Who should/could be a Bond actor?

159606264651235

Comments

  • Posts: 3,333
    bondjames wrote: »
    This more relates to the shyness of the actor. Moore/Connery are not shy, and they don't seem shy in interviews. They are very confident/extroverted men and it shows. Similarly, Bond (at least the Bond we know) is far from shy. Craig seems to shun the spotlight

    Only one thing wrong with this theory: Craig ain't shy. Don't confuse his discomfort in interviews as shyness as it has more to do with his dislike of all the razzamatazz that comes with these junkets, and of course who is interviewing him. You don't have to by shy to dislike something! The guy is as bold as brass. How do I know? Why, I've spent quite a few hours in his company and can tell you he's quite a strong-minded bloke who doesn't suffer fools gladly, and not once did it enter my mind that he was shy. I wouldn't call Craig a raconteur, certainly not in the Moore league, as he swears like a trooper and no doubt finds it difficult curbing his language for interviews. I think he'd laugh his socks off if he read half these comments about him being shy. What I saw in real life was a tough bloke who reminded me of a young Connery. And he's not shy about being physical with someone, so don't think you can mess with him either.

    I have no problem reading some of the debates on these forums (some are very good, and some are total garbage) but it irks me when some of you draw your conclusions from baseless facts. I know its an opinion but I just want to inform you that the Craig I met wasn't the one a few of you have formed your opinions on.

    Anyway, I'll retreat back into the shadows and give the floor to someone else.
  • edited July 2015 Posts: 6,601
    I agree with Bondsum. After following him for so many years, this is the impression I get. What you describe is his discomfort during interviews, since he knows, he is not good with words and struggles at times and his dislike of being in the middle of attention.
    But apart from that, I consider him as being very much sure of himself and this also shows in the fact, that he never hides any of his short comings such as fidgeting (I saw him sitting still for 90 minutes during A Steady Rain) or his very limited pleasure in doing certain tasks, among others. He has the confidence in always giving you 100% DC and doesn't give a damn whether or not the public likes it. For that alone, you need to be very assured of yourself.
    He is always described as having a very charismatic presence, which he can't tone down, even if he wants to. That you cannot act, you have it or you don't.

    Plus he is - to many, even collegues, surprisingly a total goof. Funny as hell, WHEN he feels coMfortable amonG friends and collegues.
  • Posts: 372
    I agree with @Bondsum. He seems to be an extravert - but one who dislikes the celebrity attention, which includes having to do interviews and answering irrelevent questions.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2015 Posts: 23,883
    bondsum wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    This more relates to the shyness of the actor. Moore/Connery are not shy, and they don't seem shy in interviews. They are very confident/extroverted men and it shows. Similarly, Bond (at least the Bond we know) is far from shy. Craig seems to shun the spotlight

    Only one thing wrong with this theory: Craig ain't shy. Don't confuse his discomfort in interviews as shyness as it has more to do with his dislike of all the razzamatazz that comes with these junkets, and of course who is interviewing him. You don't have to by shy to dislike something! The guy is as bold as brass. How do I know? Why, I've spent quite a few hours in his company and can tell you he's quite a strong-minded bloke who doesn't suffer fools gladly, and not once did it enter my mind that he was shy. I wouldn't call Craig a raconteur, certainly not in the Moore league, as he swears like a trooper and no doubt finds it difficult curbing his language for interviews. I think he'd laugh his socks off if he read half these comments about him being shy. What I saw in real life was a tough bloke who reminded me of a young Connery. And he's not shy about being physical with someone, so don't think you can mess with him either.

    I have no problem reading some of the debates on these forums (some are very good, and some are total garbage) but it irks me when some of you draw your conclusions from baseless facts. I know its an opinion but I just want to inform you that the Craig I met wasn't the one a few of you have formed your opinions on.

    Anyway, I'll retreat back into the shadows and give the floor to someone else.

    Ok, Craig is not shy. Thanks for establishing that. I stand corrected. Some of us haven't had the privilege of speaking with the man one on one like you.

