The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

[oscartheman]

My main problem is there's no James Bond whatsoever. Not in his looks (at all) not in his manners (at all) least of all in his actions (at all).

I see plenty of Bond in QOS. When it comes to looks the only thing that really sticks out is that he has blond hair, otherwise he looks like how Fleming describes as a man with cold hard looks. Mannerisms? Which exactly?

One Bondian moment I'll point to is when he's escorted to a shitty looking hotel by Fields. He steps in for a couple of seconds and walks out never looking back "suit yourself, I rather be in a morgue". After checking in a five star hotel suite he bangs Fields. Swagger, snobbery and sex.

My favorite Bondian moment with Craig is probably after he wins the poker game and immediately has a late night dinner with Vesper. That's not Jason Bourne. Bourne would order at a diner with his hoodie up.

You've got to be joking.Craig is not within 20 miles of Ian Fleming's James Bond to have a Bondian moment you have to be watching X-Men 1st Class, Iron Man or Sherlock Holmes,in CR & Qos James Bond is notably absent.

Craig Smash!

Craig is a ape in suit!

[stockslivevan]

You've got to be joking.

I'm quite humble. I think so far he has made a pretty good Bond.

[English Agent]

Eh, with the banning of Nash, I think we got rid of the truly crazy pro-Craigs. Harsh? you know it's true.

Pro-craig is really the wrong description..............i think the phrase accepts Craig in the role of Bond as long as he does a good job, and doesnt get upset just by looking at his face would be a more apt description.

Anyway 'Connery' was the best!

EA

[English Agent]

Regarding 'TWINE'.....................i thought the scenes between Bond and Elektra were very good........and Robert Carlisle was good as Renard, but on the whole i found the film somewhat dull for some reason. Much prefered GE and TND.

Moving forward to Bond 23..........what i hope we dont get is the 2nd unit action team from QOS, with all the wobbly camera work.

Also we dont need fast edits, undeveloped characters, crap story, and last but not least a truly awful title song.

I hope Mendes has fought his corner well, and has not let himself be bullied by the producers to make another Bourne film!

[Alessandra]

My main problem is there's no James Bond whatsoever. Not in his looks (at all) not in his manners (at all) least of all in his actions (at all).

I see plenty of Bond in QOS. When it comes to looks the only thing that really sticks out is that he has blond hair, otherwise he looks like how Fleming describes as a man with cold hard looks. Mannerisms? Which exactly?

Uhm, Fleming did NOT describe a man with cold hard looks. Fleming had extremely specific physical details about him, too, and Craig has NONE of those. NONE. Tall (absolutely not) dark-haired (not a chance), handsome (HELL NO!), elegant (OMG don't even get me started), with curious eyes. This thing of the cold looks is a VERY understated assessment Fleming makes in CR WHILE DESCRIBING A SLEEPING BOND (I've yet to see anyone who doesn't look serious and cold while they're sleeping), that pro-Craig people have somehow turned into a fundamental feature of the description. It's not. AT ALL. In fact, when talking about awake Bond there's anything BUT cold non-expression to him. He's described as attentive and curious, and someone who has a VERY distinct taste for both food, beverages AND clothes. Absolutely NONE of these characteristics belong to Craig's Bond. And don't even get me started about that absolutely INSULTING line "do I look like I give a d**n" about the Martini, who destroys the entire Bond description Fleming makes in CR just with one line. I'm going to really laugh at those who even think about saying Craig's Bond is close to Fleming. If anything it is the FURTHER they've gotten from what Fleming described.

One Bondian moment I'll point to is when he's escorted to a shitty looking hotel by Fields. He steps in for a couple of seconds and walks out never looking back "suit yourself, I rather be in a morgue". After checking in a five star hotel suite he bangs Fields. Swagger, snobbery and sex.

Uhm no. That's ignorant arrogance. Craig doesn't have either the looks, or the class, or the elegance in movements, or the taste and ABSOLUTELY NOT the sex appeal to do that. And that line sucks.

My favorite Bondian moment with Craig is probably after he wins the poker game and immediately has a late night dinner with Vesper. That's not Jason Bourne. Bourne would order at a diner with his hoodie up.

