# Please explain the plot of Casino Royal and Quantum of Solace **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [January 10, 2011, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140 "2011-01-10T21:20:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/41 "2011-01-11T16:42:51Z")
I think they went with poker because 95% of the people watching wouldn’t know what the fuck was going on in baccarat. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/42 "2011-01-11T16:49:53Z")
> [@Gangster\_Octopus](#): > > I think they went with poker because 95% of the people watching wouldn’t know what the fuck was going on in baccarat. You gotta get 21 points. More and you bust, less and you might not win. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Alka\_Seltzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c89c15/32.png) [@Alka\_Seltzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alka_Seltzer)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/43 "2011-01-11T16:52:32Z")
> [@Gangster\_Octopus](#): > > I think they went with poker because 95% of the people watching wouldn’t know what the fuck was going on in baccarat. This. > [@Gyrate](#): > > And note that everyone had a ridiculously good hand - IIRC a full house was one of the worst hands held. Most amazing round of poker ever. Yeah, that bit was just silly. ---
**Author:** ![muldoonthief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldoonthief/32/3188_2.png) [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/44 "2011-01-11T16:53:08Z")
> [@carnivorousplant](#): > > You gotta get 21 points. More and you bust, less and you might not win. There’s a paddle involved somehow as well. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/45 "2011-01-11T16:54:47Z")
> [@mlees](#): > > There is no bluffing in Baccarat, right? A little, at least in the version described in the original novel. The player is obliged to hit if his first two face-down cards total 4 or less (with values over 10 dropping the tens digit, so a seven and an eight count as five, not fifteen), obliged to stand if he has six or more, and can choose on a five. If he has an eight or nine, he reveals his cards immediately. It’s a fairly mechanical and (I figure) less interesting game than Hold’Em, but in any case novel-Bond “bluffs” in the sense of moderating his reactions, smiling with confidence when standing (suggesting he has a respectable 7 instead of a more troublesome 5) and masking his negative reaction when he gets two face cards (for a total of zero). The banker can choose to take an extra card or not, based on the player’s choice and the value of his extra card (dealt face up) if he asks for one. Novel-Bond ultimately wins big when he gets two red queens, asks for a third card while trying hard not to sound glum about it, draws a nine. With any initial hand other than zero, this would weaken Bond’s hand. Le Chiffre has a total of three, debates for a moment to draw or not, draws a five for a very impressive eight, then blammo. Take _that_, Frenchie! ---
**Author:** ![muldoonthief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldoonthief/32/3188_2.png) [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/46 "2011-01-11T17:04:53Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > And note that everyone had a ridiculously good hand - IIRC a full house was one of the worst hands held. Most amazing round of poker ever. I know nothing about betting in poker, but note that Bond had 5&7 of spades, and the first 3 community cards were Ace of hearts, and 6&8 of spades. So at least Bond knew he had a pretty good shot at a good hand early in - he could easily wind up with a straight or a flush. We don’t get to see the opening bets - by the time we’re watching, the dealer is turning over the 4th card, and it’s the 4 of spades, so at point Bond knows he’s got the best possible hand. The final card is the Ace of spades, and the hands are a flush (Asian guy), full house 8s over aces (black guy), full house aces over 8s (Le Chiffre), and Bond’s straight flush. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/47 "2011-01-11T17:05:57Z")
Ah. Thanks! With the hold 'em, the on screen drama can get dragged out longer, right? ---
**Author:** ![joebuck20](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/74df32/32.png) [@joebuck20](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joebuck20)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/48 "2011-01-11T17:06:35Z")
> [@BMalion](#): > > You’re right. he should have made a movie like 'Moonraker". Hey, hey, hey. I always thought Moonraker was one of the more underrated Bond movies. Yeah, the last half hour is pretty silly, but the rest of the movie kicked ass - cool gadgets, exotic locales, awesome fight scenes and a nice, simple, straightforward story. I always felt that if they tried making a serious aerospace defense movie, instead of the kind of space cowboys flick that was popular in the post Star Wars era, it would rank along with The Spy Who Loved Me as the best of the Moore flicks. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/49 "2011-01-11T17:10:09Z")
