I love the James Bond movies for the adventure and thrills so I thought I would read the first Bond book. I was expecting a boring read and was pleasantly surprised by the revelation of Bond's motives and thought processes behind what he does. The movies paint him as an indestructible superhero. Ian Fleming brings out his humanity and character.

Just have to say the movies tone down some of James more unflattering qualities. I think even for the time the book was published those qualities were a bit unflattering....having said that, it was fun to see where "it all began". I had a hard time separating my memory of the most recent Casino Royale movie from the book. There is lots of description of actual gambling, which...is a bit boring, gambling needs to be watched, participated in....and the game they are playing is so boring...at least that is what my mom told me back in the day's of her card dealing career. There were no jangling sound of slot machines in the back ground of this casino.

James liked to be pampered more in the book than in the movies I feel. I liked how he actually ate large meals and drank more than he should. The book talks about how James liked gambling, that it was his thing. I am surprised we don't see more of it in later movies, I am not sure if I will read any more books to see if this is true. I was bothered by the ending of this one. We went from this huge "high" to this very "low". I get it, James had his heart broken, we knew it was inevitable from the first chapter. Still....it bothered me.

It was an easy read. I think I will stick with the movies..... for me Pierce and Daniel show us the essence of James in the books.

I'm pretty sure I've read this before, but for some reason I had no track of it. It's an excellent introduction to the world of James Bond, but should it be one of the "1001 Books To Read Before You Die"? Not sure.

It is definitely a game-changer as thrillers went. We have a character who can be cold as ice, but probably because he has to be. It is also emblematic of a time. The time where everyone's life was circumscribed by the two big elephants in the room: US and USSR. In many ways, a simpler time. And, it's nice to revisit it.

When I finally got around to reading this book I was in for more than a few surprises. And it was not as if I went in blind. I was aware that the movies--even the Daniel Craig vehicles--were different from the books. And I had read Thunderball years ago, though it was during the observation period after a car accident; it was the only book of fiction in the room and all I can remember is that I didn’t care for it.

My first surprise was at how well written Casino Royale is, particularly since I had heard of Ian Fleming’s lack of critical respect. I can only assume it was more a question of subject matter and tone than his narrative prowess. Another surprise was that while we share thoughts with Bond, there remained a certain lack of intimacy. I felt we never got much insight into 007. Fleming painted more vivid pictures of the supporting players: Vesper Lynd certainly, and to a lesser extent Mathis and Felix Leiter. Perhaps this was intentional in order to give Bond’s final scene--and the last line of the book--more impact. If that was the goal, at least that part was successful.

As was the main casino sequence. Fleming loved sports and games and endeavored to include them in his work whenever possible. That showed here. Bond’s showdown with Le Chiffre at the baccarat table was everything it could be.

But there were plenty of negatives, some serious. First of all, I kept waiting for something to happen. A lot of time--for me, too much--was spent inside Bond's head. Again, because I felt we didn’t learn much about the man, this compounded the feeling that there was too much “waiting around.” And then there is the matter of following a protagonist who never once manages to save himself. He was saved from a bomb by luck. He was saved from another bitter loss by Leiter’s care package. And he was saved one other time [from Le Chiffre’s torture by SMERSH]. Actually, Bond did manage to save himself once, but even then there lingered this feeling that if the confrontation had not happened in full view of multiple witnesses, Bond would have been left dead on the floor.

I don’t mind mistakes by the hero. They should all make some, whether the series is realistic or fantastic. But by the time a villain says to Bond, “You are not equipped, my dear boy, to play games with adults,” I find myself agreeing with him.

My last complaint is muted to some extent by the fact that the book is sixty some-odd years old. It took place in an era when the only reason characters’ needed to fall in love (in any medium) was that they were alone together in a story that required it. While the attraction between Bond and Vesper was ever-present from the beginning, love seemed unlikely, particularly as they were never on the same wavelength for any period of time. This is particularly true at that beach resort, where, again, there seemed to be a lot of wasted time; I again found myself “willing” for something to happen.

Was it worth the read? Maybe as a curiosity. Will I follow up? I was somewhat intrigued by the character and those who have read the series have promised more evolution to Bond, at least in the first couple of books. And it might be interesting to see how the movies and the accompanying fame affected Fleming’s work. But somehow I doubt I’ll be back. It didn’t do enough for me.

n  [Reprinted and updated from a message board post I’d written in early 2006.]n

James Bond, 007, international icon. It's always fascinating to me picking up a book like this, the first in a series that has far outgrown what the author created, and seeing the original intent. In some ways it's hard to separate the cultural impact of Bond as the icon when reading the book. Tell me honestly, while even thinking of the character, did you immediately jump to Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan or Craig? I know I thought of my favorite interpretation.