That IS Jason Bourne. Because Bond would know what he's ordering AND the Bond in the book does not order dinner the same way as that ignorant CHAV that we see on screen in CR does. Not to mention of course he has absolutely none of the physical attributes Fleming gives him in CR. The dinner scene in the book quickly gets uncomfortable AND Bond is giving extremely specific orders on what he wants and showing he's a very classy man in many areas, including his gourmet taste. Daniel Craig's Bond doesn't look classy even when wearing a tux. You can't buy class, you either have it or you don't, and Daniel Craig doesn't even know the meaning of the word. That of course means his entire portrayal of Bond makes Bond a generic killer instead of the ultra sophisticated, classy connaisseur of life and its pleasures that Fleming describes in his books.

The Bolivian water scheme? Lowkey but I wouldn't call it pure nonsense. TWINE, now that has a lot of nonsense. Like Cigar girl shooting at Bond from her boat just to start another mundane Vic Armstrong action sequence ripping off better boat chases from the Roger Moore films.

Oh right and that of course is worse than a plot that has no sense and no importance whatsoever and action scenes that make people want to throw up and where people absolutely don't understand what the hell is going on? The action scenes in TWINE are great, including the boat scene. I'm sorry but that's not opinion... any self-respecting second unit director would slam down the QoS ones and tell you the TWINE ones are WAY better from every single point of view.

]I'll admit that Greene was too underdeveloped but I wouldn't tag him as the weakest. Blofeld in YOLT, Stromberg, Carver, Renard, Elektra, Graves I consider far weaker.

You're kidding. Elektra would kick Greene's ass in two seconds. She was badass AND classy and gorgeous while being so. Perfect Bond product. Carver was the typical Bond crazy villain, and he had exactly that crazy evil going for him that works just fine. And seriously, Blofeld is a classic Bond villain that should never even be compared to Greene in QoS. Same goes for the other mentione ones. That was possibly the worst villain EVER in a Bond movie.

Oh please. Worse than Goodnight, Triple X, Bibi, Stacey, Paris, Elektra, Christmas Jones and especially Jinx? Ridiculous. I don't think Vesper and Camile rank among the classic Bond girls. In fact I don't think there really has been a classic Bond girl since probably OHMSS. I'd rank them along with Pam and Natalya in the better modern Bond girl category.

What? Vesper SUCKED so badly that I can't even begin to explain. She was unattractive, with ridiculous baroque dresses, make up like Morticia Addams and COMPLETELY incompetent and incapable. Whatever she did, she did by pure coincidence. Eva Green made her the second-worst Bond girl I've ever seen in movies. And the worst gets the prize just because freaking girl (Denise Richards) wouldn't know acting if it bit her in the behind. Other than that, she was WAY worse than ALL the above mentioned. IN every single aspect. Eva Green can't act, totally inexpressive, and don't get me started on the fact her style SUCKED. Makeup, dresses, everything. She was as expressive as a dead fish. The only expressions she got were when they made her twenty kilos of eyeliner drool down from her eyes. Nice. NOT. Don't even get me started about the amount of bad taste she showed on the red carpet too. (Which YES is also a FUNDAMENTAL part of being a Bond girl, you represent the franchise just like Bond does.)

Camille ONLY had the right looks. As far as the rest she was so underdeveloped people are NEVER going to remember her for Bond movies because she was completely insignificant. Comparing them to Pam Bouvier is insulting to both the character and the actress. Both so much better than the two aforementioned nobodies there's absolutely so comparison. And, Vesper wasn't a modern Bond girl at ALL. She was a useless, incompetent, incapable Bond girl whose only casual achievement was to save Bond at a certain moment, something that happened coincidentally, not because of her skills or preparation. She had absolutely no skill for anything. Not even for lying since when she started the biggest lie, Bond immediately understood. (By the way they also made Bond a PATHETIC Barbara Cartland romance novel guy in the second part of CR, something I will NEVER forgive them for. And no, it's not the way it is in the CR novel AT ALL). And this about Vesper, despite in theory being the most important (and maybe the most devious, given the situation) one of the entire franchise. We can thank the useless Eva Green for that, alongside with the script.

Oy. This is how I see Elektra: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90HhZ-pyC2Y#t=11s A spoiled rich brat.

Considering you dare saying that the incompetent, incapable and absolutely style-lacking Vesper not to mention the totally insignificant (albeit gorgeous) Camille compare to KICKASS Pam Bouvier who sets a standard for Bond girls (while those two destroy what the Bond girl is all about) I'm not surprised. Elektra instead is the one who is exactly in the same range as Pam and, more than Pam, Lupe, since she is the evil Bond girl and not the good one. A badass, evil, gorgeous girl who knows exactly what she wants, goes after it, and doesn't hesitate to kill people in the process. Doing so while always displaying beauty and style.

