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
I could well imagine that. All concerned are probably very relaxed about it all, including DC. Right now, they are playing the public and the fans. Bond is everywhere and it doesn't cost them a penny.
or lazy journalists. I'm content in knowing who will be in the next Bond film.
I don't feel he hurts the franchise, no.
probably out of fatigue, but a mistake. :(
Quite so dear lady .
This is the biggest question for me. If Craig doesn't return, will Q's cats still be an ongoing part of the franchise? It just wouldn't feel right hearing them mentioned again with a new actor as Bond. But then, do you just leave the cats out altogether? Gahhh! Thank goodness I don't have to decide such things...
of " Staying on message" , So I think he probably did say it but as a joke. We'd all say the
same if after finishing a hard job, we were asked did we want to do it again.
Basically, I think it was a joke answer, which has been blown up out of all context.
..and he paid for it. I suppose, even he might think twice next time. He admitted to a loud mouth. Sadly only the negativity gets that amount of media time. Right now, they are really giving it back to him - all the turning his back on them. He brought himself - with their help - in a position, where there is no way back IMO. People have a short memory and forget all the good quite easily. He certainly experienced the "One minute they love you, the next they hate you" and so on.
You down :( in some ways this might be the start of what happened to Brosnan ?
The turning of some from love to hate? Sad to see and not fair on any actor.
I always like to cut people a little slack, just as he said it, he probably thought
It was funny ? How many of us have had that happen ? ........ not me obviously ;)
Yes, there is a certain collectivist authoritarian note in some these comments. Like we should all agree to a set of opinions, and dissent is viewed as something we shouldn't tolerate. I value individual thought much more than collective sentiment.
Haha... ;;)
Though if Daniel Craig doesn't return, then I'll be happy with Tom.
The thing that annoys me with any actor who says film making is hard work, yes I'm sure it is. But then normal people don't make millions of dollars for six months, a years work at best. Must be tough. Poor them.
I love films, and I will be a Bond fan till I die. Personally I'd like to see a more stable series of films. Every two years, three at worst. If they could do it in the 60's, 70's and 80's I really don't see why they can't do it now. After all, it's money in their pocket at the end of the day.
Now the wrists comment was unnecessary and avoidable, but he did it, just letting it out, what he found, was a stupid question. "If I get silly questions, I give silly answers"
Like I said, he did pay for that, to this day.
His tone in interviews ALWAYS was, that he loves what he was doing immensely!!
So - the press made A LOT out of very little to really screw him up. But its different, if fans do the same. They should know better then that. Just my two...
To be fair, I would say that Craig plays the role more demandingly than any other Bond actor ever did (doing his own stunt work is probably a big factor), at a time where Bond films are at their biggest. I can understand the pressure and maybe even the fatigue and stress that comes with ir, especially considering the "hits" he has made with CR and SF. And you are discounting the fact that Craig has to promote the film afterwards, so it's really 9 months for one film. Which, to be fair, is not bad ar all. But I also get the sense that at this stage Bond is taking too much of his schedule, and as a good actor he wants to move on from that.
There's also the fact that Craig could probably get some sort of high billing and make a good chunk of money without being Bond, or at least work as hard as being on a Bond film.
We went two year cycles back then because we can afford to, with the number of unused Fleming material that screenwriters literally adapted from the books. It takes more time to write a Bond film now, with the increased competition and sophistication.
Plus, filming today is of a different age than the 80's, even the 90's. IMAX conversion takes a good chunk of time. Shooting on location is more difficult, and post-production/CGI is a six month prerequisite.
Alas, I think if you do want the 2 year cycles to return, you'd need MGM to get off their arse!
Other studios are able to churn blockbuster films (and just as good products) within a 2 yr and even 1 yr cycle. So it can definitely be done. I just think they need a crack creative, distribution and studio team behind them.
Plus everything karate said.
Now they have to deal with the distribution rights and maybe a new actor. That's not done in a heartbeat plus, as they all say, life doesn't solely consist of Bond, whether some here like it or not.
Understanding what he said is the responsibility of the individual, but a lot of people blindly take media drivel at face value.
SW -TFA may have taken a while to come together, but they are getting a move on now with Rogue One and several other products as well as the Marvel entities. We may not like what they give us, but in terms of bang for the buck as a fan, it's impressive.
As I said, QoS - delivered in 2 yrs flat, even with a writer's strike.
It can be done, if they want to do it.
But if he had worded his answer differently, that storm in a tea cup wouldn't have been blown out of proportion. How hard would it have been for him to say something like "Right now, i'm not thinking about the next Bond film. I'm going to take some time off, then we'll see."
That's also why I said Hiddle will have to stop dancing in public if he becomes Bond. Not because he shouldn't dance (it's his business), but because it will be used against the franchise.
I almost get the impression DC did that intentionally, to sort of put the nail in the coffin. It may have been subconscious.
Whether we like it or not, it has been damaging for his Bond tenure more than it has for Bond. If I was EON's marketing dept, I would say he has to go, in order to move forward and reignite energy in the franchise, and remove that misquote from being used whenever Bond is discussed.