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
It's always hard to imagine who could be the successor of a beloved icon.
I experienced this several times with Star Trek, I could never imagine anyone to succeed Captain Picard, but they managed fine with Sisko, Janeway and Archer AND the new Kirk!
Once Bond 7 hits the screen, Craig will be "forgotten" quickly, believe it.
They have always found the right guy and they will again.
If anyone had suggested Daniel Craig in 2002 he would have been rushed to the looney bin!
I have one or two choices, but I don't think it's going to be them. Bond #7, I think, will have been born somewhere between 1980 and 1985, and won't be a big name... yet.
The Star Trek analogy doesn't really work except for Kirk. Recasting iconic characters is always a tricky thing. Chris Pine was a shot in the dark and it worked.
Craig will not be forgotten. Bond 7 will most likely receive the same heated reception Craig did before Casino Royale came out.
That's why I put forgotten in "s
If EON doesn't choose again a blond, short actor or something completely different like a red-haired or American, the new actor will not at all get the heated reception Craig did.
I believe the opposite will happen.
With someone like Tom Hardy or Fassbender (he's too old I know) the general public will jump for joy.
I've seen enough Bad Trek fanfilms to make me appreciate a good actor haha. Those pictures of Hardy you posted half sold me on him being cast as Bond. I've not seen to many of his movies. As a movie buff I'm ashamed to say. I plan on checking out his works soon. I don't see EON hiring a Craig lookalike for Bond 7. I don't know if Hardy will be in their line of fire for candidates as he's pretty famous but we'll see. Eon's picked out famous stars before. Moore, Brosnan. I have faith in them. :)
Yeah...those Bad Trek fan films....urghh...
Just remember when picking Tom Hardy films, he is one if not the most versatile actor of his generation. There are movies around of him in which he comes across nothing like Bond.
If I may make suggestions: (not for Bond reasons)
1. Warrior (highly underrated movie and possibly my favourite of Hardy, Mixed Martial Arts Story)
2. Lawless (set in depression-era Virginia, crime-story)
3. This Means War (Hardy as spy, yes! against Captain Kirk Pine, yes!, fabulous fun)
I guess the obvious ones like MMFury Road and Inception you have seen.
The bolded part sort of answers your question. If he doesn't want to do the role I'm sure he'd gladly and easily pull a sicky or something but nope not Craig he got on with the show instead of having the appropriate medical treatment he needed.
No one is arguing that DC is not a professional on the job. From what I have seen, he is the consummate professional in every way.
The conversation is more around his off-camera behaviour, and particularly the way he conducts his interviews. It's obvious that he is uncomfortable doing these things (I've always noticed that) and he can also seem self conscious too. There is a difference between sticking two fingers up at a paparazzi photographing you in your private time (which he's known to do) and conducting a one on one interview in a magazine while promoting James Bond however.
I don't think it's too much to ask of him not to say things off the cuff that can be manipulated by the media looking for headlines or to avoid swearing where possible. My mother advised me on how to control my inner self in public and I try my best to do that as much as I can when I should. He should be no different...it's really not all that difficult if you try just a little. I'm sure he doesn't fart when in front of the Queen, so he likely knows how to control himself when he has to. I just think he should do a little more of that in front of the media.
These things can matter. As I've said, I'm a huge fan of this franchise, as are many here of course, but I can see how this might impact other's enthusiasm for this film on the margin. It's just unnecessary imho.
Again, nothing to do with his professionalism.
Nobody I think is questioning his professionalism. He gives his all to make the movies the best they can be.
I think some people have difficulty to see their "hero" in a unfavourable light, which I can understand. I would too.
True, promoting a movie until it opens belongs to the job. Absolutely.
Precisely.
I do not think they are finished with him yet.
Precisely. Connery only did DAF for the money and yet is still rated the most popular Bond.
With that you get another Brosnan. An actor so preoccupied with 'finally being Bond' he over-eggs all the cliches of the role and contributes nothing new or original to the franchise.
The thing you don't realise is the Major would be more than happy with that he's already says he prefers the PB era over Craig's because they still seem like Bond films to him. Some people need the cliches thrown at the screen to convince them they are watching a Bond film. The character and story line aren't enough, I like to think as them as fans of the elements rather than the essence of what is Bond.
The Brosnan era had all the subtlety of a sledgehammer and some Bond fans need things spelled out to them in block capitals for them to accept they are of the same series.
That's most certainly true.
"...Left eating Her Own Words."
There are other articles also making it clear that Craig was "joking," was "exhausted," was talking about the "moment," and was clear about the possibility of returning for Bond 25.
"Daniel, are you still going to do one more Bond film only for the money?"