You show promise here. Just work on that.

Right back at you!

As for what I look like, well, here you go DCINBers: http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b188/ ... 6271_n.jpg

I'm sorry I didn't mean to oblige you to show a photo! I actually still think of you as Sark (that's a compliment, he's the evil guy, but he's a good-looking, competent and stylish one at that ). nice photo

[The Sweeney]

Uhm, Fleming did NOT describe a man with cold hard looks. Fleming had extremely specific physical details about him, too, and Craig has NONE of those. NONE. Tall (absolutely not) dark-haired (not a chance), handsome (HELL NO!), elegant (OMG don't even get me started), with curious eyes. This thing of the cold looks is a VERY understated assessment Fleming makes in CR WHILE DESCRIBING A SLEEPING BOND (I've yet to see anyone who doesn't look serious and cold while they're sleeping), that pro-Craig people have somehow turned into a fundamental feature of the description. It's not. AT ALL. In fact, when talking about awake Bond there's anything BUT cold non-expression to him. He's described as attentive and curious, and someone who has a VERY distinct taste for both food, beverages AND clothes. Absolutely NONE of these characteristics belong to Craig's Bond. And don't even get me started about that absolutely INSULTING line "do I look like I give a d**n" about the Martini, who destroys the entire Bond description Fleming makes in CR just with one line. I'm going to really laugh at those who even think about saying Craig's Bond is close to Fleming. If anything it is the FURTHER they've gotten from what Fleming described.

Fleming does describe Bond as a man with cruel looks in many of the novels. In FRWL, the SMERSH general studies a photo of Bond and thinks to himself `nasty looking customer.' When Viv Michel in TSWLM first lays eyes on Bond, she immediately thinks he's one of the villains by his appearance.

I guess with literary work, everyone's interpretations will be different. I read Carte Blanche recently, and strangely found myself picturing Craig in the role as Bond. This is probably the first time I've done that with any actor when reading one of the novels. Carte Blanche is not a patch on Fleming's work though, and although Deaver tries to emulate Fleming, the novel definitely has a foot in the cinematic Bond world too. Maybe Deaver himself had Craig in mind when writing the book, hence why I found myself picturing him when reading the book (although Deaver still describes the appearance of Bond the way Fleming wrote him.)

[English Agent]

We dont see much of you Sweeney nowadays..........are you working on that film archive website you mentioned sometime ago?

[bjmdds]

http://boxofficemojo.com/daily/chart/ As predicted, "Cr-Aliens" fell to "13th" place! PURE JUNK and DC is the lead in ANOTHER failure! At what point will the studio pull the film instead of continuing to pay out advertising dollars on a film that is now BLEEDING money? Potter is STILL pulling in over $1 million a day FBF!

[English Agent]

http://boxofficemojo.com/daily/chart/ As predicted, "Cr-Aliens" fell to "13th" place! PURE JUNK and DC is the lead in ANOTHER failure! At what point will the studio pull the film instead of continuing to pay out advertising dollars on a film that is now BLEEDING money? Potter is STILL pulling in over $1 million a day FBF!

Did you see my review on C&A yesterday 'BJ' ?

It will be interesting to see the International BO take for the film this weekend, dont think it will be that good!

EA

[bjmdds]

Yes I did. It should go to DVD soon. Universal must be FUMING with Spielberg for hiring DC in the lead. Who ever thought it would take a faux James Bond to tarnish the sterling reputations of Spielberg and Ford?

[The Sweeney]

We dont see much of you Sweeney nowadays..........are you working on that film archive website you mentioned sometime ago?

Hi EA, yes still working on the website. I'm halfway through.
I saw Inbetweeners the movie yesterday, it was hilarious, one of the best comedies I've seen in years.

[English Agent]

We dont see much of you Sweeney nowadays..........are you working on that film archive website you mentioned sometime ago?

Hi EA, yes still working on th website. I'm halfway through.

Quite some project that.............dont forget to let us know when youve finished, so we can have a peep!