    Having said that, these forums are for debates and discussion. I'm sure a lot of the stuff that's on here may be baseless to those in the know, but as long as it's discussed properly there's nothing wrong with it. There's no need to jump on your high horse based on inside information you may have that others do not, but thanks for pointing out that Craig is not shy. At least that's sorted out.

    My response was to repeated questioning as to why I prefer Moore/Connery in interview settings vs. Craig. I stand by my opinion that I much prefer those two to DC (even though I have a very high regard for DC as Bond). I thought it was either possibly (a term I should have used) shyness or it was that he was uncomfortable. You have confirmed that it is the latter. Well, I sense that every time I see him in an interview. The question was who do you prefer in interviews? My answer remains imho: Moore and Connery.

    I don't see much similarity between Connery in the interview setting (at least the way he presents himself in the interviews) vs. Craig. On screen I see a lot of similarities between them.

    Plus, I don't really like seeing this (and I see it a lot) even if it's always in jest. Goes to your point about him swearing like a trooper and finding it difficult to curb his language for interviews (which I've seen in some of the written pieces) or suffering fools lightly.

    a6f63e5cf356327bbb1e85bf42c691ce.jpg
    B4-pSneCQAA0zla.jpg
    de29d21533c6c04c8e7fdbde1f681ae5.jpg
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited July 2015 Posts: 15,723
    @bondjames I don't think Craig is shy in interviews, he's more down to earth, etc. The point I was making is Craig in interviews is a different animal from his characters on the big screen. When I see Craig at a premiere, event, etc, he does look 100% like James Bond to me, but it's his behavior that is night and day compared to his Bond. Connery and Moore didn't 'become' Bond, they 'were' Bond naturally, and came off as acting the same in interviews than as Bond in their respective films. Connery and Moore basically sat on a chair to answer random questions, and IMO it's as if it was Moore/Connery's Bond answering the questions like they'd do in the actuals films. And this is not only true for Bond, but for all the films/tv shows Sean and Roger did in their entire career. I've seen interviews of Moore from the 1960's posted here, and it was as if it was Simon Templar himself doing the interviews. Sean and Roger in real life = their characters in the films.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2015 Posts: 23,883
    @bondjames I don't think Craig is shy in interviews, he's more down to earth, etc. The point I was making is Craig in interviews is a different animal from his characters on the big screen. When I see Craig at a premiere, event, etc, he does look 100% like James Bond to me, but it's his behavior that is night and day compared to his Bond. Connery and Moore didn't 'become' Bond, they 'were' Bond naturally, and came off as acting the same in interviews than as Bond in their respective films. Connery and Moore basically sat on a chair to answer random questions, and IMO it's as if it was Moore/Connery's Bond answering the questions like they'd do in the actuals films. And this is not only true for Bond, but for all the films/tv shows Sean and Roger did in their entire career. I've seen interviews of Moore from the 1960's posted here, and it was as if it was Simon Templar himself doing the interviews. Sean and Roger in real life = their characters in the films.

    I am 100% in agreement with you @DaltonCraig007.

    I put it down to shyness, and it appears I was wrong. There is definitely a big visible difference between DC the person and his James Bond persona imho.....at least to me.

    I completely agree with you on Moore/Connery. To me they seemed seamless between the interview version and the on-screen version. 100% agreed.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    edited July 2015 Posts: 2,138
    Back on topic? Back to Fassbender having seen him again in the Steve Jobs biopic the man is the calibre we will need after Dan has had enough I think he could do 3 movies from 2018 before he himself would look too old for the role.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited July 2015 Posts: 15,723
    Fassbender is ruled out as Bond (imo) since he played a major character in the X Men franchise. EON will want to create their own 'star' as Bond and have him be immediatly identified as Bond and only as Bond. Which is why actors like Fassbender with X Men, Cavill with UNCLE/Superman, Aaron Johnson with Kick-Ass, Tom Hardy with Mad Max are out of the running.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,585
    I'm not so sure it's that important these days DC. There are so many franchises, so many characters in multi film series that it's virtually impossible to find an actor who hasn't been in one.

