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
Your right!
For better or worse, I think Craig has left his mark on the series.
I think I would still prefer it, because the outlook for the franchise would be that much brighter knowing we are striding forth in a new direction. The Bond actor is only one aspect after all, and if Craig were to leave pronto, that would leave the door slightly ajar for Campbell to return at the grand age of 74 and complete his trilogy of films.
The more I check out Hiddleston, the less I like him, so that isn't changing anytime soon. But most importantly I want EON to try new things and basically throw out the current formula. I think the quickest way to make that happen is to drop Craig like an ugly baby. If I have to live with Hiddleston as a result, that is a personal sacrifice I will have to make for the good of the franchise.
Think nothing of it, my good man!
That really made me laugh.
:D
You really believe him though? He really has all of you under his spell and nobody seems to notice that he plays you off with his little boy attitude. :> sweet kid he is. Yeah... :x
I don't know how he feels and what he wants to do, but if he'd rather leave the role, then he absolutely should. That's what any actor should do in a similar position. It's definitely the wise career move. How would staying be the better career move if it's not what he wants to do?
What has he to fall back on? Really?
1) Financially he's secure, so no worries on that front.
2) If he doesn't even want to do big movies like Bond anymore, I would understand that perfectly. A lot of actors don't enjoy really long shoots and huge amounts of promotional work. There is nothing wrong in wanting to do smaller movies, and indeed tv series or plays. It's all acting work, and it's not less valuable or somehow a failure for the actor. It's just different size-wise. The work may be even more interesting and fulfilling, and challenging and rewarding in different ways than a huge movie. He seems like a non-movie star, non-blockbuster type of a guy anyway.
3) He's a good actor and my understanding is that he's well liked and respected as well, and surely he has friends in the industry. Why wouldn't he get offers for work? If they are small projects, I guess that would be fine, it may very well be what he wants. He was doing steady, varied and interesting work before Bond, no reason to think he couldn't do that after Bond. I would imagine that work-wise he'd be in a better position post-Bond than he was pre-Bond - I mean that since his name-recognition is much higher and he was successful in the big franchise role he'd get more offers rather than less.
I think a lot of people assume that being in as big movies as possible and being in the limelight as much as possible is what all actors really want - which isn't the case. And people think that, if they ever get to be in big movies then anything smaller is a failure somehow. That it's all about box office and what not. And, of course, it isn't.
Yes, that makes perfect sense to me.
Quite.
I'm surprised by the pack mentality out there. All those that once praised Craig (and rightfully so), are now screaming for fresh blood. I'd understand that if (no matter what you thought of the film), DC had delivered a clunker of a performance in SP.
But he didn't. He was firmly in charge of the role. Again. As he will be in absolute control of it in future instalments.
It's the script that crumbled. The writers should be replaced. Bring in fresh eyes to map out a great story that forces Bond, and DC, to exert in the role once again. Bring back the blunt instrument.
Bring in new writers, but this Bond actor has much more he can explore. He just needs the script to do it.
Jeez, I feel like some of us are like Hamlet's mother, Gertrude: her husband's not dead for two months before she and her husband's brother are in the sack.
There are numerous websites dedicated to doing just that.
I wasn't happy with SPECTRE and the way it ended I was quite happy for them to ignore what it set up entirely and just move on be that with DC doing one final entry and bowing out or rebooting with a new Bond.
I suppose they could if DC is done pick up and say Bond & Swann didn't work out and the new Bond continues with team MI6 but I think they'll reboot with a new actor but I could be wrong.
I have to say I think Hiddleston & Turner have just had too much light thrown on their chances and they need to consider a relative unknown and looking at @CatchingBullets post and his blog link it reminded me of Tom Hughes.
Both my Wife and I noted him while watching the excellent BBC2 series The Game and I think an actor like him with not too much exposure would be ideal, I still like the idea of Dan Stevens and he's certainly not getting the exposure that the Hidds & Turner are.
If Dan is here for more good, I was one of his biggest advocates and it's only since SPECTRE I have had my reservations, if they can ignore all that ESB nonsense and give him a great swansong then I'm there but I've a feeling reading that BBC post that the reason they are saying an announcement won't be made for sometime is because DC has quit but they can't say it officially till the new partner is finalised.
That being said, normally a new actor gets announced just as they are about to go into production so we could be waiting till late 2017 before a new actor is announced unless EON decide to sate everyones thirst for a new 007 long before production begins if DC quits.
It says a lot for me that those that weren't that keen on him thought he was all of a sudden amazing in SPECTRE.
A number of Brosnan fans now think he's the best thing since sliced bread, just rob him of all that made him so distinctive and they'll cheer jubilantly
the day a new Bond actor is introduced, is the same time i feel like EON will make a strong push to Chris Nolan to introduce him as a director, and possibly direct his own 2-3-4 Bond films with said actor... i think the Martin Campbell ship has sailed, as i personally feel like he has done all wanted to do - what else is there for him to come back for and to prove?.... I am not pushing for Nolan to be the director, but you can't deny that if they announced Hiddleston as Bond with Chris Nolan directing, that that wouldn't generate a lot of buzz.
We did. Just not a lot to appreciate.
The U.S surprisingly was more reserved or critical on SP, some of the reviews it got here were ridiculous, the 5 star ones in the broadsheets from the likes of Tom Bradshaw were just shameful.
TFA got some ridiculous reviews here as well, I liked the film but 5 stars seriously.
You haven't been looking, then. Is your oculist certified?
There is a lot to appreciate in the Dalton films. The problem in 89 was the stiff competition from other franchises (a lot of films that came out that year are now considered classics) and the horrendous market campaign in America.
i also think Dalton was ahead of his time... he played Bond the way that would be more appreciated today, but the world just wasn't ready for that type of Bond back in the day..... there is also the Brosnan factor to think about as well - everyone was so dead set on him being Bond, that when he wasn't cast, there might have been a percentage of fan backlash..... also, it could be possible that people were just suffering a bit of Bond fatigue - they had been pumping these films out so fast for so long, and some people could've been burnt out by Roger too...
all of this, plus the heavy competition from the films of that period....
as much as we all curse the 6 year hiatus between '89-'95, i also think it really helped renew interest in the character, because he had been gone for so long.
LTK suffers from serious jarring moments, yes you get the revenge element but then you get the Roger Moore like Q moments and that brush with a radio in it is just plain embarrassing.
Dalton as the character yes but the content wasn't much better than had been in the latter half of Rog's spell in the role.