> [@muldoonthief](#): > > I know nothing about betting in poker, but note that Bond had 5&7 of spades, and the first 3 community cards were Ace of hearts, and 6&8 of spades. So at least Bond knew he had a pretty good shot at a good hand early in - he could easily wind up with a straight or a flush. We don’t get to see the opening bets - by the time we’re watching, the dealer is turning over the 4th card, and it’s the 4 of spades, so at point Bond knows he’s got the best possible hand. > > The final card is the Ace of spades, and the hands are a flush (Asian guy), full house 8s over aces (black guy), full house aces over 8s (Le Chiffre), and Bond’s straight flush. So… there’s 6 eights on the table that we can see? (Community hand has one, Lieter has three, LeChiffre has two.) I assume then, like Blackjack, they play with multiple decks in the shoe. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/50 "2011-01-11T17:11:14Z")
> [@joebuck20](#): > > Hey, hey, hey. I always thought Moonraker was one of the more underrated Bond movies. Yeah, the last half hour is pretty silly, but the rest of the movie kicked ass - cool gadgets, exotic locales, awesome fight scenes and a nice, simple, straightforward story. I always felt that if they tried making a serious aerospace defense movie, instead of the kind of space cowboys flick that was popular in the post Star Wars era, it would rank along with The Spy Who Loved Me as the best of the Moore flicks. Bonus points for “Dr. Goodhead”. ---
**Author:** ![muldoonthief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldoonthief/32/3188_2.png) [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/51 "2011-01-11T17:18:05Z")
> [@mlees](#): > > So… there’s 6 eights on the table that we can see? > > (Community hand has one, Lieter has three, LeChiffre has two.) > > I assume then, like Blackjack, they play with multiple decks in the shoe. Whoops, made a mistake. Le Chiffre has Ace & 6, so he’s got a full house Aces over sixes. Interestingly, that means Le Chiffre was at least possibly bluffing right up until the final card - he only had 2 pair until the final Ace came up. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/52 "2011-01-11T17:19:03Z")
> [@mlees](#): > > So… there’s 6 eights on the table that we can see? > > (Community hand has one, Lieter has three, LeChiffre has two.) > > I assume then, like Blackjack, they play with multiple decks in the shoe. Nope. The black guy wasn’t Leiter, incidentally - Leiter got bounced early on. There’s one eight, one six and two aces on the table. Black guy has two eights in his hand. Le Chiffre has an ace and a six in his hand. Only three eights, total. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/53 "2011-01-11T17:27:26Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Nope. The black guy wasn’t Leiter, incidentally - Leiter got bounced early on. > > There’s one eight, one six and two aces on the table. > > Black guy has two eights in his hand. > Le Chiffre has an ace and a six in his hand. > > Only three eights, total. Ok, thanks. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Gordon\_Urquhart](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/db5fbb/32.png) [@Gordon\_Urquhart](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gordon_Urquhart)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/54 "2011-01-11T17:30:04Z")
I appreciate Bond films, and believe that Connery and Moore are certainly great in some of their appearances in the movies. I really wanted to like Brosnan as Bond, and _GoldenEye_ wasn’t awful. I wonder though: is all this praise of the Brosnan films, and bashing of Craig-as-Bond and the Bond reboot in general a bit revisionist in its thinking? I’ll grant that Qu_antum of Solace_ was a significant step down from _Casino Royale_, but the latter, as noted upthread, is a great action movie – not just a great Bond movie; any follow-up to \*Casino Royale \*was almost inevitably going to be a step down. While the plots of both are a bit convoluted, I don’t think that it’s a bad thing to make a “smarter” Bond film at all. I’d tried for years to get Mrs. Urquhart to see a Bond movie in the theater; unfortunately, she finally acquiesced with _Die Another Day_. I quietly apologized to her in the theater, and that was before the appearance of the invisible car. I’ve seen _Casino Royale_ at least 10 times and can easily envision myself seeing it that many times again; if I ever watch a Brosnan Bond film again it will be too soon (and I’ll be wishing, instead, that I was watching nearly any other Bond film, including _OHMSS_). It’s not just me: _Casino Royale_ has a Rotten Tomatoes critics’ rating of 94%; _GoldenEye_ has an 80% rating (and the abominable _Die Another Day_ clocks in at 59%). We can’t know what an immediate follow-up to _Quantum of Solace_ would have been like, due to MGM’s financial difficulties. Now that the studio’s bankruptcy is underway, I’m glad that things are moving again and Craig is still the man. ETA: as disclosure, RT has a critics’ rating of 63% for _QoS_. But I said it was a step down, didn’t I? ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/55 "2011-01-11T17:39:28Z")