    Harrison Ford has two major characters under his belt, neither compromises the other.

    Isn't the chap who plays Napoleon Solo also Superman (you can see how up to date I am?)

    There used to be an age old problem that soap actors couldn't get roles outside soap because they were too identified with their soap character. Not an issue these days - Tv realises those actors are popular and they utilise them accordingly.

    Well, I don't think being known as, what, Superman, is a problem now? (poor old George Reeves, if only ..) So, if someone is an X Man today, he could still be Bond tomorrow.

    We certainly don't seem to mind Ironman being Sherlock Holmes do we? Accept that and we can accept anything.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,723
    NicNac, did you know Harrison Ford is one of the most 'franchised' actors? He appeared in Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Jack Ryan and Expendables. I think the actor who tops it all is Bruce Willis, with Die Hard, Red, Sin City, Expendables and GI Joe.

    So I guess you are right @NicNac, but still a part of me think the next Bond is at this very moment building a good resume in smaller movies and on TV.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,585
    NicNac, did you know Harrison Ford is one of the most 'franchised' actors? He appeared in Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Jack Ryan and Expendables. I think the actor who tops it all is Bruce Willis, with Die Hard, Red, Sin City, Expendables and GI Joe.

    So I guess you are right @NicNac, but still a part of me think the next Bond is at this very moment building a good resume in smaller movies and on TV.

    I do agree about that - an unknown who we don't know about yet.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I'm with @NicNac. I don't think it's that much of a problem these days if an actor is in two franchises.

    However, I think where EON will draw the line is if the characters played by the actor are too close or similar, particularly if the portrayal is occurring concurrently.

    -So I think Cavill may be out due to Solo, if not Supes
    -Similarly I think Bale would have been out due to the Bat/Wayne while he was playing it, but possibly not now, since he's been done with it for a while
    -I don't think Hiddleston is out due to Loki (different genre)

    Just my thoughts..
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    bondjames wrote: »
    I'm with @NicNac. I don't think it's that much of a problem these days if an actor is in two franchises.

    However, I think where EON will draw the line is if the characters played by the actor are too close or similar, particularly if the portrayal is occurring concurrently.

    -So I think Cavill may be out due to Solo, if not Supes
    -Similarly I think Bale would have been out due to the Bat/Wayne while he was playing it, but possibly not now, since he's been done with it for a while
    -I don't think Hiddleston is out due to Loki (different genre)

    Just my thoughts..

    Agree 100% L
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Someone like Cavill will never be Bond based on him being Superman alone. The role is too iconic and him being Solo makes no difference. Bond isnt like every other character out there. Just because other franchises are happy to be a lot more liberal with their casting it doesnt mean the same applies to Bond. Chris Evans was the human torch and got the role of captain america. Downey maybe Iron Man and Holmes but again these characters arent Bond and dont have the cinematic legacy Bond has. Holmes for example has Downey, Cumberbatch, Johnny Lee Miller and Ian McKellen pprtraying the character. Bond is a different kettle of fish and plays by uts own rules. Fassbender, Hardy, Cavill...forget it, the Bond ship has sailed for them. These guys aren't the only actors in the business and I'm pretty sure there are more talented, low profile actors out there that will get the gig when the time comes.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2015 Posts: 23,883
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Someone like Cavill will never be Bond based on him being Superman alone. The role is too iconic and him being Solo makes no difference. Bond isnt like every other character out there. Just because other franchises are happy to be a lot more liberal with their casting it doesnt mean the same applies to Bond. Chris Evans was the human torch and got the role of captain america. Downey maybe Iron Man and Holmes but again these characters arent Bond and dont have the cinematic legacy Bond has. Holmes for example has Downey, Cumberbatch, Johnny Lee Miller and Ian McKellen pprtraying the character. Bond is a different kettle of fish and plays by uts own rules. Fassbender, Hardy, Cavill...forget it, the Bond ship has sailed for them. These guys aren't the only actors in the business and I'm pretty sure there are more talented, low profile actors out there that will get the gig when the time comes.

