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
True but slowly I am noticing a reappreciation. He deserves it and Cubby said that hard core Bond fans loved his interpretation. I knew Bond collectors who had met all the actors always rate Dalton as they loved the Fleming books.
They knew a lot of what the press said about him was utter b*llshit. The film studio of the 90's needed the money and it would not help their ambition if they praised Dalton making it even harder for Brosnan to inherit the role.
And Cubby mentions that he never saw an actor put so much effort into delving into the books for clues on his psychological makeup. Cubby being a theatre lover loved the fact that Dalton said he found the role intimidating.
For Cubby seeing a serious actor say that gave him great validation for possibility in the series. Bond is one of the most adaptable to the times creations.
Cubby never liked hearing from the press that any one could play Bond. It insulted him.
well @Getafix is a lil' low on the DC-love at the moment :p. I think he actually does like him, he's just not properly satisfied as things stand.
Yes, and we've had ample evidence now of how difficult it can be. As every year passes, my appreciation for Sean, Rog and Tim grows. I rate DC but for me - and this is not meant as an insult - he is not quite in the same league as those 3.
No worries; for me, Sean, Tim, and Sir Roger aren't in the same class as Daniel Craig. :P
(Though Tim's close.)
DC is a fine Bond but it took a lot of work to achieve that. It did not happen overnight and DC even said himself. You need the support structure for that to happen and an open minded film studio.
DC's Bond is a depature for the series and a risk that paid off. But it could have easily gone the other way.
I remember a critic saying that had Dalton got the same level of backing as Brosnan, he would have given an even greater performance as Bond and achieved far more. And with the backing Craig got, he would be something else.
I applaud DC but what would he have been like with the same crew and director in LTK? And with an interferering studio that tried to shave the budget as they were shooting and complain about everything. All in Cubby's book.
Imagine making a film when the studio is a sinking ship with a management that know little about film but accounting? That was the era of LTK and why the Bond hiatus happened. It was a sad end to an era where the old Hollywood style was being pushed aside for quick profit.
For me I cannot really put Craig above Dalton. I do like Craig's interpretation and he has certainly not played Bond as an idiot. When I watch Craig as Bond, I often think of Tim or Sean. Not that I am implying he is a copy because he is not. But he is assured in how he wants to play it and makes no apologies.
But he has that believeability about him. All of them are different men so I stay clear these days of comparing. All of them are why Bond is still here. No other franchise could go on as long as Bond.
I am curious of the next Bond and what he will be like. I hope they cast someone interesting.
You have at least 2 films unless Craig starts eating 3 kilos of chocolate per day and McDonald's Big Macs become his favourite food.
I hope he quits the role when he is ahead. Nothing worse than a good actor leaving on a franchise nose dive. He even said that the best intentions can go horribly wrong.
Not that easy. You can start production thinking your last film is going to be great and then issues develop on the set. It happens despite the will to stop it.
When did he say that? It's weird because that's what I feel about SF. It has all the right intentions but fails miserably to deliver. It's like they've taken a risk and aimed really high and then just belly flopped into an empty pool...
True, there is some luck involved, but it's not all that. Craig seems to have a good feel for his career much of the time, and seems to do well more often than not.
Well, he certainly doesn't sound like he's bored by the prospect when he talks about it.
Yeah, that's kind of what I'm thinking...
I just think he might get a bit bored after B24 and B25, obviously I possess no crystal ball, so what do I know. It's just a gut feeling.
If you go through his recent Youtube interviews you will find it. He does not do much press but he does say it. If I find it I will PM you. But I have a fine memory.
With SF, they are trying to balance so much but it feels like they are walking on a tight rope at high altitude. Old Bond never gave a sh*t. It was very spontaneous and less self-conscious. I mean when they say nowadays we have to make a classic Bond film. In Roger's day they just said we are doing another Bond. End of. They explain too much these days of themselves.
I think the QOS backlash scared them and there seems to be a subtly apologetic tone.
I think, this is a reasonable approach,.
Great quote about this. (Not from DC)
"Its not, that we make bad films on purpose. Its just, that making good ones, is so damn hard
BTW - he does and did a ton of press. Believe me, as I watch them all.
He is smart and honest which I like. But when you are making films, studio politics can get in the way sometimes. And being cautious is the better approach.
But QOS is definitely an experience which must have haunted him. Great crew, cast and budget and yet the film was heavily criticised by fans. That must make the balance so hard to get right.
What I mean is that he knows with the Bond franchise you are high up as an actor and one slip can be the fall that ends it. I think all Bond films start production with the best intentions for the fans. But there are factors beyond an actor's control.
Well, Quantum did suffer the effects of a writer's strike.
Exactly and there was nothing they could do when production started. But it proves how even with huge money behind a film, it can still fall short of expectations. Me, I was fine with QOS because I like how Craig stays in character and does not veer off to extremes.
Me neither. I had not been to the cinema in a long time and enjoyed the visit. I was none the wiser until I heard other opinions many months later. But I like Craig for not making Bond look like a character that is in love with himself. He captures that tarnish Dalton had. Though Dalton is playing a Bond who has had enough and is seriously jaded.