdeveloped villains. The plot is as hard to follow as the master spy is elusive and the jokes are easy to miss when one has to keep asking "how did we get here?"This film is worth watching for the riotous fun found in the last third of the film and sprinkled throughout the rest. Also making it worthwhile are the incredible sets ranging from a Scottish Lord's Gaudy Manor, to the classic bond villain hideout, even an entire spy school set in a German expressionism nightmare house.The Bonds all attempt to be icy cool with varying degrees of success, and although they all brought their own gags good enough to justify their inclusion, it was the indecisive, meandering following of the handful of agents that made the movie so boring. Watch it for the Woody Allen and Orson Welles scenes, for the climax, and for the Bond Girls, but don't watch it for a coherent story. Could have been better with a half hour trimmed off.

Don't be fooled. This is not James Bond. Even with a plot that involves several James Bond imposters, the entire film is not Bond; it is a mere shadow of Bond. You might think that a Bond parody is a good idea, since it's been done before with the deadpan sincerity of Our Man Flint and the all-out wackiness of Austin Powers. By those standards, the effectiveness of the comedy in 1967's Casino Royale is...iffy.The film is as colorful and goofy as they come. The whole thing reeks of 60s kitsch, complete with psychedelic colors and music. As a mockery of the Bond franchise, the film frequently divulges in emphasizing the sex appeal of the Bond character, often pitting him against an onslaught of various female spies. You can expect a few drug references, some innuendos, and some goofy action scenes. There are secret lairs, casinos, stupid technology and more.As nice as it all sounds, the film is one hot mess. Partly because very little of it is actually funny. A few lines are funny, a few gags work, but most of the film comes off as obnoxious and lame. What really makes this film daft, unfortunately, is the story. There's a faint semblance to the original novel, but most of the film is slapped together with seemingly-random scenes that don't really congeal into any kind of a storyline. It feels like one long montage of random scenes (or possibly sketches). Even with the sheer star power, very few of the characters carry enough of a presence to stand out. The whole thing comes off as a silly, disjointed, irreverent experience.This film is made with average photography and pretty wacky editing. Writing is pretty stupid and the acting is cheesy...which is not necessarily bad for this type of comedy, but it hardly helps either. This production uses some very colorful and gaudy-looking sets, props, and costumes. Music is very upbeat and jazzy, for better or for worse.You'd have to be a real serious fan of 1960s camp to love this silly farce. For me, it's just goofiness without much real comedic weight, much like how Police Academy: Mission to Moscow was. If it's a good spy comedy you want, better stick with Austin Powers (yes, it's also goofy, but at least it's more overtly funny).2/5 (Experience: Poor | Story: Awful | Film: Marginal)

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.