I wonder how Craig will react! Brush it off with a smile might be the best tactic! Craig has dug himself into a potential big PR hole here. We'll have to see if the media really exploit it. Babs and MG should give him some rehearsed replies to say. If Craig doesn't control his reaction he may say something he'll regret. He has to be careful.
I have no idea about that interview, but I do know that PR reps are not always present in interviews. Some actors don't particularly like being baby-sat, and I would imagine Craig would be one of those.
I haven't gotten the impression of people seeing him as their "hero". I think it's the difference between seeing context, how media handles things as well, etc. and seeing just a couple of sentences out of context. (By context I mean both the actor in general and what else he has said and how he speaks, acts etc. and the context of timing, when the interview was done vs. published and how it's presented etc.) You just might see it differently since you don't like him anyway. People who like him for most part seem to be perfectly capable of seeing how some stuff can be interpreted and why and understand that Craig's word choices were not the best and so on. Simplifying people's differences on the matter to people who presumably see him as a "hero" and people who can supposedly see more clearly is not really fair.
This is, of course, true. Everything doing with the promotion of the movie is also part of the job - regardless of how big a star or not an actor is, in my opinion.
Oh my. You LIKED This Means War? I hadn't realized anyone did. The only reason I didn't turn it off after the first few minutes was the only reason I was watching it in the first place, in other words Tom Hardy, who wasn't particularly good in it, but in a movie that bad it's kinda hard to tell, really. I didn't expect the movie to be great in the first place, but it was much worse than I could have feared. The cinematography hurt my eyes, the plot was beyond terrible, and as for "fun" you mentioned - eeeeh... no idea when it was fun, I must have blinked. I sat through it, but at no point did I have fun. Hardy had a miserable time doing it (he said so... I think it's a pretty safe bet that he won't be working with McG again, either), and I had a miserable time watching it. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, ever. Except if someone wanted recommendations of bad movies specifically. I obviously don't blame Hardy or the other actors for the movie being as it was.
If I were to recommend something instead of that choice, I'd say Locke, such a unique movie. Anyway, Hardy is indeed a fabulous actor. I wouldn't want him for Bond, though, nor do I expect he would be on the list necessarily - too old, too famous, attached to another franchise - plus I'd like to see him continue to do the kind of varied stuff he has been doing instead of being stuck as Bond, plus I wouldn't want him into the brutal Bond circus, poor guy. Maybe he'd be able to handle it, but I'd be worried about him.
I'm excited about the film and I want to tone down my negativety. Its just partly fanboy nervousness.
This sums up Craig:
November 9 2012
http://www.ew.com/article/2012/11/09/daniel-craig-007-regret
The way he expresses himself - terrible. He's a disgrace to the franchise. The ungrateful comments like "I’ve been trying to get out of this from the very moment I got into it,” - that isn't a joke because we've now had Craig say he would do another Bond film only for the money. It's a consistent pattern. Sure, (some) fans dismissed past comments as "it's a joke" - yeah, well the joke is not funny anymore.
He's brought too much negativity to the franchise. It's too negative and unpleasant. Saying he'll wipe his ass with the contract. It's incredible to be so dismissive of it all, and so vulgar.
And now he's said he'd rather cut his wrists than play Bond.
It's shameful. He's damaging the franchise with these comments. Enough is enough. He does not deserve to be James Bond. It's obvious he has contempt for the part - it comes to the surface in some interviews.
We deserve better than Craig. He's insulted the franchise with his comments. The guy should go. Heck, I'd rather he didn't even turn up for any promotion of SPECTRE, that's how strongly I feel about this man. He's a disgrace and it will be an insult if this person makes another Bond film. 30 million dollars for a guy so ungrateful? **** that.
Albert Broccoli would be ashamed of Craig's conduct.
Oh dear God.
Leave the misinterpreting to the papers, who make money of it.
But yeah, forget EVERYTHING he put into the franchise to make it great again. Go ahead, if it pleases you, but stop whining.
Concerning This Means War
I chose it so the diversity that Hardy is capable of is shown. If you watch those three movies I guess it can be seen that Hardy can play about anything.
But of course if I had to rank all Hardy films, TMW would end up probably somewhere at the bottom.
I did enjoy it though, just for seeing Chris Pine and Tom Hardy on screen. It is mindless fun.
I can feel U.
Here for something funny:
But who thought Daniel Craig has mass appeal in 2005? Hardly anyone. I thought he was a good choice but did not imagine he'd become as successful as he is.
I think the role actually has the power to elevate lesser actors to superstar status. It can give actors who don't have obvious appeal a mass appeal.