[Blowfeld]

Uhm, Fleming did NOT describe a man with cold hard looks. Fleming had extremely specific physical details about him, too, and Craig has NONE of those. NONE. Tall (absolutely not) dark-haired (not a chance), handsome (HELL NO!), elegant (OMG don't even get me started), with curious eyes. This thing of the cold looks is a VERY understated assessment Fleming makes in CR WHILE DESCRIBING A SLEEPING BOND (I've yet to see anyone who doesn't look serious and cold while they're sleeping), that pro-Craig people have somehow turned into a fundamental feature of the description. It's not. AT ALL. In fact, when talking about awake Bond there's anything BUT cold non-expression to him. He's described as attentive and curious, and someone who has a VERY distinct taste for both food, beverages AND clothes. Absolutely NONE of these characteristics belong to Craig's Bond. And don't even get me started about that absolutely INSULTING line "do I look like I give a d**n" about the Martini, who destroys the entire Bond description Fleming makes in CR just with one line. I'm going to really laugh at those who even think about saying Craig's Bond is close to Fleming. If anything it is the FURTHER they've gotten from what Fleming described.

Fleming does describe Bond as a man with cruel looks in many of the novels. In FRWL, the SMERSH general studies a photo of Bond and thinks to himself `nasty looking customer.' When Viv Michel in TSWLM first lays eyes on Bond, she immediately thinks he's one of the villains by his appearance.

I guess with literary work, everyone's interpretations will be different. I read Carte Blanche recently, and strangely found myself picturing Craig in the role as Bond. This is probably the first time I've done that with any actor when reading one of the novels. Carte Blanche is not a patch on Fleming's work though, and although Deaver tries to emulate Fleming, the novel definitely has a foot in the cinematic Bond world too. Maybe Deaver himself had Craig in mind when writing the book, hence why I found myself picturing him when reading the book (although Deaver still describes the appearance of Bond the way Fleming wrote him.)

Sweeney all you need is this from Carte Blanche;

‘There’s no shortage of Special Air or Boat Service chaps about who know their way around a knife and sniper rifle. But they don’t necessarily fit into other, shall we say subtler, situations. And then there are plenty of talented Five and Six fellows who know the difference between . . .’ he glanced at Bond’s glass ‘. . . a Côte de Beaune and a Côte de Nuits and can speak French as fluently as they can Arabic –but who’d faint at the sight of blood, theirs or anyone else’s.’ The steel eyes zeroed in. ‘You seem to be a rather rare combination of the best of both.’

Over all Carte Blanch is at times a stinging rebuke of the movie reboot.

Bond was described by Ian as being a handsome man, a short unrefined man he was not. Deaver lifts a lot of Ian's work to describe Bond, the cruel aspect use to defend Daniels miscasting is laughable because when Ian had the chance to hire someone like Daniel he never did. He fought against it. FRWL Bond is a very handsome charismatic man, Tatiana starts to fall in love with him from his picture.

[Omega]

Everyone is over-thinking the hard looks Fleming described. Fleming worked with real Special Operators in WWII right? Let me tell you these SOF guys are bad asses but they look anything but. Every now and then you might catch a look on their faces that tell you they know how to hurt a bad guy. I think this is more what Fleming was talking about admittedly I haven't read all of his books I do have them all on my iPod so that should count for something

[spoil][/spoil]

[katied]

Yes I did. It should go to DVD soon. Universal must be FUMING with Spielberg for hiring DC in the lead. Who ever thought it would take a faux James Bond to tarnish the sterling reputations of Spielberg and Ford?

I think it'll get a fan base of people who wouldn't bother otherwise(it'll be popular at places like the Blockbuster and Red Box kiosks they have at grocery stores where it only costs a few bucks(or less) to rent it.

[Alessandra]

Uhm, Fleming did NOT describe a man with cold hard looks. Fleming had extremely specific physical details about him, too, and Craig has NONE of those. NONE. Tall (absolutely not) dark-haired (not a chance), handsome (HELL NO!), elegant (OMG don't even get me started), with curious eyes. This thing of the cold looks is a VERY understated assessment Fleming makes in CR WHILE DESCRIBING A SLEEPING BOND (I've yet to see anyone who doesn't look serious and cold while they're sleeping), that pro-Craig people have somehow turned into a fundamental feature of the description. It's not. AT ALL. In fact, when talking about awake Bond there's anything BUT cold non-expression to him. He's described as attentive and curious, and someone who has a VERY distinct taste for both food, beverages AND clothes. Absolutely NONE of these characteristics belong to Craig's Bond. And don't even get me started about that absolutely INSULTING line "do I look like I give a d**n" about the Martini, who destroys the entire Bond description Fleming makes in CR just with one line. I'm going to really laugh at those who even think about saying Craig's Bond is close to Fleming. If anything it is the FURTHER they've gotten from what Fleming described.

