No Time To Die: Production Diary

15055065085105112507

Comments

  • Posts: 4,325
    echo wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    I disagree. He looked bored and out of place in SP. CR remains his best performance, with QoS a close second. Even the lighthearted moments in those two films are better ("We're teachers on holiday who won the lottery") than the forced ones in SF or SP. It is pretty clear in retrospect that Craig and Mendes had different ideas about the direction of the character but that Craig, like most actors, trusted his director.

    Absolutely agree, DC is best in CR and QoS.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    edited November 2016 Posts: 4,078
    echo wrote: »
    SeanCraig wrote: »
    If they feel comfortable and able to end on a high note with Craig (so with continuity from his films since it's some form of trademark in his 007 era), then they should do exactly that.

    If they have the feeling SP is their only way to do a "standard" Bond movie, then they have done all they can (with Craig) and it's time to release Craig and start fresh with a new tone of the movies.

    To me, the Craig era deserves one last, bookending entry with all the now trademark elements Craig brought to the role: Personal background of Bond, serious relationship, hard-boiled action, less gadgets.

    But any cheesy thing like the foster-brother "twist" and such must be avoided - same as the "one-man-army" thing the third act of SP showed. Of course Bond is larger-than-life ... but Craig's other entries showed he suffers greatly to achieve his goals .. where in SP he walks away, shoots some guards and the whole Blofeld HQ blows up... WTF?! SO please let's avoid that.

    IF EON is able to get a script together which focuses on the Craig-Bond-trademark elements, mix in ingredients from Novels (OHMSS, MR are my choices) plus escapism (less but more explored locations like in DN or TB) I am absolutely sure we would get a well done and very successful bookend for the Craig era.

    If all that's not possible and the only way they think they can do it is like especially SPs third act (which wipes out all the most excellent elements of acts 1 and 2) - then please start over with another actor and find a new balance ... maybe go back to the traditional formula which may suit the new actor better. If they stick to the "new formula", it will be (too) hard for any new actor not to be compared to Craig's version and he will not be able to show his strengths as he could otherwise (see Dalton's first movie with too many elements suiting Roger Moore for example).

    Well said!

    I want Craig back for one more to close out his era properly. The story and tone of SP were so muddled, and because of it, Craig gave the worst of his four performances.

    For Bond 25, my hope is that they ignore the worst aspects of SP (the foster brother angle, and possibly Swann, whose relationship with Bond never quite jelled for me). Blofeld is likely to reappear, since Eon spent all that money to get the rights.

    But it will have to be a director Craig wants. I could see Campbell (if he wants it, and is up to the task at his age). I could even see someone like Greengrass (whose revival of Bourne kind of blew up in his face). Or someone like Villeneuve. Let's face it, most directors would give their right arm to helm a Bond film.

    I really hope--although past behavior does not give me a lot of comfort--that Eon uses this downtime to hire a good writer and leave P&W in the past (their contributions to SP took the franchise in the wrong direction, IMHO). And like a new director, most writers would give their right arm to write a Bond film.

    That being said, a good writer does not need years to write a good script. He or she just needs a good starting point, such as the novels YOLT, OHMSS, or MR, as you've basically suggested.

    And I now wonder if a certain redhead being elected leader of the free world (!) makes a neo-Drax more likely to appear in Bond 25.

    Greengrass has already rejected doing an 'imperialistic' Bond film.

    Typical British leftie, he doesn't mind making films about American spies or soldiers.

    Villenueve is perfect for a Craig Bond.
  • Posts: 4,325
    Yes Villenueve would be my choice.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited November 2016 Posts: 8,452
    We need a lighter touch to direct. But also someone good at action, atmosphere, and suspense. A workman will do fine, but a highly competent and accomplished one who knows when to add an occasional creative flourish. Basically we need Martin Campbell, no substitutes.
  • Posts: 4,325
    We need a lighter touch to direct. But also someone good at action, atmosphere, and suspense. A workman will do fine, but a highly competent and accomplished one who knows when to add an occasional creative flourish. Basically we need Martin Campbell, no compromise.

    Disagree about Campbell.
  • Risico007 wrote: »
    I still just want to know who is writing the darn thing

    Hopefully not Logan, although he did seem to come in tow with Mendes. From what I read about Spectre it took Jez Buttrworth and an embarrassing climb down to reproach to Neal Purvis and Robert Wade to fix the holes and add some humour to Logan's script. Too many cooks spoil the broth. I would give the gig to Mark Gatiss. A self proclaimed super fan his writing on Sherlock and guest writing on Dr Who went down well. he is a really creative guy and I think he could nail a classic adventure.

