After killing a "hired gun" bomb maker (there is no similarity to the shooting of an innocent and unarmed man by London police last year so, muckrakers, please stop claiming there is), Bond wants to find out who was trying to hire this man and what the target is. 007's investigation leads him to the Bahamas and Miami where he learns that middleman Dimitrios (Abkarian) is in cahoots with Le Chiffre (Mikkelsen), a banker for terrorists and international organized crime who was thought to have been killed in Iraq while Saddam Hussein was still in power.

In Fleming's book, Le Chiffre is a Communist agent who embezzled funds from the Soviets and then lost it in a series of brothel investments. He must then win back his patrons' money in a high-stakes baccarat game at the titular casino. Bond, the best gambler in the service, is sent by M to beat Le Chiffre, to humilate him and make sure the Reds don't get their money back. MI6 doesn't want to kill him because they don't want to make him a martyr for leftist causes. Obviously, in this contemporary version, that plot needs to be updated.

Le Chiffre has still lost his clients' money (thanks to the direct intervention of 007, which is a nice improvement on Flemimg's story), and needs to win it back in a multi-million dollar poker game at the Casino Royale in Montenegro. 007 is sent to beat him and to get Le Chiffre to come over to the Brits; they will offer him safe haven in return for information. I know what you're thinking. Why don't they just take him into custody? Why play a game at all? Either way, Le Chiffre's lost funds that would have belonged to or ended up in the hands of worse enemies. This could also be said of Fleming's tale. Bottom line, if there wasn't a match between Bond and Le Chiffre then there wouldn't be a story. That's just the way it is.