Fleming does describe Bond as a man with cruel looks in many of the novels. In FRWL, the SMERSH general studies a photo of Bond and thinks to himself `nasty looking customer.' When Viv Michel in TSWLM first lays eyes on Bond, she immediately thinks he's one of the villains by his appearance.

I guess with literary work, everyone's interpretations will be different. I read Carte Blanche recently, and strangely found myself picturing Craig in the role as Bond. This is probably the first time I've done that with any actor when reading one of the novels. Carte Blanche is not a patch on Fleming's work though, and although Deaver tries to emulate Fleming, the novel definitely has a foot in the cinematic Bond world too. Maybe Deaver himself had Craig in mind when writing the book, hence why I found myself picturing him when reading the book (although Deaver still describes the appearance of Bond the way Fleming wrote him.)

He never says he has cruel looks, he says he has a cruel mouth in one of the descriptions. A "nasty-looking customer" is not at all a synonym of cold looks, pale face and blond hair (that's Craig). Quite the opposite. It's also not a synonym for classless and vulgar. And, it's not something that refers to his general physical attributes and attitude but something that refers to his specific attitude in a specific scene where clearly he's got to look a certain way because of the situation. The general description of Bond and his general physical attributes do NOT include the "cold looks" part at all. Neither does the "nasty-looking customer" definition anyway. Or the fact Viv Michel thinks he's one of the villains. Neither of these (specific to a certain moment and in the second case, the perception of someone else, not Fleming's general description of the character) equal "cold looks". Least of all short, blond, unattractive and unclassy. (=Craig). In fact, Bond is always described by Fleming as someone who cares despite not wanting to care, he cares enough about doing his job properly to care about what happens and to whom it happens (lol a tad badly-written this one but it was the only way to explain the concept). And he most definitely cares a LOT about his suits, his gourmets foods and drinks and his surroundings. He is "high maintenance". And absolutely not someone who would EVER say "do I look like I give a d**n?" when asked if the Martini needs to be shaken or stirred. He only wants things his own way, including even the way the bread is toast and the quantity of toast bread he gets with his caviar.

Everyone is over-thinking the hard looks Fleming described. Fleming worked with real Special Operators in WWII right? Let me tell you these SOF guys are bad asses but they look anything but. Every now and then you might catch a look on their faces that tell you they know how to hurt a bad guy. I think this is more what Fleming was talking about admittedly I haven't read all of his books I do have them all on my iPod so that should count for something

Plus this, totally agree.

[The Sweeney]

He never says he has cruel looks, he says he has a cruel mouth in one of the descriptions. A "nasty-looking customer" is not at all a synonym of cold looks, pale face and blond hair (that's Craig). Quite the opposite. It's also not a synonym for classless and vulgar. And, it's not something that refers to his general physical attributes and attitude but something that refers to his specific attitude in a specific scene where clearly he's got to look a certain way because of the situation. The general description of Bond and his general physical attributes do NOT include the "cold looks" part at all. Neither does the "nasty-looking customer" definition anyway. Or the fact Viv Michel thinks he's one of the villains. Neither of these (specific to a certain moment and in the second case, the perception of someone else, not Fleming's general description of the character) equal "cold looks". Least of all short, blond, unattractive and unclassy. (=Craig). In fact, Bond is always described by Fleming as someone who cares despite not wanting to care, he cares enough about doing his job properly to care about what happens and to whom it happens (lol a tad badly-written this one but it was the only way to explain the concept). And he most definitely cares a LOT about his suits, his gourmets foods and drinks and his surroundings. He is "high maintenance". And absolutely not someone who would EVER say "do I look like I give a d**n?" when asked if the Martini needs to be shaken or stirred. He only wants things his own way, including even the way the bread is toast and the quantity of toast bread he gets with his caviar.

It still irks me that Craig has blonde hair, when Bond is described as being dark haired. To me this is the biggest error with the physical description matching Fleming's Bond. I do think however, that Craig's piercing cold blue eyes absolutely fit the bill to Fleming's description of Bond. Out of all the actors, Craig looks most like he could kill someone.

