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
Those were the days - keep the actor in his box.
And there is one of the main problems in a nutshell.
"i'm numero uno around here Boyle,now f**k off " !!
Agreed. No point in bringing Craig back if his finale is just a tacked on movie. You may as well recast and soft-reboot.
I don't think they did, but they did the same with Mikkelsen. According to Some Kind of Hero, Mikkelsen was invited to screentest for the role of LeChiffre twice and he missed it both times because he was busy elsewhere. They wanted him so badly that they eventually invited him a third time.
Now, given that, and given the fact that he earned on the field every benefit he could have got, given the fact that you don't know for sure what really happened with Boyle, you don't know what he does in his producer tenure and most of all, the guy has given heart, soul, blood, a knee and some teeth for the job, could we please stop speculating, stop insulting, move on and try to focus on the movie?
Thanks
One thing that's quite apparent in the SP interviews is that a lot of the one liners and humour in SP was improvised by Craig and the cast onset in the moment - Mendes let them do it. I really hope they don't do that this time around because I personally found that to be some of the most fake feeling stuff in the film.
If you are referring to me,it was a joke, so my answer to your question is : no.
Thanks.
I'm 'freelance' Jake.
There's a latin motto "Excusatio non petita, accusatio manifesta". Try looking into it
And there's a useful 4-letter word...............................and you're full of it.
Spot on..there is a chap who knows Bond.
Wow, that escalated quickly.
What a gentleman.
About the bondjames comment: Bond was disappearing twice during Craig tenure, before Casino Royale and after QOS. And both times he was a big part in saving it.
I'm afraid we must agree to disagree. DAD was very successful and so was QoS. Bond as a franchise was in no risk of disappearing at that point. The films just weren't everyone's cup of tea and the producers made some strange decisions in both instances which required some rebalancing.
The period after LTK was the darkest and most uncertain for the franchise.
I'm talking about the business part of the things. If Casino Royale and Skyfall wouldn't have been successfull, producer would have dropped the franchise. Money is all.
Not to mention MGM problems.
Try to understand what I'm writing, and don't be rude without any motivation. Thanks
Thank you,i am indeed known to be one.
And Craig has not 'saved' Bond in anyway,shape or form.
And this is not meant as a nasty question before you comment,but were you around or old enough between 1989 and 1995 ?
If you were then you will know that is the closest we came to losing 007.
No they wouldn't .
What about the 2 Dalton films, and the 6 year gap to GE...and TMWTGG and its 3 year gap to TSWLM,they didn't 'drop the franchise' then,if you are referring to films not doing too well.
Yeah, I think the only actor you can really give credit to for saving the series is Roger Moore. Him breaking the mould and doing something different finally proved they could move out of Connery's shadow. Brosnan deserves a lot of credit as well because if he wasn't so popular and GE had flopped we probably would have been looking at a very long gap, but that wouldn't have been the end. I think especially with how things are today (reboots, remakes) we would have certainly got another one eventually. Might just have had to wait a bit longer for it.
Some people vastly overrate the importance of Daniel Craig to the franchise. Likely comes from a personal habit of doing the same thing. People forget DAD was Brosnan's most successful film yet, and most would have been fine to see him in a fifth film.
Yes, there were tensions which came to a head towards the end of the shoot when Dalton asked a question, but John Glen, who is a charming, funny and very polite man, snapped back - this was also partly due to the fact he'd broken a toe or badly hurt his foot a day or so before, and he was in some pain. I have huge respect for John Glen, he was wonderful to work with, but he was more of a technical director with an editor's mind, and not really an actor's director. And Dalton, as we know, wanted to push the character and, I believe, John Glen was not really geared up for that. With Roger Moore it was easy because Sir Roger, even when he questioned things, like Bond ruthlessly kicking Locke's car off the cliff in FYEO, he accepted Glen's directions. Dalton was not so straight forward in that regard, he wanted to dig deeper into the character. Some here have suggested bring Glen back - despite his maturing years - but Craig and Glen would never gel.