The book's Bond is a bit different. He's not immediately assigned the job because he's a super cool secret agent... no he's assigned the job because he's a good gambler. While he does have the classic license to kill, he's apparently only killed two people and only one of them was an up-close fight. Hell, he's still figuring out his martini, and while shaken not stirred is mentioned, I think he only drinks one or two, which means he drinks more wine/champagne in the book instead.

Alright, let's stop comparing. How does the book work on its own?

Honest opinion: it's alright. It's fairly entertaining. Fits pretty firmly in the classic "adventure" fiction. Not my usual big thing, but I can't say I didn't enjoy myself while reading. That said, the misogyny was a big turn off. Yes, yes, I know, it's Bond, I should expect some of that... and indeed I did. I just wasn't expecting his inner monologue and quite frequent outer dialogue for him to refer to the female lead as a "bitch" seemingly half the time he mentions her. That aspect did lower the rating for me as it went beyond "oh, it was a different time" and much more into "wow, either the character is a complete ass or the writer is" territory.

Casino Royale was Ian Fleming's first James Bond book. It is remarkable in many ways. First, it has no techno-gadgets. A tire-shredding mesh thrown from the car of the leading bad guys is about as sophisticated as the mechanical tricks get. Bravo. Sorry, Q old man, this one shines brightly without you.

In all his books, Fleming drew on the tradition of Graham Greene, as Le Carre has done since. And he essentially wrote what he knew, mostly described places he had visited. Granted he may have been basking on the beach and burning his all-too-white, easily freckled skin instead of blowing up missile silos or escaping on jet-powered watercraft. In this book, he trades on his experience at the baccarat table. And if you yearn to learn the game (not that I would advise it!), you will get a full tutorial here, including strategy on when to hold-em, when to fold-em. Nicely done, and a neat example for writers who wish to learn how to liven a narrative simply by adding lots of accurate detail.

Interesting to me, as I had not realized it before, Casino Royale is set in the *north* coast of France, not far from Trouville, near the landing beaches of the Allied troops on D-Day. That region is the vacation home of Parisians during the hot months leading up to back-to-school. (I was there once in St. Malo in early September and I remember getting a great deal on a sweater at Monoprix because all the kids' mothers had already virtually cleaned out the store.) Casino Royale is *not*, as you might expect, in the acclaimed gambling region of the Cote d'Azur (French Riviera) and adjacent Monte Carlo, both of which are busiest in the winter and are much more famous for being the Las Vegas of Europe.

As to sexual politics, of course this Fleming book fails dismally, all in retrospect. The female accomplice Vesper Lynd is the first in a long line of Bond bunkmates that give but don't get happy endings. At one point, Bond muses (in his mind, thankfully) that he would enjoy raping her. I'd say that's about as non-p.c. as you can get these days.

But then Fifty Shades of Grey sold all those books -- to someone!

This was a very interesting read. If you know the James Bond movies you might be a bit disappointed since the James Bond character shown here isn't the unbeatable superhero as on film. We have a casino setting with a compelling game going on between Bond and a villain named Le Chiffre. Then there is a secret agency named Smersh. What about Vesper, his female colleague on this case? It's a nice story with a romantic twist at the end and a woman (Vesper) torn between two men. Don't get me wrong, an interesting read (bit of a pulp) but I preferred the movie to the book. Maybe I couldn't read the novel in an objective manner since I know all the Bond movies. The bond character in this book is different to the screen hero. Nevertheless worth a reading, since it is a spy classic!

Excellent spy novel, first of a long series. Fleming was a British Naval Intelligence officer in WW II. Bond and Bourne would make a great team.

Casino Royale...Or How To Stop Worrying and Learn To Play Baccarat

Having watched the movie, I had very high expectations from the book. But I must say that I was let down. This is probably due to the early chapters which focus more on Baccarat and gambling instructions than anything interesting, like moving the plot forward. So the early chapters do get very boring and start feeling like a chore.
Another thing that let me down is the sexism. From the first chapter to the last, there is a bit of sexist remarks and dialogues thrown around.

