All member reviews for Casino Royale (2006)

About our rating system

  • ON: Content is age-appropriate for kids this age.
  • PAUSE: Know your child; some content may not be right for some kids.
  • OFF: Not age-appropriate for kids this age.
  • NOT FOR KIDS: Not appropriate for kids of any age.

Find out more

Quality

Our star rating assesses the media's overall quality.

Find out more

Learning ratings

  • Best: Really engaging, great learning approach.
  • Very Good: Engaging, good learning approach.
  • Good: Pretty engaging, good learning approach.
  • Fair: Somewhat engaging, okay learning approach.
  • Not for Learning: Not recommended for learning.
  • Not for Kids: Not age-appropriate for kids; not recommended for learning.

Find out more

Kids say

(out of 82 reviews)
AGE
13
QUALITY
 
Review this title!
Teen, 17 years old Written byTrinity3 March 24, 2009
AGE
14
QUALITY
 

REally AWEsome!!!

I saw this movie when i was 13 and thought it was awesome! I hate the gorey violence shown in horror films.=, but this isnt a horror film. its an awesome action film with intense scenes all over the place!
What other families should know
Too much violence
Too much sex
Too much swearing
Teen, 13 years old Written byeteichert April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 

Terrific!

Espionage gains a whole new face in the newest installment of Bond! This is one of the best movies I've ever seen!
Teen, 14 years old Written byquickbuild2345 March 2, 2012
AGE
13
QUALITY
 

Great action movie, best Bond; lots of violence, however

This is the best Bond movie ever made - it has a great Bond, a solid plot, a convincing villain, a marvelous cast, some incredible action sequences, a witty script, and plenty of intensity and suspense. It's also one of the grittiest Bonds, so I would recommend it for teenagers and up. As per a usual Bond, there is quite a bit of drinking. Violence: in the opening sequence, two men are shot at close range in the head - this is a black and white sequence. The first one there is no blood and we simply see him fall back in his chair from a distance. The second, we see it from his point of view, with a copious amount of blood dribbling down the screen. The film includes plenty of explosions, bullets, and hand-to-hand combat, often brutal. Bond shoots many people and we usually see a brief bit of blood. A man is strangled rather graphically. A woman drowns - this is probably the most emotional drowning scene I've seen in a movie. A man is shot in the eye with a nail gun - we briefly see the nail protruding from the lens of his sunglasses. A man is electrocuted very briefly. The villain beats Bond's genitals with a knotted rope. Sex: Bond and a married woman kiss passionately on the ground for a while, but he leaves before anything more happens. Bond and Vesper kiss passionately and fall to the ground - sex is implied. In one scene, we see them naked in bed with sheets covering anything graphic. There are lots of women in skimpy clothing. Language: M says "h**l" a lot. "D**n," "b*****d," "b**ch," religious profanities, and other swear words are used infrequently.
What other families should know
Too much violence
Too much sex
Too much drinking/drugs/smoking
Teen, 14 years old Written byredring120 February 12, 2009
AGE
14
QUALITY
 

Bond's Back at his Best, but Think before taking the Kids

Since Ian Fleming created Bond, he has gone through many incarnations. Sean Connery had perfected Bond in his first movies, being able to switch between ruthless and a charmer. Roger Moore was a very good Bond but wasn't able to stand to the juggernaut of Connery. Pierce Bronsman had the same problem. But today, I have to say, this new Bond is easily better then the past ones and can stand up with Connery. He is ruthless, charming, and even a bit humorous. The movie starts off in one of the most memorable opening sequence of any Bond film. Shot in black and white, it shows Bond becoming a 007. While the stories plot can be a little difficult to follow as a whole, it is an enjoyable experience. It is the best Bond I've seen since Goldfinger. As for age, not only do I think that this should not be seen by children because of the content, but I also think that the younger one's should see the older Bond movies first. If they are interested, of course. There are scenes of great emotional destress and even torture. This is not a children's movie. But for the people who have seen other action movies like, say, "Hot Fuzz" this should be appropriate. In conclusion, don't take children, but if you want to see James Bond at the top again, see this film.
Teen, 13 years old Written bynatkh1293 April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 
Teen, 15 years old Written byJustjr92 April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 

One of the best!!!!

