Now I do understand that EON Productions couldn't repeat the novel completely-heck, it was set in the early 1950s and many allowances needed to be made for current events. I miss that Bond and am glad that, in part, the new CASINO ROYALE finally features much of this cold-blooded and flawed character. While Craig isn't quite the same as Fleming's Bond (he's missing the scar down his cheek), he's much closer to the novels than any prior Bond incarnation. Bond was, above all else, a killer-not quite as sexy or sophisticated as he was in the films. Most were either shot or killed with his bare hands. In the book, Bond struggled with guilt over the many people he'd killed-and they were NOT killed in crazy and exotic ways like they were in most of the movies. CASINO ROYALE was the first book and Bond was his most human in it.

Fans of Ian Fleming usually twitch with disgust at even hearing the title of this god-awful film-thank goodness someone FINALLY wanted to do the Fleming novel some justice! In the books, Bond was a bourbon drinking, chain-smoking assassin. It was purported to be a comedy, though practically none of the film was funny and like YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, the plot was impossible to follow and bore no similarity to the book. While some of the characters were retained, the movie was an abysmal mess-a very high budget and confusing mess. Sadly, in a few cases (such as YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE), about the only similarity between the books and the movies were the titles! In fact, the original CASINO ROYALE was a horrid film in practically every way except for the music. While some of the Bond films have been a lot of fun, most have practically nothing to do with the great Ian Fleming novels.

For many years, I have longed to see a James Bond series actually based on the books.

Casino royale ending location