The book also has some positive things though. After the Baccarat lessons, the book really picks up on the plot and things get exciting. There is a certain scene where Bond is captured and the dialogue by the Villain, Le Chiffre is written in an amazing manner. And that's about everything positive about the book.

As a final verdict, the stone cold spy with a license to kill, gets a very weak debut novel that makes the readers doubt whether to continue reading the novels or rather shift to the more action-packed and interesting movies.

I've been a huge fan of James Bond ever since Casino Royale(2006) was shown in theatres. I remember watching it with my family and my dream then was to become just like James Bond. I watched all the Bond movies that Daniel Craig starred in ever since that Royale movie. I haven't seen the older ones though, and I heard that this novel is similar to the older movies, and thankfully I haven't seen those.

There's this scene in this novel wherein the villain tortured Bond by repeatedly striking his manhood, and I'm 100% sure that that scene is present in either Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace (more or less Royale). While reading the novel, I imagined Bond as Craig, and I don't think I can ever imagine him as someone else.

The novel itself is very short, but substance filled. Is that a thing? Substance filled. I really enjoyed it, and it brought back a lot of memories. Not that much action I guess, but this is Bond, and I'm pretty biased about him. Deep inside, I'm sure I'd still want to be a spy if given the chance. I almost forgot, this novel explained why Bond got the 007 status, been wondering my whole life. Not sure if they told it in the movies, but I was 8 years old when I watched it, so I can't really remember much.

Before I conclude, let me just say that the movies were not particular about Bond's vices/habits(?). He likes to smoke 70 cigarettes a day, take cold baths, and collect cool cars. I'm a huge car enthusiast, I hate cold baths, and I don't smoke, but one day, I still believe that I'll be just like James Bond.

I'm a huge crime-mystery-thriller fan, and I'm a huge Bond fan, so this novel was quite enjoyable for me. I've been deciding between 4 or 5 stars, but I believe I didn't find any flaws that bothered me that much. Like I said though, I'm really biased when it comes to Bond. 5/5 stars, and I can't seem to not add this to my favorites list. Read this if you want a short but satisfying crime novel.

The casino where the first James Bond adventure begins is located in Royale-les-Eaux, a fading resort town near Dieppe on the coast of northern France. It is a surprisingly déclassé locale, one might think, for a James Bond novel – not the sunny beaches of Monaco, but rather the grey mists of the windswept Norman shoreline. Yet that touch of the noir-ish gives an added degree of authenticity to Casino Royale, the 1953 novel with which Ian Fleming launched the career of the world’s most famous secret agent.

Fleming worked in British Naval Intelligence during the Second World War, and therefore he knew a thing or two about the world of espionage. As the war ended, giving way to a Cold War between the Western Allies and the Soviet Union, there was heightened interest among the reading public in Western countries regarding what their intelligence agencies were doing to protect democracy. Fleming, in short, had the good fortune of releasing his James Bond novels into a world of readers who were eager to learn what they could about the secret world of spies – particularly if that information could be relayed via the medium of a sexy and action-packed novel.

Casino Royale, as the first of the James Bond novels, introduces the reader to a number of the storytelling archetypes that will become de rigueur in one Bond story after another. After an in medias res opening chapter that takes place at the novel’s title casino, Fleming takes us back to British Secret Intelligence headquarters in London, where “M” (code name for the director of MI-6) receives a dossier regarding a proposed plan to neutralize one “Le Chiffre” (“The Number”), a Frenchman who is a Soviet spy, influencing trade-union activities in Alsace-Lorraine.

As Le Chiffre is a compulsive gambler, who has been spending Soviet espionage funds on both his gambling habit and an array of organized-crime activities, the plan presented by Station S of the British Secret Service is as follows: send Bond to Royale, and have him ruin Le Chiffre by defeating him in a high-stakes gambling match. His embezzlement from the U.S.S.R. having thus been made clear to Soviet authorities, Le Chiffre will then be eliminated by Soviet SMERSH agents, saving the British the trouble. SMERSH (СМЕРШ), by the way, was a real-life Soviet counterintelligence agency; it was established by Stalin, and it stood for Смерть шпио́нам (Smert' shpiónam, “Death to Spies”).