    Mark Gatiss? Oh yeah! Excellent choice. Does wonderful work on Sherlock and Doctor Who. Great novelist to boot and a life-long Bond afficionado. The only issue is that EON keep things very much "in house" (if that's a term). What I mean is that they prefer someone who will do go to script meetings and write down what they're told to (ahem, Purvis and Wade). It's very much by committee and, alas (such as what happened with Spectre), by the numbers. Heck, even Daniel Craig had a crack at writing QOS!

  • edited November 2016 Posts: 4,325
    SonofSean wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I still just want to know who is writing the darn thing

    Hopefully not Logan, although he did seem to come in tow with Mendes. From what I read about Spectre it took Jez Buttrworth and an embarrassing climb down to reproach to Neal Purvis and Robert Wade to fix the holes and add some humour to Logan's script. Too many cooks spoil the broth. I would give the gig to Mark Gatiss. A self proclaimed super fan his writing on Sherlock and guest writing on Dr Who went down well. he is a really creative guy and I think he could nail a classic adventure.

    Mark Gatiss? Oh yeah! Excellent choice. Does wonderful work on Sherlock and Doctor Who. Great novelist to boot and a life-long Bond afficionado. The only issue is that EON keep things very much "in house" (if that's a term). What I mean is that they prefer someone who will do go to script meetings and write down what they're told to (ahem, Purvis and Wade). It's very much by committee and, alas (such as what happened with Spectre), by the numbers. Heck, even Daniel Craig had a crack at writing QOS!

    Mark Gatiss has publicly said he would never write a Bond film, sorry, he wants to experience them as a fan rather than write them.

    DC wrote stuff for QoS in extenuating circumstances, it was by accident rather than by design.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Yes Villenueve would be my choice.
    Mine too.
  • edited November 2016 Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    SonofSean wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I still just want to know who is writing the darn thing

    Hopefully not Logan, although he did seem to come in tow with Mendes. From what I read about Spectre it took Jez Buttrworth and an embarrassing climb down to reproach to Neal Purvis and Robert Wade to fix the holes and add some humour to Logan's script. Too many cooks spoil the broth. I would give the gig to Mark Gatiss. A self proclaimed super fan his writing on Sherlock and guest writing on Dr Who went down well. he is a really creative guy and I think he could nail a classic adventure.

    Mark Gatiss? Oh yeah! Excellent choice. Does wonderful work on Sherlock and Doctor Who. Great novelist to boot and a life-long Bond afficionado. The only issue is that EON keep things very much "in house" (if that's a term). What I mean is that they prefer someone who will do go to script meetings and write down what they're told to (ahem, Purvis and Wade). It's very much by committee and, alas (such as what happened with Spectre), by the numbers. Heck, even Daniel Craig had a crack at writing QOS!

    Mark Gatiss has publicly said he would never write a Bond film, sorry, he wants to experience them as a fan rather than write them.

    DC wrote stuff for QoS in extenuating circumstances, it was by accident rather than by design.

    Also the vast majority of film screenwriting is by committee. In fact many screenwriters only doing redrafts of someone else's work. EON are not exactly unique in that approach.

    When they have let writers do their own thing it's had disastrous results - Peter Morgan's terrible idea of Bond killing M, Haggis' ridiculous idea of Bond chasing after Vesper's child, Logan's awful script for Spectre putting the whole production in turmoil.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,452
    jake24 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Yes Villenueve would be my choice.
    Mine too.

