To me, this movie is perfection.

Redundant and unnecessary.

Absolutely Brilliant!

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Even allowing for the fact that this was a product if early live TV, this "adaptation" of the Fleming novel is quite dreadful. There were a lot of truly great, even legendary, productions for early live TV.The principal problem with this episode is the casting of Barry Nelson as Bond -- and changing Bond to an American. Nelson completely fails to bring Bond to life. He totally lacks the charisma and dangerousness of James Bond. There is also zero chemistry between Nelson and Linda Christian, the supposed "love interest." Even Peter Lorre seems to be sleepwalking through his performance as Le Chiffre.The second fatal flaw in this production is that it completely fails to develop any real believable tension or sense of something important being at risk. The pacing is pretty plodding throughout.Some of the weakness of this production is in being forced to condense the story into 50 minutes. There is zero room for character development. However, I don't believe Nelson would have given us a credible James Bond even with two hours to do it in.So, this production is of historical interest as the first filmed adaptation of a James Bond story, but not of much interest otherwise.

So, the first film about the famous British spy James Bond was not the "Dr. No". The first actor who played the 007 was not Sean Connery. First studio picture starring pro elegant mi6 agent is not Eon Productions. In 1954, CBS director Gregory Ratoff Ian Fleming buys the film rights to the first novel of the famous series, in 1000 dollars, and the money at the time were not low. After watching this television plays, 50 minutes long, I still have mixed feelings. Watch the first movie about the 007 was my old dream, but I will not say that I am very pleased seen. After all the action games that show recently, hardly somebody to watch the drama began 50 years ago, even the most about James Bond, except that loyal fans Bond as I am. The role of the main character in this film takes Barry Nelson. On it remains ambiguous impression. Outwardly, he is not like any one of the actors performing the role of an agent later with two zeros in the official films. "His face was a rustic" said my friend, who like me is a fan of James Bond. Since it is hard to disagree - in appearance he is not like Bond, but as most of acting, then there is another matter. 007 appeared before us in such a way and it described Fleming - glamorous spy ironically cracking down with any task, always knows how to defuse his subtle humor, people coming out of the water dry in the most seemingly difficult situations. Watch or not watch your work. I would recommend this movie for those who enjoys watching a film about the legendary spy. And if you look James Bond films only when nothing else to watch on TV, then you should refrain from watching this movie, and then you just go bad impression about the 007!

I don't think it was until the internet era that I found out an obscure trivia fact and that was the first media appearance of Ian Fleming's James Bond wasn't Sean Connery in DR NO but Barry Nelson in an American anthology series called CLIMAX which adapted CASINO ROYALE . We all know Bond is the most successful film franchise in history and we all recognise the icons , the babes , the exotic locations , the gadgets , the big set piece stunts etc of a franchise featuring a very British fictional hero . Now imagine a James Bond story without any of these icons . Worse than that imagine if he was an American character ? I do apologise I didn't mean to make you faint Some people have said this live American TV production deserves some credit for at least sticking to the plot of the original novel which is not something you can say about the films that started going their own way even before the end of the 1960s . My own fascination watching this was entirely down to the opposite reason - it's Bond as film noir that shares nothing in common with the film series . Bond played by Nelson wears a tuxedo and smokes too much but that's the only link you'll recognise . Surviving a murder attempt in the opening scene a policeman refers to it by stating:" They weren't after your winnings then ? " " Yeah ? They weren't after my autograph either " And that's the closest we get to show stopping one liners as the entire action takes place in a couple of sets shot in a TV studio as Jimmy tries to beat Peter Lorre's villain in a card gameOn its own this obscure TV drama come thriller would be totally forgotten if it wasn't for the fact that it's the first on screen appearance of someone playing Ian Fleming's James Bond . In comparison you can see why Bond became an instant legend in the 1960s with the exotic location filming and the sexy and charismatic Sean Connery playing the role with a hard edge . Not to be too dismissive of the 1954 version of CASINO ROYALE it's fascinating to see Bond done as essentially film noir

It was the first time we heard the distinctive opening theme music...of a timpani fanfare. It was the first time we saw him order...a Scotch and water. The first time we heard a woman moan: "Oh...Jimmy."Um, okay, so there were still a few kinks to work out. But it was October, 1954, just one year after Ian Fleming's first novel was published. So what if James Bond didn't hit the ground running? To see the man, okay, played by Norwegian-American Barry Nelson, offer a casual quip after a brush with death, tuxedo unruffled, will stir the heart of any true Bondophile.Bond (Nelson) is on the case for Combined Intelligence. His mission: Break the bank on Le Chiffre (Peter Lorre), a top Soviet operative in France. To do so, he needs to beat Le Chiffre at baccarat, and not lose his head in the process when his old flame Valerie Mathis (Linda Christian) is threatened with death.I had to give this TV movie a ranking here in order to review it, though it's no fair using the same metric as with the theatrical Bonds. There was no "Take 2" for the cast of 1954's "Casino Royale", working live and without a net. Shadows are cast over actors' faces. A pasty, bloated Lorre stumbles over many of his lines. Nelson crams his shoulder into a lampshade. Someone can be overheard coughing behind the camera during a tense interrogation scene.Nelson, an amiably solid journeyman actor, comports himself well under the circumstances. Once you get used to his accent and flattop haircut, a slight twitchiness in his manner, and people calling him "Card Sense Jimmy Bond", he's easy and interesting to watch, managing to look both cool and concerned while still pulling off a nice Roger Moore-ish quip or two."So it was you those men were shooting at! Why?""Maybe they needed the practice."Christian is a terrific inaugural Bond girl, even if the flat black-and-white camera image does little justice to her face and form. Lorre, oddly, is the weak sister in this acting trio, but despite some obvious discomfort he does use his famous screen presence to some good effect, especially in a card-table sequence which is the best part of this short movie where he smirks and glowers to cold effect.There's also a surprisingly gritty torture sequence at the end, with the bad guys using a pair of pliers on Bond's toes. The producers of "Climax!" and director William H. Brown couldn't copy the Fleming novel too closely; it had Bond getting punished in a more tender part of his anatomy. But they do get much of the nub of the story, not a bad feat considering the time limit and production code.The movie I saw ran just 48 minutes. Apparently there was more to the ending that I missed, though it seemed to have run its course well enough. The last line in my version has Bond saying "Call the police". I don't think you'll hear Bond say that in any of his other movies.Despite or because of such incongruities, "Casino Royale" is a fascinating glimpse at giving birth to a 1960s icon a decade too soon. As a spy story, it only works in fits and starts, but what matters is its place as the somewhat-neglected beginning of a screen legend.