My response to Section S's master plan for neutralizing Le Chiffre was: Really? British Intelligence has been the world’s finest espionage service since Sir Francis Walsingham was protecting Queen Elizabeth the First from a wide array of would-be assassins, and this is the best plan that they can come up with? Give an undercover operative a sizable bankroll of pounds sterling, and have him out-gamble a gambler? It seems evident that this weak plot element of Casino Royale is introduced so that Fleming can later share with us his considerable knowledge of the fine points of high-stakes casino gambling.

Bond learns, upon accepting the assignment, that he will be assisted by René Mathis, a top agent for France’s Deuxième Bureau. That news pleases him. He further learns that he will also be assisted by a woman named Vesper Lynn from his own country’s intelligence service. He is distinctly not pleased by that news: “And then there was this pest of a girl. He sighed. Women were for recreation. On a job, they got in the way and fogged things up with sex and hurt feelings and all the emotional baggage they carried around. One had to look out for them and take care of them.”

At a later point in the novel, when a woman agent seems to have been kidnapped, Bond indulges in more misogynist musings: “These blithering women who thought they could do a man’s work. Why the hell couldn’t they stay at home and mind their pots and pans and stick to their frocks and gossip and leave men’s work to the men?”

Well, “Good God, 007!” – as “M” has been known to say when he is impatient with his ace secret agent.

And yet I can’t help thinking that there may be something of a “meta” element to Bond’s seemingly bottomless misogyny – as I am reminded when, in the second chapter of Casino Royale, the reader meets M’s administrative assistant, Miss Moneypenny. “Miss Moneypenny,” the book’s narrator states, “would have been desirable but for eyes which were cool and direct and quizzical.” It is passages like that make me wonder whether, in presenting the oh-so-sexist mind of James Bond, Fleming just might be having us on.

During his time in British Naval Intelligence, Fleming would have known many agents like Moneypenny – smart, courageous, able women who risked and in many cases gave their lives for Great Britain and democracy. It is as if Fleming is saying, subtly, that any man who would look at Moneypenny only in terms of her potential desirability, who would fail to appreciate her intelligence and her gift for observation – or, in other words, any man who would think about women the way James Bond does – is a bloody fool for thinking that way.

Bond may not like working with a woman colleague, but he does like the S section’s scheme for gambling Le Chiffre into a traitor’s grave: “Above all, he liked it that everything was one’s own fault. There was only oneself to praise or blame. Luck was a servant and not a master. Luck had to be accepted with a shrug or taken advantage of up to the hilt. But it had to be understood and recognized for what it was and not confused with a faulty appreciation of the odds, for, at gambling, the deadly sin is to mistake bad play for bad luck.”

Bond likes the scheme because of his history of good luck with cards and with women: “[H]e was honest enough to admit that he had never yet been made to suffer by cards, or by women. One day, and he accepted the fact, he would be brought to his knees by love or by luck. When that happened, he knew that he too would be branded with the deadly question mark he recognized so often in others, the promise to pay before you have lost: the acceptance of fallibility.”

At the casino, Bond meets Felix Leiter, a CIA agent from Texas, and likes him at once: “Bond reflected that good Americans were fine people and that most of them seemed to come from Texas.” Readers of the series already know that Leiter will play a vitally important role in many of the novels – one that reflects the “special relationship” between the governments, and the intelligence services, of Great Britain and the United States of America.

Part of why people who are interested in reading Fleming’s James Bond novels might want to start with Casino Royale is because of the narrator’s s description of Bond as Bond looks at his reflection in the mirror while getting ready for the gambling match with Le Chiffre:

His grey-blue eyes looked calmly back with a hint of ironical inquiry, and the short lock of hair which would never stay in place slowly subsided to form a thick comma above his right eyebrow. With the thin vertical scar down his right cheek, the general effect was faintly piratical. Not much of Hoagy Carmichael there, thought Bond….

Readers can decide for themselves whether this description best matches Sean Connery, David Niven, George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan, Daniel Craig, or some other actor.

One surprise from Casino Royale is how much Fleming focuses on what Bond eats and drinks. After meeting Leiter, Bond orders a drink – one that I suppose is shaken-not-stirred. “Three measures of Gordon’s, one of vodka, half a measure of Kina Lillet. Shake it very well until it’s ice-cold, then add a large thin slice of lemon-peel.” Later, over dinner with Vesper, Bond orders a Taittinger Blanc de Blanc Cru 1943 – “probably the finest champagne in the world,” as he tells Vesper – and then feels obligated to explain what he finds to be a pretentious statement:

“You must forgive me,” he said. “I take a ridiculous pleasure in what I eat and drink. It comes partly from being a bachelor, but mostly from taking a lot of trouble over details. It’s very persnickety and old-maid-ish, really, but then when I’m working I generally have to eat my meals alone, and it makes them more interesting when one takes trouble.”