    I haven't seen much of his work, but do you think he would get the tone right? I think we need something lighter and more playful.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited November 2016 Posts: 15,423
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    It wasn't his best performance as Bond.
    Definitely his best performance as Bond. Best performance as an actor in his Bond tenure? That goes to Skyfall. Not as Bond, I point that out.
    echo wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    I disagree. He looked bored and out of place in SP. CR remains his best performance, with QoS a close second. Even the lighthearted moments in those two films are better ("We're teachers on holiday who won the lottery") than the forced ones in SF or SP. It is pretty clear in retrospect that Craig and Mendes had different ideas about the direction of the character but that Craig, like most actors, trusted his director.
    In CR and QoS, he seemed very wooden at bits, barely giving a facial expression, other than that train scene with Vesper and their interaction at the hotel reception. CR and QoS may be very solid films, but none of them had Craig's best performance as Bond. If it wasn't for Craig's physicality in those films as well as the story's gritty tone, I doubt his Bond would've been given a praise. In SF, Craig definitely seems more alive in the role and not as wooden as he was before. I'm not SF's biggest fan, far from it. But, there the performance was mountains better than the ones prior to it. And in Spectre he played a James Bond with complete arc and supreme confidence. Definitely not bored.
  • Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    It wasn't his best performance as Bond.
    Definitely his best performance as Bond. Best performance as an actor in his Bond tenure? That goes to Skyfall. Not as Bond, I point that out.
    echo wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    I disagree. He looked bored and out of place in SP. CR remains his best performance, with QoS a close second. Even the lighthearted moments in those two films are better ("We're teachers on holiday who won the lottery") than the forced ones in SF or SP. It is pretty clear in retrospect that Craig and Mendes had different ideas about the direction of the character but that Craig, like most actors, trusted his director.
    In CR and QoS, he seemed very wooden at bits, barely giving a facial expression, other than that train scene with Vesper and their interaction at the hotel reception. CR and QoS may be very solid films, but none of them had Craig's best performance as Bond. If it wasn't for Craig's physicality in those films as well as the story's gritty tone, I doubt his Bond would've been given a praise. In SF, Craig definitely seems more alive in the role and not as wooden as he was before. I'm not SF's biggest fan, far from it. But, there the performance was mountains better than the ones prior to it. And in Spectre he played a James Bond with complete arc and supreme confidence. Definitely not bored.

    He wasn't playing Bond in Skyfall? Must have missed that.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    It wasn't his best performance as Bond.
    Definitely his best performance as Bond. Best performance as an actor in his Bond tenure? That goes to Skyfall. Not as Bond, I point that out.
    echo wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    I disagree. He looked bored and out of place in SP. CR remains his best performance, with QoS a close second. Even the lighthearted moments in those two films are better ("We're teachers on holiday who won the lottery") than the forced ones in SF or SP. It is pretty clear in retrospect that Craig and Mendes had different ideas about the direction of the character but that Craig, like most actors, trusted his director.
    In CR and QoS, he seemed very wooden at bits, barely giving a facial expression, other than that train scene with Vesper and their interaction at the hotel reception. CR and QoS may be very solid films, but none of them had Craig's best performance as Bond. If it wasn't for Craig's physicality in those films as well as the story's gritty tone, I doubt his Bond would've been given a praise. In SF, Craig definitely seems more alive in the role and not as wooden as he was before. I'm not SF's biggest fan, far from it. But, there the performance was mountains better than the ones prior to it. And in Spectre he played a James Bond with complete arc and supreme confidence. Definitely not bored.

    He wasn't playing Bond in Skyfall? Must have missed that.
    No. You just missed my point.
  • Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    It wasn't his best performance as Bond.
    Definitely his best performance as Bond. Best performance as an actor in his Bond tenure? That goes to Skyfall. Not as Bond, I point that out.
    echo wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    I disagree. He looked bored and out of place in SP. CR remains his best performance, with QoS a close second. Even the lighthearted moments in those two films are better ("We're teachers on holiday who won the lottery") than the forced ones in SF or SP. It is pretty clear in retrospect that Craig and Mendes had different ideas about the direction of the character but that Craig, like most actors, trusted his director.
    In CR and QoS, he seemed very wooden at bits, barely giving a facial expression, other than that train scene with Vesper and their interaction at the hotel reception. CR and QoS may be very solid films, but none of them had Craig's best performance as Bond. If it wasn't for Craig's physicality in those films as well as the story's gritty tone, I doubt his Bond would've been given a praise. In SF, Craig definitely seems more alive in the role and not as wooden as he was before. I'm not SF's biggest fan, far from it. But, there the performance was mountains better than the ones prior to it. And in Spectre he played a James Bond with complete arc and supreme confidence. Definitely not bored.

    He wasn't playing Bond in Skyfall? Must have missed that.
    No. You just missed my point.

