MGW - "Daniel Craig plays Bond like Connery"

2456

Comments

  • Posts: 11,189
    The comments from MGW are just part of the hype machine, the usual PR stuff.

    Exactly!
  • Posts: 1,492
    BAIN123 wrote:
    and quality-wise the best shape it's been in since the 60s. I .

    This guy (a lover of Craig) doesn't think so :)) :))



    (I know Ive posted this review several times on here but its just SOOO epic :D ).

    I like Kermode but he is no Bond fan. He has gone on record that the only one he likes is OHMSS because it has a romantic character arc. He tore TND to pieces in one of his newspaper columns.

    It is perfectly reasonable to like Craig but not like the Bond genre. And I expect Bain if the man had ripped GE to pieces you would be crying into a bucket.
  • edited February 2012 Posts: 11,189
    actonsteve wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    and quality-wise the best shape it's been in since the 60s. I .

    This guy (a lover of Craig) doesn't think so :)) :))



    (I know Ive posted this review several times on here but its just SOOO epic :D ).

    I like Kermode but he is no Bond fan. He has gone on record that the only one he likes is OHMSS because it has a romantic character arc. He tore TND to pieces in one of his newspaper columns.
    It is perfectly reasonable to like Craig but not like the Bond genre. And I expect Bain if the man had ripped GE to pieces you would be crying into a bucket.

    TND - nah (although it is sort of fun in a guilty pleasure way - watching it now actually) but GE probably :))

    I do like the review he gives here though. As I said I think he's a bit harsh but there is a certain element of truth to it.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    I don't see any of Connerys Bond in Craigs Bond. Which isn't a bad thang, as it's not like Connery is the be all and end all of Bond anyway. And I think Craig should try to find his own style and bring new elements to the role, rather than look to the past.
  • JR_747 wrote:
    NicNac wrote:
    timmer wrote:
    Yes Sean-Bond had a relaxed arrogance, confidence about him. He was very comfortable in his skin. Will the Bond powers-that-be, ever let Craig find similar swagger, or will Craig let himself?
    It might be that Craig can't pull it off. Connery was/is a great actor. With guidance from Terrence Young, Sean created and perfected the on-screen character.

    I'm of the opinion that Craig does capture that relaxed arrogance, and he does look comfortable in his skin. Which is why MW makes these comments.

    Dalton and Brosnan tended to play Bond with the weight of expectation on their shoulders. You could see it in their eyes that this was a big part and a tough ask. The history of the part was always shadowing them. Dalton tried to be different but tried too hard. Every movement of his face and body was calculated and actorish. It was like watching a stage play of a Bond adventure. Brosnan simply played Bond four different ways, looking for the way that suited him best.

    Roger Moore succeeded in part because he couldn't care less about the history of Bond and Connery's part in it. The same to a degree with Lazenby.

    Now Craig has clearly thought it through, and tried to develop Bond in a way that addresses the usual problem with making a film ie scenes are shot out of sequence and sometimes (Brosnan especially) Bond's actions in one scene don't somehow represent the happenings from the previous scene. Craig never falls in to that trap and neither did Connery. Great screen actors both of them.

    I agree with both being great actors. And I agree with Craig looking comfortable in his skin, as well. The problem - or merely the point, as it's actually not a "problem" - is not about Craig but about how the script describes Bond. We could see Bond's "relaxed arrogance", this certain light-heartedness in maybe the first half of CR. But then again he had not fully grown into beeing a double-0. During the course of CR he did grow into being 007, but at the same time the events that made him become 007 made things personal for him and he let these things get to him. That's why the connery-esque light-heartedness got lost, in parts at least. And it never returned in Qos.
    This is nothing I blame the writers for! Actually I like the way the character developed a lot, as this is completely different and more credible than anything we have seen in ages before Craig!
    But, what I wanted to say is, that we are yet to see Craig being his closest to Connery in the way mentioned above. And I am looking forward to that!

    I really agree with what you say. Craig captures a style of relaxed confidence, even arrogance, in CR that made me think of Connery. And the great thing is that it never tipped over into being "smug" or smarmy which I found to be a problem with Moore and especially Brosnan. The fact that Craig's Bond evolves over CR is not a weakness but a huge strength to the film IMHO.