And Casino Royale does have its surprises in terms of how Fleming delineates Bond’s character. When Vesper tells Bond that her officemates were jealous of her for getting to work with “a Double O,” Bond’s response is interesting. Suddenly the arrogance and the alpha-male posturing is all gone:

Bond frowned. “It’s not difficult to get a Double O number if you’re prepared to kill people,” he said. “That’s all the meaning it has. It’s nothing to be particularly proud of. I’ve got the corpses of a Japanese cipher expert in New York and a Norwegian double agent in Stockholm to thank for being a Double O. Probably quite decent people. They just got caught up in the gale of the world…. It’s a confusing business, but if it’s one’s profession, one does as one’s told.”

Gambling aficionados will enjoy the ups and downs of Bond’s baccarat game with Le Chiffre. There is much information regarding the intricacies of the game – even if I still think that Section S’s plan has to be one of the silliest in the history of espionage.

There is also a grueling torture scene – one that is faithfully reproduced in the Daniel Craig film adaptation of Casino Royale. Many male readers will probably cringe their way through this scene, even whilst knowing that, as this is only the first of what will be many James Bond books, Bond’s got to get out of this ordeal somehow.

A thought-provoking chapter titled “The Nature of Evil” shows Bond, who is then recovering from the injuries that he suffered at the hands of Le Chiffre, actually saying that he wants to resign! To Mathis, as he had earlier for Vesper, Bond recounts the story of the two men he killed to earn his “Double O” designation, and recalls having felt like the hero who had killed some villains. “But,” he adds, “when the hero Le Chiffre starts to kill the villain Bond and the villain Bond knows he isn’t a villain at all, you see the other side of the medal. The villains and the heroes get all mixed up….History is moving pretty quickly these days, and the heroes and villains keep on changing parts.”

It is left to Mathis to remind Bond that there is a difference between democracies like France and Great Britain on the one hand, and dictatorships like the U.S.S.R. on the other hand – even if the distinction may not always seem clear when one is elbows-deep in the dirty work of espionage. Mathis reminds Bond of the importance of trying to maintain a moral conscience, even under the most difficult of circumstances, and adds a healthy bit of advice: “Surround yourself with human beings, my dear James. They are easier to fight for than principles.” I was not expecting to encounter something so thoughtful in the midst of the sex and sensationalism of a James Bond story.

A long, seemingly idyllic interlude of erotic romance with Vesper follows – interlaced with the sense that something is wrong, that there is trouble in paradise. “People are islands,” Vesper says to Bond at one point, adding that “They don’t really touch. However close they are, they’re really quite separate – even if they’ve been married for 50 years.” The alert reader will have noticed long before this point that Fleming has diligently scattered many clues foreshadowing that Bond’s romance with Vesper will not end happily.

Casino Royale started it all. Fleming wrote 14 Bond books; other novelists, licensed by Fleming’s estate, have written 36 more. There have been 27 Bond films to date, with the character being played by seven different actors. The films alone have generated over 7 billion dollars in box-office receipts. It is fascinating to reflect that it all began, in a literary sense, over a game of cards in a dreary little town on the northern coast of France.

I think I read From Russia With Love first (and, FRWL will always be my favorite Bond book and movie), but I had to go back to the beginning a read the Fleming bond books straight through. I was afforded the opportunity a few years ago when the entire Fleming collection in paperback was available for $20 at Sam's Club! Still one of the best book buys I have ever come across!

Casino Royale did not blow me away - it is a bit dry and slow. I wasn't going to let that deter me from my quest to work through the series, but it did take some getting used to. I am not sure if it is just that it is from early in Fleming's writing career or if it is just tough to feel comfortable with my image of Bond as I was reading words from his creation. I am reminded of when you go back to watch the first episode of a sitcom while you are 8 or 9 seasons in and none of the characters are developed or comfortable yet.

One thing that surprised me was that the more recent Casino Royale movie did include most of the story from the book trading Texas Hold-Em for Baccarat. It had been years since a bond movie include plot lines or plot points from Fleming's works, it was kind of cool to see!

If you just want a taste of Fleming's Bond, go to From Russia With Love, but if you want to experience the whole adventure, be sure to start at the beginning!