    What is your point?
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    It wasn't his best performance as Bond.
    Definitely his best performance as Bond. Best performance as an actor in his Bond tenure? That goes to Skyfall. Not as Bond, I point that out.
    echo wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    I disagree. He looked bored and out of place in SP. CR remains his best performance, with QoS a close second. Even the lighthearted moments in those two films are better ("We're teachers on holiday who won the lottery") than the forced ones in SF or SP. It is pretty clear in retrospect that Craig and Mendes had different ideas about the direction of the character but that Craig, like most actors, trusted his director.
    In CR and QoS, he seemed very wooden at bits, barely giving a facial expression, other than that train scene with Vesper and their interaction at the hotel reception. CR and QoS may be very solid films, but none of them had Craig's best performance as Bond. If it wasn't for Craig's physicality in those films as well as the story's gritty tone, I doubt his Bond would've been given a praise. In SF, Craig definitely seems more alive in the role and not as wooden as he was before. I'm not SF's biggest fan, far from it. But, there the performance was mountains better than the ones prior to it. And in Spectre he played a James Bond with complete arc and supreme confidence. Definitely not bored.

    He wasn't playing Bond in Skyfall? Must have missed that.
    No. You just missed my point.

    What is your point?
    In Skyfall he gave a very great acting performance. Very theatrical. But, the way he played it wasn't very Bond-like at times... Most of the times. It indeed seemed to me as if he was playing a different character. While in Spectre, he played Bond at his best. The cinematic Bond as we know him, hence the best Bond performance.
  • edited November 2016 Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    It wasn't his best performance as Bond.
    Definitely his best performance as Bond. Best performance as an actor in his Bond tenure? That goes to Skyfall. Not as Bond, I point that out.
    echo wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    I disagree. He looked bored and out of place in SP. CR remains his best performance, with QoS a close second. Even the lighthearted moments in those two films are better ("We're teachers on holiday who won the lottery") than the forced ones in SF or SP. It is pretty clear in retrospect that Craig and Mendes had different ideas about the direction of the character but that Craig, like most actors, trusted his director.
    In CR and QoS, he seemed very wooden at bits, barely giving a facial expression, other than that train scene with Vesper and their interaction at the hotel reception. CR and QoS may be very solid films, but none of them had Craig's best performance as Bond. If it wasn't for Craig's physicality in those films as well as the story's gritty tone, I doubt his Bond would've been given a praise. In SF, Craig definitely seems more alive in the role and not as wooden as he was before. I'm not SF's biggest fan, far from it. But, there the performance was mountains better than the ones prior to it. And in Spectre he played a James Bond with complete arc and supreme confidence. Definitely not bored.

    He wasn't playing Bond in Skyfall? Must have missed that.
    No. You just missed my point.

    What is your point?
    In Skyfall he gave a very great acting performance. Very theatrical. But, the way he played it wasn't very Bond-like at times... Most of the times. It indeed seemed to me as if he was playing a different character. While in Spectre, he played Bond at his best. The cinematic Bond as we know him, hence the best Bond performance.

    Sorry I disagree, he was very much Bond in Skyfall, in fact he was most like Bond in that film. Who was he like if he wasn't very Bond-like? How was he playing a characer that is different to James Bond?
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Well then, we agree to disagree.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,452
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    It wasn't his best performance as Bond.
    Definitely his best performance as Bond. Best performance as an actor in his Bond tenure? That goes to Skyfall. Not as Bond, I point that out.
    echo wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    I disagree. He looked bored and out of place in SP. CR remains his best performance, with QoS a close second. Even the lighthearted moments in those two films are better ("We're teachers on holiday who won the lottery") than the forced ones in SF or SP. It is pretty clear in retrospect that Craig and Mendes had different ideas about the direction of the character but that Craig, like most actors, trusted his director.
    In CR and QoS, he seemed very wooden at bits, barely giving a facial expression, other than that train scene with Vesper and their interaction at the hotel reception. CR and QoS may be very solid films, but none of them had Craig's best performance as Bond. If it wasn't for Craig's physicality in those films as well as the story's gritty tone, I doubt his Bond would've been given a praise. In SF, Craig definitely seems more alive in the role and not as wooden as he was before. I'm not SF's biggest fan, far from it. But, there the performance was mountains better than the ones prior to it. And in Spectre he played a James Bond with complete arc and supreme confidence. Definitely not bored.

    He wasn't playing Bond in Skyfall? Must have missed that.
    No. You just missed my point.

    What is your point?
    In Skyfall he gave a very great acting performance. Very theatrical. But, the way he played it wasn't very Bond-like at times... Most of the times. It indeed seemed to me as if he was playing a different character. While in Spectre, he played Bond at his best. The cinematic Bond as we know him, hence the best Bond performance.

