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
:))
He got a BAFTA nom for Casino Royale, and although that was a real statement-of-intent attention-grabbing performance, I'd say he's even better in this one.
Ok, but can you cite examples of scenes that are on par with those I posted?
Because that tantrum he has with Tanner or the interrogation scene with Blofeld, or the conversation with M, are all sub par, IMO. But I'm open to be convinced of scenes that surpass the ones above or are similar in their acting qualities.
So, which ones?
"Die, Blofeld, die" ? :P :D
I'm saying this since yesterday I was finally able to see the film in English.
All of this, yeah. I also love all of his meetings with M and Felix. It's a very well-rounded, human performance. I think the work he does here in NTTD is more impressive and more difficult than what we get in CR.
That's what was said, yes. Sometimes folks don't say things because they're 'giddy' or doing it for 'shock value': sometimes they just believe different things to you.
And that's why these are forums, so we can argue different points of view. So I can easily say "I don't agree", and "I'm open to be convinced", as I said.
And I said "we" are all giddy. Myself included, as to not offend anyone.
And the only time I mentioned "shock value" was in another context, and you know it. You must have taken it personally.
And @matt_u, and @ProfJoeButcher, have kindly answered to my challenge and gave appropriate responses and opinions, to which I have yet not replied because I'm wasting my time with you.
Want to teach me anything else today, kid?
On, cmon, are we seriously saying we were being open to other opinions when we derisively described them as being influenced by being 'giddy'?
Note how the phrasing of that sentence implies that you can't possibly be serious with your reply, and it echoes how you phrased your question. 'Kid'.
And when you mentioned shock value it was in exactly the same way: not believing that people actually meant what they said and that you must be right. It's tiresome, superior and argumentative and I won't be falling for any more of it today.
Anyway, folks have replied and explained to you now about the scenes and acting in question, so it's been answered, let's move on.
Granted, he really chew the scenery in that scene, and the scenery was brutalist, worthy of our man Tadao Ando, so it was a hard chew ;)
Listen, Craig was AWESOME (can't believe I'm using that word) in this film. And he practically aced it in every scene, despiste those scenes I mentioned and did not like.
I just think CR's acting was on another level. But you guys are right in saying that his acting was very good in NTTD. Frankly, I've never seen him act badly, in anything.
I loved his interactions with Felix. The absolute highlight of the film, IMO. With M, nop, but that was due to the writing, IMO.
PS: Sorry for the double posting, I never do this, but I wanted to distance myself from the comment above, as I try to never engage that particular member, as to not increase animosity levels. Let's carry on with the talk, gents :)
You know, in CR he brought a fierce energy to his Bond that I think won't ever be matched.
In NTTD he brings a total different feeling to the character. There's a melancholy in his portrayal that I find extremely subtle and well done.
Yeah they're two ends to the spectrum that work really well: he really feels like a matured version of that guy from the first one who has learnt to open himself up and actually drop that armour. He's terrific in both but I feel like this one may be his best.
It's a very hard thing to judge of course, you can't do it scientifically.
The melancholy aspect really convinced me in most of his scenes, you're right, Mr. Roark. He does the extremes very well. Like his own looks, which are undeniably different and unique, he's always better at the most extreme situation, acting wise.
Even in QOS he has brilliant moments. Some low key moments as well, there.
A really good thespian, that's undeniable.
SF had brilliant moments as well.
For sure. I don’t think he gives a bad performance. There’s just something about the three I mentioned that I really like though.
I don't get what could be wrong with the writing in any of these scenes. James Bond (who tried to murder M in one novel and broke into the home of the previous M in the films) has had his life jeopardized by M's poor judgement, and now the whole world is in danger. And Bond is no longer with the service. I can't fathom why their scene would play out any differently than it does.
Agree.
