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
when Craig was announced as the new Bond, i was firmly set on the fence... i wasn't against it, but i wanted to see him in the role first..
when the trailer for CR came out, I was still on the fence, but the look and style of the new Bond movie had me very interested..
then when i first saw the movie - all it took to win me over was the PTS.. i sat back and was like "Daniel is not only a hardcore m'fer, but he's slick as well (with his kill of Dryden)"... i was sold on him at that very instant...... because before, all i could judge was look - he looked the part.. but that PTS showed me he could act the part as well.
Anyway, IF Craig returns, he'll probably just be doing it for the glory (the money) and to have fun. He will just become another stereotype. Selfish.
Sir Roger might have been too old in AVTAK, but he did deliver a fine performance.
I agree.
We didn't get that from Brosnan but I'm sure he would have never just done it for the fame or money anyway, he was passionate about Bond, something that I'm not so sure about Craig when I think of how he is presenting him in the media.
He probably better quit than "doing us a favour" and return.
I just hope the next actor will be passionate and thankful again to be Bond.
That may be the impression you get from his media persona, but if you look at his actual work and his willingness to be involved with crafting the films then I think your statement is completely inaccurate.
Well said, as great as Craig is as Bond, a lot of his Bond Interviews make me cringe. He lightened up only after the press took his 'wrist slash' comments and Ran with it.
I grew up with Brosnan and He was always a great ambassador for Bond.
Hiddleston would also have a more Moore/Brosnan Type Charisma and easiness when talking with the press, i'm sure
Exactly.
I grew up with Brosnan and yes, he was a great ambassador, but that's besides the point. Moore was, and remains, a great ambassador, but it was simply a job for him. Every two years he turned up and did his bit. I'm a Rog fan, but I'm not going to pretend he was ever completely invested in his movies and their direction. Craig on the other hand has treated each movie with great respect, he clearly cares about the movies he's producing and if you can get past the media soundbites you'd realise that. I think it's important that we as so called 'hardcore' fans remember this and don't perpetuate the media agenda just because it suits our own. Most will probably only realise just how much dedication this bloke has shown when he's long gone... and that's sad.
Of course, he is doing it only for money and fun, he is selfish and a stereotype is ill mouthing. Money and fun are fine, but what about feeling a responsibility to give the franchise the kick it needs to survive another 50 years? What about the thought "Can I still give them that?"
@ Jason - exactly this thought is most likely going through DC's mind - that is HOW he proves, he cares. But its so easy to go with the negative in order to put a new guy on the pedestal, who didn't prove himself yet. Like RC7 says - I am almost sure, people will realise the difference between dedication and making nice for the press - maybe sooner then they care for.
IF he is back, it will be because he thinks, he can still provide the goods with the 150% of energy, he has given the other installments. If he can't guarantee that, no money will make him do it and THAT is class, if you ask me. Also already proven with CR - when he ran from all the money (little by standard, but a lot for him) because he didn't feel it.
I didn't say he IS doing it for the money/fun. Craig himself has said that IF he returns it would only be for the money. We're just falling into the same trap that we do every time we get attached to a certain actor in the role. When people look back at DAF now, its clear that Connery should have left sooner. Same with AVTAK. I'm not seeing the evidence that bringing back Craig will be any different.
When has the idea of bringing an actor back to end on a high EVER worked in the past?
We won't get a DAV or whatever "one too many" Bond from HIM. Period.
And to assume actors "never try with their last entry" is one helluva sweeping statement, friend! Actors are professionals. It's their job to put their best effort forward. And DC is a consummate professional. No matter what you think of the films themselves (the success or failure of any film is made of many different parts), one thing that remains consistent is Craig; he put his best performance into each (whether you like him or not, that's a matter of opinion. But his professionalism can't be questioned).
At the end of the day, I do appreciate what Daniel Craig has given to James Bond, and his dedication to the role, but I am first and foremost a James Bond fan. A Daniel Craig fan second.
In terms of performances, I don't agree that Connery gave us his worst in DAF. I actually prefer that performance much more to his turn in YOLT. Brosnan probably gave his best in DAD. Moore was just too old for the role in AVTAK, and the film wasn't all that good, which is why it was his worst - not because he was noticeably bad. It is with Craig actually where I feel he has given us his worst performance with his latest, in comparison to what he has done before (which was to a very high standard no doubt).