    I agree. He seemed like he was playing a Mendes character more than Bond in SF. Like the Kevin Spacey character from American Beauty or Leo from Revolutionary Road. Just another one of those. A great performance, but not Bond.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    It wasn't his best performance as Bond.
    Definitely his best performance as Bond. Best performance as an actor in his Bond tenure? That goes to Skyfall. Not as Bond, I point that out.
    echo wrote: »
    Spectre, as confused as it was, had Craig's best performance as Bond. He played the proper character in it. Say whatever you like about the film, at least he was triumphant and laid-back there.

    I disagree. He looked bored and out of place in SP. CR remains his best performance, with QoS a close second. Even the lighthearted moments in those two films are better ("We're teachers on holiday who won the lottery") than the forced ones in SF or SP. It is pretty clear in retrospect that Craig and Mendes had different ideas about the direction of the character but that Craig, like most actors, trusted his director.
    In CR and QoS, he seemed very wooden at bits, barely giving a facial expression, other than that train scene with Vesper and their interaction at the hotel reception. CR and QoS may be very solid films, but none of them had Craig's best performance as Bond. If it wasn't for Craig's physicality in those films as well as the story's gritty tone, I doubt his Bond would've been given a praise. In SF, Craig definitely seems more alive in the role and not as wooden as he was before. I'm not SF's biggest fan, far from it. But, there the performance was mountains better than the ones prior to it. And in Spectre he played a James Bond with complete arc and supreme confidence. Definitely not bored.

    He wasn't playing Bond in Skyfall? Must have missed that.
    No. You just missed my point.

    What is your point?
    In Skyfall he gave a very great acting performance. Very theatrical. But, the way he played it wasn't very Bond-like at times... Most of the times. It indeed seemed to me as if he was playing a different character. While in Spectre, he played Bond at his best. The cinematic Bond as we know him, hence the best Bond performance.

    I agree. He seemed like he was playing a Mendes character more than Bond in SF. Like the Kevin Spacey character from American Beauty or Leo from Revolutionary Road. Just another one of those. A great performance, but not Bond.
    My point exactly.
  • Posts: 4,325
    Well then, we agree to disagree.

    I think we do, I can't understand how you can think Craig is not 'Bond-like' in Skyfall, he was the very epitome of James Bond - falling for a girl with her wing down to use a Fleming phrase, baiting the villain with his wit, slight insubordination to his superiors, not unlike Connery in GF, which is often seen as the epitome of 'screen Bond'.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    jake24 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Yes Villenueve would be my choice.
    Mine too.

    I haven't seen much of his work, but do you think he would get the tone right? I think we need something lighter and more playful.
    His recent films, Prisoners, Sicario, and Arrival are all incredibly tight, tense, well-scripted, and visually spectacular thrillers. Each get progressively lighter, and he's certainly capable of injecting some humor into the mix.
  • Posts: 4,325
    Sicario is brilliant. Would love Del Toro to return as a main villain too, as well as Emily Blunt as a Bond girl.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Well then, we agree to disagree.

    I think we do, I can't understand how you can think Craig is not 'Bond-like' in Skyfall, he was the very epitome of James Bond - falling for a girl with her wing down to use a Fleming phrase, baiting the villain with his wit, slight insubordination to his superiors, not unlike Connery in GF, which is often seen as the epitome of 'screen Bond'.
    He was a bit too friendly with the villain when they were supposed to be raging opponents, like two bullies at a high school trying to outwit each other. The screen Bond had a different approach to that sort of interaction. Something Craig actually did display during his verbal exchange with Le Chiffre in CR. And he was a bit too emotional for Bond, playing it too much of a tragedian type of a character, which is what I'm not fond of. Even walking away from MI-6 when they were under attack wasn't very Bond-like. Connery certainly wouldn't have done that.

    Again, he played a great protagonist. But, that protagonist is more akin to what Bruce Wayne in a Christopher Nolan film would be. Not the screen Bond.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,592
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Sicario is brilliant. Would love Del Toro to return as a main villain too, as well as Emily Blunt as a Bond girl.
    Plus, there's a good chance we'll get Deakins back.
  • Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Well then, we agree to disagree.