To me Craig embodies the tougher qualities of the character, the same way Connery and Lazenby naturally did, but I also think Craig is the least refined out of all the actors in terms of an English upper class gentleman. In Casino Royale I saw an essence of Fleming's character (mainly in the second half of the film), but not so much in QoS.

But I agree, he doesn't physically fit the bill of the literary description as much as the other actors did.

[Alessandra]

He never says he has cruel looks, he says he has a cruel mouth in one of the descriptions. A "nasty-looking customer" is not at all a synonym of cold looks, pale face and blond hair (that's Craig). Quite the opposite. It's also not a synonym for classless and vulgar. And, it's not something that refers to his general physical attributes and attitude but something that refers to his specific attitude in a specific scene where clearly he's got to look a certain way because of the situation. The general description of Bond and his general physical attributes do NOT include the "cold looks" part at all. Neither does the "nasty-looking customer" definition anyway. Or the fact Viv Michel thinks he's one of the villains. Neither of these (specific to a certain moment and in the second case, the perception of someone else, not Fleming's general description of the character) equal "cold looks". Least of all short, blond, unattractive and unclassy. (=Craig). In fact, Bond is always described by Fleming as someone who cares despite not wanting to care, he cares enough about doing his job properly to care about what happens and to whom it happens (lol a tad badly-written this one but it was the only way to explain the concept). And he most definitely cares a LOT about his suits, his gourmets foods and drinks and his surroundings. He is "high maintenance". And absolutely not someone who would EVER say "do I look like I give a d**n?" when asked if the Martini needs to be shaken or stirred. He only wants things his own way, including even the way the bread is toast and the quantity of toast bread he gets with his caviar.

It still irks me that Craig has blonde hair, when Bond is described as being dark haired. To me this is the biggest error with the physical description matching Fleming's Bond. I do think however, that Craig's piercing cold blue eyes absolutely fit the bill to Fleming's description of Bond. Out of all the actors, Craig looks most like he could kill someone.

To me Craig embodies the tougher qualities of the character, the same way Connery and Lazenby naturally did, but I also think Craig is the least refined out of all the actors in terms of an English upper class gentleman. In Casino Royale I saw an essence of Fleming's character (mainly in the second half of the film), but not so much in QoS.

But I agree, he doesn't physically fit the bill of the literary description as much as the other actors did.

That was exactly the point I was trying to make. We all have different taste when it comes to preferring this or the other characteristic Bond has obviously, but the general gist to me is that Craig doesn't fit the bill of the literary description either physically or in terms of class and manners, and yes he looks like a killer (though to me the one who looked like the perfect embodiment of Bond the killer was Dalton, not Craig), in fact instead of looking like James Bond he just looks like a random killer. Or like your typical Bond VILLAIN instead of James Bond himself in my opinion. That's the problem. He doesn't have class and manners and characteristics Bond is supposed to have, that Martini line should NEVER even have been THOUGHT of because it is the opposite of who Bond is. A high maintenance upper class spy who's manic about the details of his drinks, food and clothes. Those things aren't a minor part of the books, and the very first one (that Craig starred in) has very specific details about how Bond likes his food and his drinks. So not only what they did was out of place in terms of casting but it was a slap in the face to the literary character (not just the cinematic one) to include certain attitudes and lines.

That said, obviously everyone will have their favorites, but I think it's an undeniable fact that Craig is the one who fits the literary (and cinematic) Bond the least.

[bjmdds]

He belongs playing Jame Gumb in Silence Of The Lambs(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHyadlNZ ... re=related), or in a film about Gumby, the animated piece of clay(http://www.multipet.com/images/gumby.JPG), nothing else. He is the WORST possible ambassador the saga ever had!

[stockslivevan]

Frankly I don't see what is wrong with the "does it look like I give a d**n" line. It worked perfectly in the context of the scene where Bond had lost it all and was very upset over the circumstances. High class he may be but there comes a time when it doesn't matter when you realize you might have lost a hundred million dollars to terrorists. In fact he doesn't even pick up his martini, once he sees Le Chiffre he realizes that the only way to really prevent him from winning under the certain circumstances is to kill him on the spot. The last thing Bond would want to see is an enemy walking away delivering money to those who commit evil. Times like these Bond has bigger fish to fry.

Is it a line Bond would utter on another occasion? Likely not. But given the circumstances it's appropriate and Craig delivers it well.