    Normally and based on historic practice, I agree with you @doubleoego.

    However, as I said somewhere a few days back, I do think things have changed post-SF. Now that Bond is as big as it is again (which it hasn't been since Connery's heyday in the mid 60's and Moore's heyday in the late 70's) I don't think EON will necessarily go that far off course, particularly since studios are much more risk averse these days (which has been discussed elsewhere on this forum), since movies cost more to make and payoffs have to be more certain.

    I think EON will go with a middle ground this time......not as much of a risk as they took with DC. I think there is also a chance that they will cast someone known (although not too known). Somewhat like how Moore/Brosnan were rather than how Lazenby/Dalton were.

    So when they eventually replace DC, I'm sure we'll all have heard of the guy, no matter where we reside.
  • Posts: 2,081
    Yes, actors can be in several franchises, especially if they're different genres. I still think EON wouldn't want their Bond to be too much associated with another franchise even if the actor was done with that.

    Apparently others agreed with my impression that Craig is indeed confident. Another comment on the shyness issue. I didn't call him shy, but I'd also like to point out that there are different levels and kinds of shy. I'm sure @bondjames wasn't thinking of a quiet nerd, afraid to utter a word, so no reason to act like thinking of the possibility of Craig being shy is mad or something. Some people can be shy even around people they know, some are only shy around people they don't know, and how it shows can vary. Being uncomfortable being the center of attention and so on can easily be a form of shyness, too. Just saying. I'm not even talking about Craig here specifically, just a general observation. It obviously has nothing to do with goofing around with friends or colleagues, either, that's a whole other situation. I've seen other actors use the word "shy" about themselves even if they don't seem that way to me. I think the word can be used (and indeed is used) to mean more than the narrow definition and image of shy that some people may have.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Yeah i think whoever replaces Craig won't be a complete unknown and chances are we would have heard of the guy if not familiar with his filmography but I still think they're not going to cast someone who's name usually gets thrown around ala Fassbender and Hardy. I mentioned this earlier in this thread or another but where EoN really need the biggest shake up is in who they get to write the scripts. Bond by default will always be an event movie thankfully but to hammer home why we need to be more and more excited rests with getting the right people to pen the projects. The acting competency of the cast of the Craig era has never been an issue and the biggest problems the Craig era have been script related issues...the writers' strike for QoS, the writing for SF is tge biggest issue fans have a grievance with and then there's the whole turmoil of tge writing process which was already made public mobths before the Sony leaks.
    You're absolutely right, Studios are more risk averse and it pains me how what is glaringly obvious the studio execs for tge most part ignore and make stupid changes that do nothing to better the problem. For the life of me I still can't understand why Logan was left alone so long to do his own thing which inevitably hindered production. The Bond movies are like an entity unto itself, the producers need to enforce certain parameters and stipulations to keep things on track and in check. It doesn't matter who gets cast, even if Fassbender decided to wave adios to all his future ptojects and commitments if the script is garbage so will the film, irrespective of how much or little money is made.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Agreed. Script and director are very important.

    Which is somewhat concerning, because the guy who successfully and brilliantly directed/introduced the last two Bond actors is likely too old for the job now.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited July 2015 Posts: 11,139
    Yep. Campbell doesn't have the pull that Mendes has but the man is easily the best director in the series; right behind Terence Young. GE and especially CR are the 2 best Bond movies in the last 40 years. He didn't need to employ high brow, artsy pretentiousness. He understood Fleming and he understood Young's legacy and went ahead to create 2 iconic masterpieces. SP does look much better than SF but if it can equal or top CR is the important question.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Yep. Campbell doesn't have the pull that Mendes has but the man is easily the best director in the series; right behind Terence Young. GE and especially CR are the 2 best Bond movies in the last 40 years. He didn't need to employ high brow, artsy pretentiousness. He understood Fleming and he understood Young's legacy and went ahead to create 2 iconic masterpieces. SP does look much better than SF but if it can equal or top CR is the important question.

