It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
It's quite an artistic legacy. 4 distinct films, each with their own character. I don't think any other actor has done that.
The last one runs the risk of being looked at as his DAF, AVTAK or even DAD. Not quite up to the same level as the earlier ones but still enjoyable.
Examples: Naomie Harris was playing Moneypenny, Waltz was playing Blofeld (that one wasn't Bamigboye), the SPECTRE script was a mess and Purvis and Wade had been summoned back.
Daily Mail has an unsavory reputation and it's often deserved. But they have a good batting accuracy overall on Bond items. We'll see about this one.
:D
i find all of his Bond films exceptional.. SP might not have reached the same heights as CR or SF for me, but it was still a fun ride, and definitely on the better side of the Bond barometer - the same can be said for QOS as well..
if he has indeed called it a day as 007, i will be upset (because i feel like he was deserving to go at least 5 like Sean originally did)... but it's his call.... i hope these are nothing but slow news rumor mill crap - but if it's not, then i wish him the best and thank him for all he gave to the franchise.
@Creasy47..
all they would need to do for me..
1. Pay for a personal trainer to vigorously get my tubby ass into shape - and to help keep me in shape.
2. I would do the film for nothing, but i would like at least a little bit of scratch for my time and effort... $50,000... and if i do a good job, we can renegotiate a little higher salary lol.
If he's leaving it doesn't surprise me, either.
If the Daily Mail story and sums are true (and that they would actually even know...) that would surprise me.
That was hardly a serious comment. (Considering timing and context.)
Also, there's no reason to believe the figures presented by Daily Mail are correct at all. Just the type of stuff they like to print - outrageous and big enough to get attention.
Anyway, I don't see why he couldn't turn the money down (whatever the correct figures might be), IF he didn't want to continue in the role. I've said before that I don't know enough about him to be able to guess, but I'm just saying that people don't necessarily just do anything (that they don't want to do) if they simply get offered more money - especially if they are already financially set for the rest of their lives. Not everyone is into big spending, luxuries and extravagance, so there's only so much they need. Like I said I don't know about Craig's money spending habits or how he lives, etc. - I was merely making a general comment on the relative importance of huge sums of money for people who are already rich.
There was a silly story that Christian Bale turned down 50 million to return to the Batman role after the Nolan trilogy. I don't know who initially invented that story, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was some crappy tabloid like Daily Mail. In any case the story was complete BS. However, had he been offered something ridiculous like that and had he not wanted to do it, I could certainly imagine him turning it down. Therefore I can imagine others (with similar attitude towards money and spending it) doing that, too.
But we won't really see... I mean they're not saying anything new in their "news" that Craig is leaving the role. Others have said that, too, and it may or may not be true, and yes, we'll see about that. Even if he leaves it won't prove that rag had any breaking/new info on it. We're unlikely to ever know how much Craig was offered, if indeed he was - I mean he could have decided to leave before any financial discussions anyway, so the potential money offer may never have really have even come up. So...
You do know that round is a shape, right? ;)
BUT I could very well imagine it being true. Just the way its written is silly.
The "For the money" comment is as off as the wrists one. He said AND prooved, he isn't for sale. So, turning down whatever amount of money is rather likely, if he doesn't want to do it.
That's what I think about the money thing, too.
Of course the article is silly (even if there's some truth to some of it, or they happen to guess even roughly correctly here and there). I didn't actually read it, but it's Daily Mail, so...
I'll inform Daily Mail so they may write an article about "Creasy47 wanting to play James Bond"
It worked for Lazenby!
Now they can drag Campbell out of retirement and get him to complete the trilogy - three separate Bond introduction films with 3 different actor.
If Craig would have stuck around, that would have delayed things another 3 - 4 years, meaning Campbell would have probably been too old come B26 with the new actor (he's 72 at the moment).
Oh, so if your Turner gets the role, we get it earlier?
2018 is the next possible option. With or without Daniel. And if they cast a new one, it most likely takes longer.
https://twitter.com/theversion?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author
Oh no, @Germanlady Don't forget that almost every time we have had a gap of 4 years or more, it is usually because of some legal trouble holding things up. They took 4 years off for CR, but that was because DAD was such a train wreck that they had to drastically reinvent Bond from the ground up. I don't think they have to do that this time, and there doesn't seem to be anything else to cause delays.
I wasn't expecting an answer from Craig until later this year. If this report is true, and Craig has known since SP that he isn't coming back, then all this "I just need 6 months" business was probably just smoke and mirrors that allowed EON to instigate a covert mission to find the next Bond actor. These reports we are hearing of Turner and Hiddleston being in talks with EON show that EON aren't wasting any time. In fact, they are probably quite a way along in the process. It's not implausible that given another year of prep, we could be ready to role camera on Bond 25, with Campbell in the directors chair ( [-O< ) and Turner in the tux ( [-O< ).
And why on earth do people take every sentence in this article for real. There might be an underlining truth in it, but most of it is stitched together.