I think that this is one of the best action movies I have ever seen!!!
Teen, 13 years old Written byrunner4ever April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 

scary at times but really good otherwise

The violence was bad it also had some sexual related stuff and the torture scene was on the verge of being really bad but other than that i would say 12 and up(that is being mature for your age) Daniel Craig was the best 007 that i have seen he is awesome.
Teen, 15 years old Written bycwj April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 

the greatest bond movie

Daniel Craig was a great bond. Eva Green was a great bond girl. Everyone is great. This is a great movie.
Teen, 13 years old Written byWebMasterYoung008 April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 

It's ok......

cool cool cool who cares it's sorat bad but just mainly know your child that's all....RATING:13+MAYBE14+DEPENDS ON THE CHILD!!!!
Kid, 12 years old April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 

It was the was horrible!!

this movie was one of the worst bond movies ever. If you want a family bond movie with no violence and not many swears choose this one. BUT DO be aware that it has a few sex scenes and much love. It is a bad name to all bond movies!!
Teen, 13 years old Written byTelenoid April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 

James Bond: 1962-2006

Why? Just.... why? In 1962, Ian Fleming's literary secret agent burst on to the silver screen in a little film called Dr. No. When released, the film was a critical and box office success, paving the way for a series based on the adventures of James Bond. In the movies, Bond went up against ruthless villains, like the terrorist organization SPECTRE (Special Executive for Counterintelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion), and met some of the most beautiful women ever to grace the motion picture industry. He was cool, made puns whenever a villain died in a gruesome fashion and occasionally annoys his nerdy gadget supplier, Q. All of that was about to change. In Casino Royale, which is a reboot of the 007 franchise, the series was given a more "realistic" image. The film portrays Bond as an emotionless robot, showing no mercy to his opponents and practically killing everyone in sight. If I wanted a character like that, I'd pick Governor "Ah-nuld." Anyway, 007 is sent to go after a terrorist group that is based at a casino in Montenegro called "Casino Royale", which is owned by an uber-wimpy bean-counter who gets killed later in the film by his boss. Casino Royale is probably the worst James Bond film ever conceived... Having Daniel Craig play Bond is like having Carrot Top portray Godzilla. It's an insult to Fleming, the films and the very spirit of Bond.
Teen, 15 years old Written bylbrilowell April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 

Best Bond Yet

The new Bond is great! There's more action in Casino Royale than the other Bond movies and the plot is really great too. I can't wait until this movie is out on DVD. It's a must see movie deffinately!
Teen, 14 years old Written bymythumbjib April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 

Non-Stop Action

I found this movie to be the best Bond movie since GoldenEye. If you are a fan of this franchise in any way, YOU MUST SEE THIS! I loved it and consider it to be appropriate for ages 13 and up.
Teen, 14 years old Written byfoblova01 April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 

WHAT THE HECK

this movie was so confusing......it had random characters come in it and just go away....it was more relalistic then the other ones but they could of done better.......and i think they could have found a better james bond too....but you should see it though because this is just my thoughts!!!
Teen, 13 years old Written byumidk April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 
it was a good movie... best was when bond is being tortured in his sore spot... he makes a very funny situation out of it, although he must be in much pain. i think it is appropriate because the only nudity is the torture.
Kid, 9 years old April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 

Good movie

This movie was pretty good. CS made a pretty stupid call how no one under 14 should see it. The only inapropreit part was when they where torchering 007 naked. You should see it.
Teen, 16 years old Written byCurbspaget April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 

Skip this One

Seemed like a pretty graphic movie for PG-13. The torture scene was horrible, and nude. It was also extremely boring. Just skip it, please. Not worth any of your money.
Teen, 16 years old Written bydark rose April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 

Best action sequences...ever

what can i say... this movie is genius.
Kid, 10 years old April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 
Casino Royale I thought was a pretty good movie.The sex parts were not that aggresive as other ones I've seen in movies.The vilonece was exciting I still feel sort of bad for some bad guys for some reason. the most exciting part was where the guy who MI6 had to question fought James Bond.This movie may be disturbing to some people but it is alot of fun.The torture scene was sort of funny
Kid, 11 years old April 9, 2008
AGENot rated for age
QUALITY
 

Really Good!

Good Movie, but not one i'll be looking back on in ten years time.

Pages