    I'm assuming that Craig will recapture that playful, almost menacing, sense of fun that he had in the beginning of CR. It won't be quite the same as Connery - he had a way of diffusing situations with raised eyebrows and a "What did I say/do?" look on his face which was very funny - but I can see Craig in SF being more like he was in the first half of CR.
  • Daniel Craig is a short,blonde,round faced actor with a very light speaking voice who works out a bit and strongly resembles President Putin of Russia.Now President Putin works out a bit - but would you cast him as James Bond ? George Lazenby who was a brilliant successor to Sean Connery was the actor most resembling Flemings Bond - and gave a fine performance in OHMSS. Of course the first Bond Sean Connery was also brilliant. Only George Lazenby and Sean Connery have the Bond look and style.
  • Posts: 172
    Jason19 wrote:
    Daniel Craig is a short,blonde,round faced actor with a very light speaking voice who works out a bit and strongly resembles President Putin of Russia.Now President Putin works out a bit - but would you cast him as James Bond ? George Lazenby who was a brilliant successor to Sean Connery was the actor most resembling Flemings Bond - and gave a fine performance in OHMSS. Of course the first Bond Sean Connery was also brilliant. Only George Lazenby and Sean Connery have the Bond look and style.

    welcome Jason19, can you please define what is "bond look and style"?
  • Remeber the craig's not Bond idiots.how wrong they were.
  • edited February 2012 Posts: 12,837
    Craig needs to be more like connery. I like him, but if he doesn't lighten up and become more like bond for skyfall, then I'll lose my faith in him. QOS sucked because it took the seriousness too far, the film lost all its sense of fun. The "bond is still learning" excuse is gone now, so hopefully for skyfall I'll see craig become more like bond.
  • Posts: 289
    why does he HAVE to be like anyone other than HIS bond? I really dont get it....
  • Posts: 1,492
    Craig needs to be more like connery. I like him, but if he doesn't lighten up and become more like bond for skyfall, then I'll lose my faith in him. QOS sucked because it took the seriousness too far, the film lost all its sense of fun. The "bond is still learning" excuse is gone now, so hopefully for skyfall I'll see craig become more like bond.

    Then it might be an idea that you give it a miss. The doubletaking pigeon and inivisible car days are not happening under Craig.

    You have to realise that.

  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Jason19 wrote:
    Daniel Craig is a short,blonde,round faced actor with a very light speaking voice who works out a bit and strongly resembles President Putin of Russia.Now President Putin works out a bit - but would you cast him as James Bond ? George Lazenby who was a brilliant successor to Sean Connery was the actor most resembling Flemings Bond - and gave a fine performance in OHMSS. Of course the first Bond Sean Connery was also brilliant. Only George Lazenby and Sean Connery have the Bond look and style.

    Oh Dear!

  • and norman wisdom
  • edited February 2012 Posts: 4,622
    NicNac wrote:
    timmer wrote:
    Yes Sean-Bond had a relaxed arrogance, confidence about him. He was very comfortable in his skin. Will the Bond powers-that-be, ever let Craig find similar swagger, or will Craig let himself?
    It might be that Craig can't pull it off. Connery was/is a great actor. With guidance from Terence Young, Sean created and perfected the on-screen character.

    I'm of the opinion that Craig does capture that relaxed arrogance, and he does look comfortable in his skin. Which is why MW makes these comments.
    True, Craig does look comfortable playing Bond "his" way, but I was thinking the character, not the actor. Craig plays Bond much differently than Sean did. Sean's Bond was much more relaxed.
    Jason19 wrote:
    Daniel Craig is a short,blonde,round faced actor with a very light speaking voice who works out a bit and strongly resembles President Putin of Russia.Now President Putin works out a bit - but would you cast him as James Bond ? George Lazenby who was a brilliant successor to Sean Connery was the actor most resembling Flemings Bond - and gave a fine performance in OHMSS. Of course the first Bond Sean Connery was also brilliant. Only George Lazenby and Sean Connery have the Bond look and style.
    Good post. Can't argue with that. I might add that Rog was close, but he lacked the menace. But I agree, Laz IMO is the ony Bond that has really come close to what Connery put down.
    Will Craig ever be allowed to play Bond with the relaxed mix of menace and charm, that Sean established, or will he always be asked to play a troubled Bond? Craig may actually prefer the latter. We'll see with SF. Personally I don't think Craig is as good an actor as Sean. Sean has a larger screen presence. Craig simply may not be able to do what Sean did.
    chuck007 wrote:
    welcome Jason19, can you please define what is "bond look and style"?
    That's rather obvious isn't it. It's there in the first 5 films, laid down for the those that have followed.
  • Posts: 224
    I like Craig. But, he is not Connery. The desire may be there. But to me, he doesn't have the look of Sean. He may act tough. But unlike Sean, he doesn't look the part. While I'm no woman, I can't see women falling all over themselves to get to Craig like they would Sean. And he doesn't have the personality of Sean. Just because Daniel swings his fists well, doesn't mean he is Sean II. Sorry, Michael Wilson. Fail
  • Jason19 wrote:
    Daniel Craig is a short,blonde,round faced actor with a very light speaking voice who works out a bit and strongly resembles President Putin of Russia.Now President Putin works out a bit - but would you cast him as James Bond ? George Lazenby who was a brilliant successor to Sean Connery was the actor most resembling Flemings Bond - and gave a fine performance in OHMSS. Of course the first Bond Sean Connery was also brilliant. Only George Lazenby and Sean Connery have the Bond look and style.