    +1
  • edited July 2015 Posts: 709
    Tuulia wrote: »
    Yes, actors can be in several franchises, especially if they're different genres. I still think EON wouldn't want their Bond to be too much associated with another franchise even if the actor was done with that.

    Agreed. EON taking an actor from another franchise cheapens the brand. They don't want past (or current) associations with Superman or Magneto whoever overshadowing the part, and they don't want an actor for whom Bond is a second priority or having to negotiate with another studio about when he's available, or have his Bond interviews interrupted with "So who's the villain in X-Men 8?" questions. (Nor, and probably most importantly, do they want to have to pay them a large salary from the start, which is what comes with an actor who has had box office success!)

    If nothing else, just look at the track record here. EON has NEVER hired a Bond who was an established big screen name. Moore and Brosnan were the closest thing to "stars" with known TV roles. They will want to mold their own hero from the ground up. I firmly believe that anyone who has already played any kind of iconic, big budget action/superhero role won't even be considered.
  • Posts: 725
    dinovelvet wrote: »
    Tuulia wrote: »
    Yes, actors can be in several franchises, especially if they're different genres. I still think EON wouldn't want their Bond to be too much associated with another franchise even if the actor was done with that.

    Agreed. EON taking an actor from another franchise cheapens the brand. They don't want past (or current) associations with Superman or Magneto whoever overshadowing the part, and they don't want an actor for whom Bond is a second priority or having to negotiate with another studio about when he's available, or have his Bond interviews interrupted with "So who's the villain in X-Men 8?" questions. (Nor, and probably most importantly, do they want to have to pay them a large salary from the start, which is what comes with an actor who has had box office success!)

    If nothing else, just look at the track record here. EON has NEVER hired a Bond who was an established big screen name. Moore and Brosnan were the closest thing to "stars" with known TV roles. They will want to mold their own hero from the ground up. I firmly believe that anyone who has already played any kind of iconic, big budget action/superhero role won't even be considered.

    Totally agree. The logistics of trying to share an actor with what could be up to 10 years of additional franchise commitments with other competing studios and producers would be impossible. EON wouldn't put up with the insane scheduling logistics. Trying to launch a new film in the series is hard enough even with their Bond always able to give each new Bond filming schedule priority. Imagine trying to get cooperation with competing studios with competing film franchises. Producing these huge Bond films these days is impossible enough. EON will not go there.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited July 2015 Posts: 4,589
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    This more relates to the shyness of the actor. Moore/Connery are not shy, and they don't seem shy in interviews. They are very confident/extroverted men and it shows. Similarly, Bond (at least the Bond we know) is far from shy. Craig seems to shun the spotlight

    Only one thing wrong with this theory: Craig ain't shy. Don't confuse his discomfort in interviews as shyness as it has more to do with his dislike of all the razzamatazz that comes with these junkets, and of course who is interviewing him. You don't have to by shy to dislike something! The guy is as bold as brass. How do I know? Why, I've spent quite a few hours in his company and can tell you he's quite a strong-minded bloke who doesn't suffer fools gladly, and not once did it enter my mind that he was shy. I wouldn't call Craig a raconteur, certainly not in the Moore league, as he swears like a trooper and no doubt finds it difficult curbing his language for interviews. I think he'd laugh his socks off if he read half these comments about him being shy. What I saw in real life was a tough bloke who reminded me of a young Connery. And he's not shy about being physical with someone, so don't think you can mess with him either.

    I have no problem reading some of the debates on these forums (some are very good, and some are total garbage) but it irks me when some of you draw your conclusions from baseless facts. I know its an opinion but I just want to inform you that the Craig I met wasn't the one a few of you have formed your opinions on.

    Anyway, I'll retreat back into the shadows and give the floor to someone else.

