This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

Associate producer: John Dark. Producers: Charles K. Feldman, Jerry Bresler. Executive producer: Charles K. Feldman.A Famous Artists Production, released worldwide by Columbia: April 30, 1967 (U.K.), 28 April 1967 (U.S.A.), December, 1967 (Australia). New York opening at the Capitol and Cinemai: 28 April 1967. 11,804 feet. 131 minutes. (Available on a 10/10 M-G-M DVD).COMMENT: Highly enjoyable romp spoofing the James Bond saga. The film cost $12,000,000, most of which was undoubtedly spent on engaging such a wonderful line-up of players and building such stupendous sets. The art directors merit some prestigious Hollywood award for their superb creations. The directors are not saying who directed what, but it is obvious that Huston directed the opening sequence in which he appears and its delightful sequel in which Deborah Kerr gives her best performance for twenty years. Richard Talmadge directed the uproarious (if over-long) free-for-all at the climax. My favorite scene is the superb send-up of Bond's gadget-outfitting department which is twice as funny as the one in Last of the Secret Agents. But who directed this is anybody's guess. I was right there on the set, so I know Val Guest shot the scene in which Woody Allen is introduced before a firing squad and also the sequence in which Daliah Lavi is strapped to a table. I also know Joe McGrath handled the special effects scenes, including the one with Ursula Andress dressed in Highland costume. But I would really like to know who directed Joanna Pettet's scenes and inspired her to give such an inventive and spirited impersonation. Despite the film's length, there is scarcely one dull moment (perhaps just a few too many close-ups of Miss Andress). It's a fun film almost all the way.

I remember loving this film years ago. Unfortunately, it has not aged well. The humor does not work. Aside from a few near misses, the jokes rely on blindingly obvious innuendo and over-padded wackiness (with Benny Hill style musical accompaniment, which gets annoying very, very fast). The women in the story are sex objects to the extreme. The script makes the sexploitation flicks of the early 70s look feministic. Most of the female "actors" were worse than amateur, but they were pretty, and each of their characters was in desperate search of a man to use them sexually. This hit a low when Bond's daughter implied an attraction to her father. Disgusting. Peter Sellers, once considered a genius, is more difficult to stomach every time I see him. The sound of his voice and his high-toned-grease accent are like nails on a chalkboard. I think what makes him even harder to take in this is that he was trying to play his part seriously (no kidding, folks: he wanted this to be an action flick, starring himself). The cinematography looks like it was done by a rich film student: very slick but laughably overdone. One scene cuts back and forth between Ursula Andress and Peter Sellers during a conversation, but the shots of Sellers show him speaking while sitting down, and the shots of Andress are slow motion shots of her doing awkward contortions while speaking. The effect is to make the scene look like the wrong shots of her were intercut with the right shots of Sellers. I gave it about 45 minutes before I realized I was laughing out of sympathy for the embarrassingly bad humor, and that the only reason to keep watching was the futile hope I might catch a flash of skin from one of the brainless bimbos that constantly flitted around the background in skimpy outfits or obscured partial nudity.

I don't know why i continued watching after the 30 minutes mark ... i am missing 2 hours of my life. I don't know how do describe the boorishness and ridiculousness of this movie. There is nothing Bond-like in this episode of the movie saga. I am extremely disappointed in the actors as well .. poor job at a high level

Casino Royale made in 1967 was initially a vehicle to pry Connery away from Bond when he was disheartened when playing the character for 5 films and before he eventually went on to make you only live twice a year later the offer was made by Charles Feldman he offered him approximately 1 million dollars to appear in his adaptation of Casino Royale which he had acquired the rights to make intending to make it a thriller but when Connery rejected his offer he made it into a spy spoof starring Ian Fleming's first and only choice for the role of 007 David Niven playing an older 007 coming out of retirement to save the world from spectre . And a radical change occurs after M - John Huston is killed Niven takes over mi6 and recruits various trainees to enter a training programme before becoming fully fledged secret agents ( men/women ) then all be called 007 to confuse the enemy its such a preposterous unnecessary edition to the Bond cannon with to many situations characters and needless dialogue Niven gives the only credible performance in the entire film suave and graceful as usual but the rest of the cast and characters in this film apart from le Chiiffe and Spectre are totally unnecessary to the story and should have primarily focused on David Nivens bond in short avoid unless your a die hard Bond fan watch for David Niven exclude the rest of the cast from you memory as the reek of unoriginality and creditableness .