    First of all welcome to MI6 :) .

    Lazenby certainly looked like the Bond Fleming described, which was actually pretty inconsistant from novel to novel telling me that it wasn't the most important detail to Fleming, but suffered from one fatal weakness. That weakness being there were scenes were it seemed as if he couldn't act his way out of a paper bag. Give me a less conventional looking Bond who can make me invest in the character over a male model any day. With that being said actors like Connery and Craig stand as the best to me while pretty-boys and male models like Brosnan and Lazenby are the worst.
  • Posts: 825
    craigrules wrote:
    Remeber the craig's not Bond idiots.how wrong they were.
    Yell I remember that They were losers.
    I don't any actor can be like Sean Connery at all. Daniel Craig & other Bond predecessors have their own way play the James Bond role. But Like in the different way of Sean Connery Daniel Craig is well as 007.
  • edited February 2012 Posts: 172
    timmer wrote:
    Will Craig ever be allowed to play Bond with the relaxed mix of menace and charm, that Sean established, or will he always be asked to play a troubled Bond? Craig may actually prefer the latter. We'll see with SF. Personally I don't think Craig is as good an actor as Sean. Sean has a larger screen presence. Craig simply may not be able to do what Sean did.

    Craig is not as good an actor as Sean? that's debatable my friend. Only two actors in the series who i think is a capable actor they were Dalton and Craig. Connery without Young guidance, would be still rough diamond.
    timmer wrote:
    That's rather obvious isn't it. It's there in the first 5 films, laid down for the those that have followed.

    So every actor must follow that "style" over and over again kind of mandatory to play Bond?

  • edited February 2012 Posts: 6,601
    Jason19 wrote:
    Daniel Craig is a short,blonde,round faced actor with a very light speaking voice who works out a bit and strongly resembles President Putin of Russia.Now President Putin works out a bit - but would you cast him as James Bond ? George Lazenby who was a brilliant successor to Sean Connery was the actor most resembling Flemings Bond - and gave a fine performance in OHMSS. Of course the first Bond Sean Connery was also brilliant. Only George Lazenby and Sean Connery have the Bond look and style.

    He is not short, he has average hight to begin with, yes, he IS blonde and no, he certainly doesn't have a round face and what puts your post down as just a hater is describing his voice, which is one of his best traits, as light.

    Someone else asked, what woman might see in him. I can answer that - he has charisma and presence in spades and body and voice left aside, he has the most interesting face, that some describe as gorgeous and beautiful and others as downright ugly. Add a great smile/laugh, which lights up that face in an incrdedibly appealing way and you have the attraction for many. Plus he has a great personality, which is not always obvious in the way he treats the press etc., but its still true, as I can say after 6 years.

    Also, I don't think Bond is about looks but about how the actor, who portrays him, gives that character all the traits Bond has. I agree on the lightening up. He showed, he has perfect timing in his one-liners and does the humor quite well. He just wasn't allowed too much of that by the scripts. So - lets hope, this will change. They said, it would...

  • Posts: 11,425
    Totally agree. The idea the actor has to fit a tedious concept of Bond's look is a dead end.
  • DoubleOHSeven and Getafix point to the fact that George Lazenby was a male model and also claim that in some scenes he could not act his way out of a paper bag. Firstly it is pointless to point out that he was a male model -Roger Moore was also a male model and modelled knitwear and posed for Colegate toothpaste ads for years, Sean Connery did some modelling and also worked as a milk delivery man and a coffin polisher - nobody throws this up at them : as the American song says 'It's Not Where You Start It's Where You Finish.' Secondly Georges acting ability - I studied drama at a London Drama School (Joanna Lumley's old school ),and later at University and taught Drama at an english school for a couple of years and I see nothing wrong with Georges performance. It is certainly no worse than the other 'would be Bonds' and in most cases a darn site better- with the exception of the excellent Sean Connery. You don't have to play Hamlet to be able to play Bond - on the other hand just because you can play Bond doesen't mean you can play Shakespeare.
  • edited February 2012 Posts: 1,661
    MGW often praises Daniel Craig. He's either a big fan of the guy or has to keep praising Craig to convince himself he was the right guy for the role! Perhaps he's in self-denial. Heh. :P
  • Posts: 192
    fanbond123 wrote:
    MGW often praises Daniel Craig. He's either a big fan of the guy or has to keep praising Craig to convince himself he was the right guy for the role! Perhaps he's in self-denial. Heh. :P
    He IS the right guy for the role! That's widely recognised. Dissenting opinions of a few are legitimate but certainly no cause for MGW to question his choice.