    Ok, Craig is not shy. Thanks for establishing that. I stand corrected. Some of us haven't had the privilege of speaking with the man one on one like you.

    Having said that, these forums are for debates and discussion. I'm sure a lot of the stuff that's on here may be baseless to those in the know, but as long as it's discussed properly there's nothing wrong with it. There's no need to jump on your high horse based on inside information you may have that others do not, but thanks for pointing out that Craig is not shy. At least that's sorted out.

    My response was to repeated questioning as to why I prefer Moore/Connery in interview settings vs. Craig. I stand by my opinion that I much prefer those two to DC (even though I have a very high regard for DC as Bond). I thought it was either possibly (a term I should have used) shyness or it was that he was uncomfortable. You have confirmed that it is the latter. Well, I sense that every time I see him in an interview. The question was who do you prefer in interviews? My answer remains imho: Moore and Connery.

    I don't see much similarity between Connery in the interview setting (at least the way he presents himself in the interviews) vs. Craig. On screen I see a lot of similarities between them.

    Plus, I don't really like seeing this (and I see it a lot) even if it's always in jest. Goes to your point about him swearing like a trooper and finding it difficult to curb his language for interviews (which I've seen in some of the written pieces) or suffering fools lightly.

    a6f63e5cf356327bbb1e85bf42c691ce.jpg
    B4-pSneCQAA0zla.jpg
    de29d21533c6c04c8e7fdbde1f681ae5.jpg

    Oh, Craig is very crass. He has a love/hate relationship with the press. You should read the strong "back the eff off" with an interviewer in a Cowboys and Aliens article a few years ago. I love DC to pieces, but did he not realize his private life was no longer going to exist after taking this role? I'm sure he did.

    At the same time, many actors/actresses who've worked with him have said he is awesome on set. Even Waltz recently stated how surprised he was at Craig's preparation. I became a big DC fan after reading the complementary things Rooney Mara had to say about him, especially in regards to their sex scenes.

    How crass can Craig be? Anne Hathaway will tell...

  • Posts: 725
    I think Craig has greatly raised the bar on the acting talent required for the next Bond. I simply can't imagine EON going to the next Bond with zero acting depth. Craig's engagement in the entire production process has also been hugely impactful. Mendes didn't call him my collaborator for nothing. The next Bond will need to step up. BUT, that said, I think Craig can be seriously wanting in his handling of the press. The word I think I'd use for him is "wary" which may come off as shyness, but is really his great concern of saying something that will make unnecessary headlines or he is in a bad mood, or is tired and fed up with tons of interviews, take your pick.

    He took the role, and he takes the big bucks, but he does not seem to tolerate that it also comes with the responsibility on the marketing end to be professional and affable. These pictures of him above out in public point to his inability to understand the rules of the game. He's needlessly trashing himself in the press with this kind of juvenile stuff. Guys like Tom Hanks and Clooney are masters of the promo game. Craig by this point is obviously never going to adjust to it. He does what is required to promote, but that's it. Sometimes, he's comfortable in an interview and does well, but sometimes not and it can be disappointing to watch.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    smitty wrote: »
    I think Craig has greatly raised the bar on the acting talent required for the next Bond. I simply can't imagine EON going to the next Bond with zero acting depth. Craig's engagement in the entire production process has also been hugely impactful. Mendes didn't call him my collaborator for nothing. The next Bond will need to step up. BUT, that said, I think Craig can be seriously wanting in his handling of the press. The word I think I'd use for him is "wary" which may come off as shyness, but is really his great concern of saying something that will make unnecessary headlines or he is in a bad mood, or is tired and fed up with tons of interviews, take your pick.

    He took the role, and he takes the big bucks, but he does not seem to tolerate that it also comes with the responsibility on the marketing end to be professional and affable. These pictures of him above out in public point to his inability to understand the rules of the game. He's needlessly trashing himself in the press with this kind of juvenile stuff. Guys like Tom Hanks and Clooney are masters of the promo game. Craig by this point is obviously never going to adjust to it. He does what is required to promote, but that's it. Sometimes, he's comfortable in an interview and does well, but sometimes not and it can be disappointing to watch.