    I think we do, I can't understand how you can think Craig is not 'Bond-like' in Skyfall, he was the very epitome of James Bond - falling for a girl with her wing down to use a Fleming phrase, baiting the villain with his wit, slight insubordination to his superiors, not unlike Connery in GF, which is often seen as the epitome of 'screen Bond'.
    He was a bit too friendly with the villain when they were supposed to be raging opponents, like two bullies at a high school trying to outwit each other. The screen Bond had a different approach to that sort of interaction. Something Craig actually did display during his verbal exchange with Le Chiffre in CR. And he was a bit too emotional for Bond, playing it too much of a tragedian type of a character, which is what I'm not fond of. Even walking away from MI-6 when they were under attack wasn't very Bond-like. Connery certainly wouldn't have done that.

    Again, he played a great protagonist. But, that protagonist is more akin to what Bruce Wayne in a Christopher Nolan film would be. Not the screen Bond.

    Emotional? Tragedian? Did we watch the same film?
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,602
    I don't want P&W to return. Otherwise we'll get another story about Bond going rogue or he's not trusted.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited November 2016 Posts: 15,423
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Well then, we agree to disagree.

    I think we do, I can't understand how you can think Craig is not 'Bond-like' in Skyfall, he was the very epitome of James Bond - falling for a girl with her wing down to use a Fleming phrase, baiting the villain with his wit, slight insubordination to his superiors, not unlike Connery in GF, which is often seen as the epitome of 'screen Bond'.
    He was a bit too friendly with the villain when they were supposed to be raging opponents, like two bullies at a high school trying to outwit each other. The screen Bond had a different approach to that sort of interaction. Something Craig actually did display during his verbal exchange with Le Chiffre in CR. And he was a bit too emotional for Bond, playing it too much of a tragedian type of a character, which is what I'm not fond of. Even walking away from MI-6 when they were under attack wasn't very Bond-like. Connery certainly wouldn't have done that.

    Again, he played a great protagonist. But, that protagonist is more akin to what Bruce Wayne in a Christopher Nolan film would be. Not the screen Bond.

    Emotional? Tragedian? Did we watch the same film?
    Apparently, we didn't.
  • Posts: 4,325
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Well then, we agree to disagree.

    I think we do, I can't understand how you can think Craig is not 'Bond-like' in Skyfall, he was the very epitome of James Bond - falling for a girl with her wing down to use a Fleming phrase, baiting the villain with his wit, slight insubordination to his superiors, not unlike Connery in GF, which is often seen as the epitome of 'screen Bond'.
    He was a bit too friendly with the villain when they were supposed to be raging opponents, like two bullies at a high school trying to outwit each other. The screen Bond had a different approach to that sort of interaction. Something Craig actually did display during his verbal exchange with Le Chiffre in CR. And he was a bit too emotional for Bond, playing it too much of a tragedian type of a character, which is what I'm not fond of. Even walking away from MI-6 when they were under attack wasn't very Bond-like. Connery certainly wouldn't have done that.

    Again, he played a great protagonist. But, that protagonist is more akin to what Bruce Wayne in a Christopher Nolan film would be. Not the screen Bond.

    Emotional? Tragedian? Did we watch the same film?
    Apparently, we didn't.

    Apparently not, observe Bond's stoicism as M drags up his orphan past.
  • Posts: 4,325
    I don't want P&W to return. Otherwise we'll get another story about Bond going rogue or he's not trusted.

    Agreed.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Well then, we agree to disagree.

    I think we do, I can't understand how you can think Craig is not 'Bond-like' in Skyfall, he was the very epitome of James Bond - falling for a girl with her wing down to use a Fleming phrase, baiting the villain with his wit, slight insubordination to his superiors, not unlike Connery in GF, which is often seen as the epitome of 'screen Bond'.
    He was a bit too friendly with the villain when they were supposed to be raging opponents, like two bullies at a high school trying to outwit each other. The screen Bond had a different approach to that sort of interaction. Something Craig actually did display during his verbal exchange with Le Chiffre in CR. And he was a bit too emotional for Bond, playing it too much of a tragedian type of a character, which is what I'm not fond of. Even walking away from MI-6 when they were under attack wasn't very Bond-like. Connery certainly wouldn't have done that.

    Again, he played a great protagonist. But, that protagonist is more akin to what Bruce Wayne in a Christopher Nolan film would be. Not the screen Bond.

    Emotional? Tragedian? Did we watch the same film?
    Apparently, we didn't.

    Apparently not, observe Bond's stoicism as M drags up his orphan past.
    More like trying not to think about it. Notice he takes a deep breath in some sort of a sigh once she mentions it. Or at the end within the chapel when M dies in his arms and he starts crying... That isn't very Bond-like. Not the cinematic version, at least.
Sign In or Register to comment.