> [@Anaamika](#): > > I agree on this, totally. Bond would absolutely play Baccarat, but I’m sure they dumbed it down for the stupidos in the world. How in the world could you dumb down baccarat? You choose player or bank and then cards are dealt. There are no strategy decisions, it’s not any more involved or comple than pushing the go button on a slot machine. Poker, on the other hand, is an incredibly complex game with dozens of decision options in every hand. Now - that doesn’t mean they portrayed it well - it was downright comical and retarded. TV and movies always do a bad job of displaying poker - they imply that the skill in poker is somehow ending up with a royal flush when your opponent has quads - and the scene in Casino Royale is one of the worst I’ve ever seen. But by no means is going from Bacarrat to poker “dumbing it down” - the very idea is absurd. It’s like saying that going from, uh… I can’t even come up with an analogy because bacarrat literally features no meaningful decisions. You can’t be good at it, because there’s no way for skill to work. So it’s like going from playing instant lotto scratchoff tickets to chess and complaining how they dumbed it down. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/56 "2011-01-11T17:47:19Z")
Of course, the whole premise is stupid anyway. The point was to make Le Chiffre lose, preventing him from covering his losses, putting him in mortal fear of being killed by his angry clients, thus forcing him into some kind of witness-protection scheme. In contrast, consider the book’s premise - Le Chiffre was not some financier for generic “terrorism” (generic terrorism is annoyingly popular as an antagonist, but I digress) but the treasurer of the French Communist Party. He’d invested heavily in a chain of whorehouses (a profitable investment normally, with the side benefit of giving him personally as many women as he wanted) but was bankrupted by a tough new anti-pimping law, forcing him to gambling to restore the lost funds (some 40 million francs in 1953, worth roughly $1.1 million in modern U.S. dollars). The secret service considered just killing him, with the minor complication of his personal bodyguard of two tough goons, but figure the Party would just cover up the scandal and declare Le Chiffre a martyr. What they preferred was Le Chiffre be bankrupted and let all the juicy scandalous details of his whorehouse investments come out, discrediting the French Communists. There’s no thought to interrogating him - it’s not assumed he has any knowledge that would be useful to British intelligence. Now compare this to the movie. There’s no scandal value in public exposing Le Chiffre, because nobody important has any fucking clue who this guy is. He has no bodyguard at all - witness the ease of two of his angry clients breaking into his hotel room _while the poker tournament is still underway_ and menacing him and his girlfriend. Instead of getting mired in this stupid tournament, why not just kidnap the absurdly unprotected Le Chiffre and hold him in some safehouse for a week, until his finances are completely screwed, then say “Okay, now you have a choice - work with us or we let you go at high noon in the center of Paris and you can take your chances.” God, I miss the cold war. ---
**Author:** ![aruvqan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aruvqan/32/2891_2.png) [@aruvqan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aruvqan)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/57 "2011-01-11T17:51:27Z")
> [@carnivorousplant](#): > > I enjoy the Fleming novels and until these two films detested the Bond movies. > 🙂 same here =) ---
**Author:** ![Scuba\_Ben](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/278dde/32.png) [@Scuba\_Ben](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scuba_Ben)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/58 "2011-01-11T18:27:56Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > Minor nitpick - the change from baccarat to hold-em was just plain lame. Baccarat is a much classier game. Baccarat and _chemin de fer_ are extremely classy games. (And I don’t mean the pulp version played in the States.) > [@mlees](#): > > There is no bluffing in Baccarat, right? In baccarat there is a lot of skill work. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/59 "2011-01-11T18:31:37Z")
They shoulda just played Jenga for the dough. Or Twister. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2011, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140/60 "2011-01-11T18:38:13Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > They shoulda just played Jenga for the dough. > Or Twister. Le Chiffre: “You sank my battleship!” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-plot-of-casino-royal-and-quantum-of-solace/567140.md?page=4)