    @smitty, you have elequently said in one post what I was trying to say but had trouble expressing clearly in almost five. Thank you sir.
  • Posts: 6,601
    Oh, he understands the rules, he is just not willing to play along as much as many others. It does hurt his public image, but I think, he is a bit neurotic about it, plus having had his share of hatred, he decided to just not give in to tolerating bs or annoying papz.

    Its a fight he cannot win, because like you say, he is mostly hurting himself. He is not stupid, he knows that, but decided to take this route anyway.

    Its a very different persona to whom everybody describes outside of the public, who is a lot more amicable. He certainly is a very complex person, who might gladly go back to more privacy and less huzzle around his person. Time will tell what it will be.
  • Posts: 725
    Thanks @bondjames and @Germanlady I agree with you post also. Bottom line, his inability to adjust to the promo game and when he is out in public is really sad because it is so unnecessary. He's obviously not gonna change at this point. As noted, his co-stars all consider him affable and totally professional on the set. Why the heck can't he exercise better judgement and transfer that conduct consistently to his public persona and promo work. Most of the time he is fine, but sometimes he's, well, a jerk. There are worse trials in life than occasionally have to tolerate fans and paps when you are out public, giving interviews and making $20m for your latest film. He makes himself look surly and unprofessional which one gets is not true when he is working or with friends. It's just so unnecessary, and as a fan of his talent, really disappointing and unnecessary.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited July 2015 Posts: 4,589
    smitty wrote: »
    Thanks @bondjames and @Germanlady I agree with you post also. Bottom line, his inability to adjust to the promo game and when he is out in public is really sad because it is so unnecessary. He's obviously not gonna change at this point. As noted, his co-stars all consider him affable and totally professional on the set. Why the heck can't he exercise better judgement and transfer that conduct consistently to his public persona and promo work. Most of the time he is fine, but sometimes he's, well, a jerk. There are worse trials in life than occasionally have to tolerate fans and paps when you are out public, giving interviews and making $20m for your latest film. He makes himself look surly and unprofessional which one gets is not true when he is working or with friends. It's just so unnecessary, and as a fan of his talent, really disappointing and unnecessary.

    Oh but he does do a great job of the promo work. It's mostly the paparazzi stuff where he tends to get annoyed. And who can blame him?

    No, with fans and the red carpet premieres, DC is very good. When I saw him in NYC, at the stage door of Betrayal, he was as nice and sweet as can be.

    nominee-daniel-craig-with-fans-on-the-red-carpet-(pic-liam-daniel)0004.jpg
  • Posts: 725
    The problem is he's not at all consistent when he is out in public. At premiers and at the stage door, he is required to be professional and affable. These are controlled environments and he had no choice. It is when he is out in public on his own and some fan snaps his pic, or a pap takes a pic, and he just sometimes doesn't handle it smartly and goes off, and that is exactly when it gets into the press and he looks surly and gets bad mouthed in the press. Again, it ain't necessary, and again as Germanlady noted, he ain't going to change. Don't mistake my criticism. I'm a fan of his talent and his Bond and I'd judge that he is a decent guy which is often not the case with many actors. I Just wish he's do better with this stuff.
  • edited July 2015 Posts: 6,601
    Smitty, the way I see it, he is never nice just because he HAS to but first and foremost bwcause he WANTS to be, hence we have situations, where he is not, when he'd better be. You are right, he is decent to the bone but it seems even to show that is too private for his liking plus it seems some situations or sort of people get out his bad boy and bang, off we go. If I go psycho on him here, I would say, he is scared of being liked too much, because in his book that means just more hazzle and he just doesnt want that. In a way he is lucky, that his other films havent set the world on fire, because as someone in the press rightly said, had all his franchise efforts been a success, he would be the biggest movie star in the world. Poor DC. ;)
Sign In or Register to comment.