In addition, I think many agree that DAF, AVTAK & DAD are the weakest films from the respective Bond actors. I happen to think TWINE is Brosnan's worst, but most likely am in the minority on that. Similarly, I think SP is Craig's worst film to date, by far.
So at the end of the day, two things come to mind:
1. more time in the role is not necessarily a good thing (and evidence seems to suggest that)
2. actors seem to max out, at least in terms of the quality of their films, as time goes on
If Craig stays and is to buck that trend, he will have to deliver one heck of a send-off film. I think most people feel this way.
No, its not provaction to have a difference of opinion. That is frankly baffling that you would say that.
It's also not a sweeping statement at all to state a fact: The longer that actors are in a role, the less they try. When an actor first lands the Bond role, you can tell they anxious to prove themselves (DN/LALD). Then gradually they relax into it to the point where the freshness is still there, but they feel comfortable enough (GF/TSWLM). Then eventually they become so relaxed were they are essentially going through the motions (DAF/AVTAK). This is called complacency. Even Craig is not immune to that. People are acting like I'm being harsh on him by simply holding him to the same standards as the other actors. It's those who act like Craig is above everything that are setting him up to fail.
Yes, and that is why I personally want him to leave, because this can go very wrong. Right now, even though I like Sp, I don't trust them to deliver that.
Craig has failed the media and therefore the public with many of his comments especially the wrist slashing which will get quoted forever whenever he is mentioned and that's only Craig's fault and not the media's.
I love Spectre and think Craig was never better! He takes his job seriously once he's at it.
But if I have to see his fifth with the knowledge he is doing it not because he's proud to be Bond but for other reasons I rather have him replaced.
=D> I agree 100%. Craig's best performance was in SP.
I think they have a great opportunity here, to end an Era on their own terms, rather than because they feel they have to. That would show some great self-restraint on their part.
Is it? Or is it just your being opinion being foisted on us as fact?
DAF - Sean was still pretty good but clearly only there for the money so your hypothesis holds up somewhat.
OHMSS - George puts a decent shift in throughout.
AVTAK - Rog might not be the greatest actor in history but he is as pure a professional as you'll ever see. His performance in AVTAK is not phoned in, or if it is he hides it well.
LTK - Tim really put is heart and soul into trying to get back to Fleming.
DAD - None of the issues I have with the film are to do with Broz who holds the whole shambles together as best he can.
SP - Who said it was Dan's last film? And even if it proves to be his performance is still excellent.
So out of 6 I'll agree you may have a point on Sean. Hardly conclusive proof of your 'solid fact'.
Furthermore only Sean, possibly Laz (not certain when he decided for sure but I think it was while they were still filming) and Rog knew for sure it was their last film at the time so you're saying that with LTK, DAD and SP the actors in question just weren't bothering and picking up their paycheck which I find a tad insulting towards their professionalism.
Sadly Craig is not one of them, he always seems slightly uncomfortable, or at
Least not relaxed, so he's made a few mistakes.
Exactly what I said -just that he won't let this happen. So - where is the problem?
Nah.
..and to hell with him for that. It was stupid and he paid for it. But some people just won't give it a rest and try to base all other motivations on just that. That's also what I call stupid!. Sorry...
Coup de grâce.
role on Tom Hiddleston, he knows how to keep the media sweet. ;)
http://www.theportlygazelle.com/2016/05/29/31-year-old-british-actor-theo-james-confirmed-as-the-new-bond/
Unfortunately the media don't get his personality and his words have landed him in hot water, the doing it for the money comment was clearly a joke.
Craig has never done anything purely for the money, all actors want to be paid but I'm sure if he wanted he could have cashed in on Bond much more.
His CV doesn't say to me that he's looked for the money before or after being appointed. No he doesn't make the best choices outside of Bond for role but that is another discussion.
If Craig comes back it will be because he wants to and not because of the money.
No I wasn't impressed with SPECTRE and would like to see him end on a high but I have to say the idea of Purity excites me more at the moment.
I want to see DC flex those acting muscles again and he's not like some say a one note actor, just see him as Geordie Peacock in OFITN to prove that.