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
This is rubbish.
He was brilliant in both movies and from the very first scene (PTS TLD) he was Bond.
Furthermore if he had gotten the third movie he would have steadily build up the same fan-base as Moore did. Remember Moore wasn't really accepted until his third movie.
Imagine Moore had stopped with TMWTGG.
Imagine Dalton had made 5 Bond movies.
Robot army. Not so sure.
Oh dear, robot army...well depends on the execution I guess ;) We'll never know, sadly (I think :)) )
I wish he was given the chance to do it though. He could have proved us wrong.
The early parts of TLD in Austria/Bratislava suggest Dalton could have delivered something incredible (if he had been kept in the movie-Bond cage by Cubby) in a larger than life context. Those early scenes (apart from the Bond James Bond line pretitles) are up there with the best the franchise has offered before or since.
Many people have been (quite rightly so) ragging on SP for not delivering what they expect for Craig or the series in general. The script could definitely have used some polishing up in the final act and maybe that's all it takes int he long run, kind of from a top down approach.
But what exactly do the naysayers want? SP pretty much went as far as I can foresee in terms of comical Bond mixed in with the more brooding aspects of Craig's portrayal (although the brother angle might be pushing it too far, I think most can agree here). Trying to go back to Moore's era might result in mixed results akin to the Brosnan era, like Craig being forced to say dumb quips. Moore worked for the '70's, but stayed on too long and became complacent. Craig's style is more dry and sophisticated (for lack of a better term). If Bond is "too gritty", people complain (SF). If it adds some more humour, it's too much (SP).
Writing, producing, and editing a cogent work that stands up to the '60's heyday is kind of a pipe dream and not really realistic with so many intermediates being involved in the creative process now. Everyone has different perceptions of Bond as a character and tone that it's impossible to please everyone. I just don't see how trying to appeal to one era or the next would be beneficial to the franchise as whole. I'm rambling now but I'm not sure what the strongest opponents of SP would suggest to remedy the perceived problems of SP or Craig's era at large. Writing? Sure, but the writing can always be better and tighter. I don't think it's that simple. We lucked out in the '60's with pretty much every conceivable interpretation of the character (pulpy, detective movie; espionage thriller; comic book escapades; epic; grandiose, ridiculous space epic; finally, avant garde, epic romance action movie with elements of surrealism).
It's a weird time to be a Bond fan. The horizon is certainly not bleak or uncertain, but I feel a precipice moment is coming depending on what they do for B25. I want Craig to stay on if just to give some sense of constancy and familiarity. No more Mendes and personal anguish. I want a down to earth spy thriller that doesn't need to rely on homages and winking (and I enjoyed SP).
I wasn't clamoring for the return of quips, gadgets, and OTT villains/lairs, at least not for the remainder of the Craig era. I wanted the grounded edginess of CR and QOS. Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike those familiar aspects of classic Bond films, but EON chose a certain path when Craig came on board and I was hoping they would stay the course. Once Craig left, his successor could return the franchise to the more recognizable cinematic Bond that we all know. That's typically how it went in the past anyway, the pendulum swung between "serious/grounded/dark" to "campy/comical/fantastical" with each new actor to take on the role.
What really disheartened me was when Mendes came on board and tried to mix Craig's cold, grounded version of Bond with the more fantastical traits of classic Bond. They are like water and oil. They do not mix but Mendes tried anyway. Mendes forced the Craig era to be something it's not and his two films suffer because of it.
So to answer the question posed in the OP, no, the Craig era hasn't lived up to my expectations.
http://www.jborbisnonsufficit.com/2015/11/17/is-daniel-craig-returning-after-spectre/
Out of a total score of ten I rank the films:
CR 9.5
QoS 5.5
SF 9.0
SP 8.0
total score 32= avg 8.0
So I would say Craig has more than distinguished himself.
On balance he hasn't quite lived up to my highest expectations, but he's done pretty well. All things considered he deserves a pretty big congratulations.
The best run of four successive Bond films since TSWLM to OP.
I think you forgot QOS.
:))
But that's a matter of opinion of course.
Maybe he just grows up quickly and is incredibly impulsive!
Still the best Bond, CR no. 1 in my rankings, SF - no. 6, SP - no. 5
I thought SP was really good after I saw it for the 1st time..it took a few viewings for me to think 'hang on'...
So, in regards to the thread's title: The Craig era surpassed my expectations by a wide margin and his first 3 movies live up there with Sean's first 4 for me and I hope B25 will join them. I will always go and see a new Bond movie at the movies not matter who will be starring (unless they make ridiculus changes like making Bond a woman or such) but I am not sure a new actor will be able to now compete with DN, FRWL, GF, TB, CR, QoS, SF. I know I will enjoy all of those like I enjoyed all the other entries (minus CR'67) but doubt they will have such an impact on me ever again. But ... if so I would not mind - quite the opposite.
I am extremely satisfied with the course they had chosen since 2006 with just one misstep in form of SP. I wished for Craig's TB and got his DAD. But he will get one more shot and I have high hopes.
They were the first 4 and established the character we have now.
Craig needs B25 to be exceptional or I personally don't think the popularity of CR and SF will be enough to save his tenure .
DAD was the lowest point. I left the cinema cringing...
But DC's debut knocked everything out of the park, and continued strongly through to SF.
I too am hoping for a strong exit.
And I will continue to enjoy Bond into the future, but as I said to another forum member, good luck in casting once DC takes his final bow.
Back on topic, I disagree and think the popularity of CR and SF will make Craig stand out. Either way, it will be interesting to watch how it's viewed in the future.
'Millenials' are anti-Connery?
It was big news a few weeks ago they view his Bond as a something of a rapist due to his seductions of Pat Fearing in TB and other instances. I believe there was a thread about it.
I must have missed that thread or I would have got involved in that to defend ConneryBond against such PC shit.