I thought M's backing of the bioweapon was very out of character although RF did a fantastic job, and I didn't like the first scene in particular with M and Bond, for the reason you outline. I think Mallory was brought in as a return to a more traditional M after Judi Dench's autocrat and I wish they had kept to that and hadn't put him in such a difficult moral position in NTTD.
I'd write it differently, but this assumption is based on the fact that I truly believe Fleming would write it differently as well, as the relationship between the two men is one of respect, always, and camaraderie; Bond would be angry, yes, but he would reserve judgement as he, himself, has made numerous mistakes and bad judgments over the years, and so had the previous M. By the end of SP they had form a bond, pun intended, and Bond should've come out of retirement in order to help Mallory fix his mistake, because he knows what is like to make them. Instead of that smug "You understand why I had to come back to play" line, this would be more apt, IMO. "Why not stay dead, you once asked me" - says Bond? M: "We can't have you dead, Bond, not now, not yet". Bond: "Not ever, apparently". Something along those lines, I'm writing as we speak, and I don't have the time to make this better, but god knows they had the bloody time, didn't they?
I loved the way Mallory was portrayed in SF, and even in SP, being a bit of a foul mouth no nonsense guy who got Bond's back when needed. Both had seen active service, both were honourable men. Bond winking at him and shooting the extinguisher was brilliantly done, for example.
Have to go, sorry, would love to stick around some more for this chat of ours. To be continued ;)
I really liked that scene: it was refreshing to see Bond and M with the dynamic of being boss & subordinate removed; and I especially like the moment where M broke off to pay tribute to Felix. It was a well-written scene which suited both of their characters and it's always interesting to see the characters we know put in a new position we've not seen before.
The only issue in terms of being out of character was, as LizW mentions, M's backing of the weapon in the first place.
I’d like to count myself as part of the Nominate-Craig-Posse. He was sublime.
Count me in as well. Craig is brilliant.
Agreed. Fiennes belongs in the same boat as Lee and Brown. He's a superb actor and a fine M.
Precisely. I really liked Fiennes' haircut in this film. He could have easily fit in during the classic Connery era.
I really hope he continues playing the part. And he wants to do it!
Top Job, a brauva
I'll join that club, I'm sure they'll be those that snort but the hunt to find another Bond is going to a bloody hard one.
His portrayal throughout his tenure has been on another level from anyone else as far as digging in beneath the skin of James Bond 007.
If you want just surface level charm and a man on a mission, then maybe not for you but as some have already said, you have 20 films of that ilk to look at.
Barbara & Michael said this time they wanted to tell Bond's story rather than concentrate on the mission. So yes the plots/schemes took a back seat in this era but this version of Bond wasn't about that.
I'm sorry but having the films again about the same old blueprint which it seems some would gladly accept. These films are not just for a little small percentage of the fan base and they never have been.
There is a lot of criticism from some who seem to know more about making Bond films than the people making them but they made the right call when they went in this direction and the reception and the financial reward shows that in spades.
There is no way in hell they could have continued as the PB era was going, this needed to change up and change up it did.
So yes Craig was a powerhouse in this film, although I can only ever think he wasn't all there or committed on SP, every other time he shows up. His injury on SP might have a had a lot to do with that but also throwing other Bond's traits at him to sell.
People think NTTD script is bad, god SPECTRE's is one of the worst of the series entire.
Some mention Waltz being much better, I'd agree he was better although him suddenly doing a 180 on his approach would have jarred if Ernst had become really sinister and threatening.
The writers rightly stuck to the petulant snipey child routine, always trying to get a rise out of sweet James, the words that were put in his mouth were much better though and I think that made all the difference.
That utter nonsense he spouted in the torture scene from SP was utterly embarrassing. Some complain about his dispatch and him being thrown aside.
One day we'll get a proper introduced ESB but this tenure wasn't it, so like SP deserved the worst insipid drivel as it's title song, so did Ernst deserve this fate as he wasn't worthy of getting anything else.
The damage was already done in SP and it was irreversible, at least Waltz turned up in one great Bond film.