  • edited February 2012 Posts: 1,661
    Here is the full transcript of that article:

    "Sean was a tough guy; he set the tone," Wilson said. “[Roger] played it more comic. Roger was lighthearted. Timothy brought it down to earth and Pierce brought a touch of charm and touchiness. And as for this George Lazenby person - never heard of him."

    :D
  • edited February 2012 Posts: 4,622
    chuck007 wrote:
    Craig is not as good an actor as Sean? that's debatable my friend. Only two actors in the series who i think is a capable actor they were Dalton and Craig. Connery without Young guidance, would be still rough diamond.
    But Connery was smart enough to work with Young to establish the character. This is a testament to his acting ability - an ability to take direction and work with others to really get the role figured out.
    chuck007 wrote:
    So every actor must follow that "style" over and over again kind of mandatory to play Bond?
    Yep that would be quite advisable actually. Sean did take pains to establish the character over 5 films. Bondmania with Sean showing the way was the biggest thing in cinema circa 1964-1967.
    Jason19 wrote:
    DoubleOHSeven and Getafix point to the fact that George Lazenby was a male model and also claim that in some scenes he could not act his way out of a paper bag. Firstly it is pointless to point out that he was a male model -Roger Moore was also a male model and modelled knitwear and posed for Colegate toothpaste ads for years, Sean Connery did some modelling and also worked as a milk delivery man and a coffin polisher - nobody throws this up at them : as the American song says 'It's Not Where You Start It's Where You Finish.' Secondly Georges acting ability - I studied drama at a London Drama School (Joanna Lumley's old school ),and later at University and taught Drama at an english school for a couple of years and I see nothing wrong with Georges performance. It is certainly no worse than the other 'would be Bonds' and in most cases a darn site better- with the exception of the excellent Sean Connery. You don't have to play Hamlet to be able to play Bond - on the other hand just because you can play Bond doesen't mean you can play Shakespeare.
    Agreed, that's just a cliche that Lazenby couldn't act as Bond. His acting was quite good. He was very convincing as Bond. Like Sean and Terence Young, he was smart enough to take direction from a Bond veteran like Peter Hunt. Yes, Hunt and Lazenby had a strained relationship at times, but Hunt made sure he got what he needed out of Laz, and Laz grudgingly gave it to him. Lazenby as Bond in OHMSS is one of the best performances in the series.
    As for Dan Craig, I love the guy, but his look is all wrong for Bond. The look does matter. The look is tall, dark, lean and handsome. After that ,the actor has to find the right mix of menace and charm. 5"10 is too short for Bond. Sean was 6'2 and that was 50 years ago, when men were a tad shorter on average. Craig's lack of stature is very apparent in the films. That said, what's done is done. I wish Craig the best, and as long as the films are making money and keeping audiences happy, I'm happy to have him around, but as a Connery purist; I say next time, insist on the classic look.
    You can hold out for both - both the look and the performance. There is no need to compromise or trade-off.

  • edited February 2012 Posts: 1,661
    According to the new Bluray Bond 50 boxset cover, Mr Craig is the same height as the other Bond actors. He is actually 6'2 but looks smaller due to his blonde hair and craggy complexion. :P
  • edited February 2012 Posts: 172
    timmer wrote:
    But Connery was smart enough to work with Young to establish the character. This is a testament to his acting ability - an ability to take direction and work with others to really get the role figured out.

    He was lucky enough to be cast as "the first James Bond" , his testament is not his acting ability my friend.


  • edited February 2012 Posts: 4,622
    chuck007 wrote:
    timmer wrote:
    But Connery was smart enough to work with Young to establish the character. This is a testament to his acting ability - an ability to take direction and work with others to really get the role figured out.

    He was lucky enough to be cast as "the first James Bond" , his testament is not his acting ability my friend.
    You are right of course. Very over-rated. Sean's acting skills are quite limited. Glad we got that cleared up.

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    chuck007 wrote:
    timmer wrote:
    But Connery was smart enough to work with Young to establish the character. This is a testament to his acting ability - an ability to take direction and work with others to really get the role figured out.

    He was lucky enough to be cast as "the first James Bond" , his testament is not his acting ability my friend.


    Oh please. I am so sick of hearing all this wish wash about how Sean is only considered the best because "he was first". That is utter tripe, and unfounded. Sean helped form the character. He was a perfect mix of suave, cold with his gaze, ruthless in his actions, and deadly in appearance in the field. He set some of the best aspects of Bond that are hardly used anymore. His Bond checked the hotels he stayed in for bugs, he enjoyed fun brakes between missions, and his Bond felt the pain and hurt. He is the greatest because he led the craze of Bondmania, and played the role to a tee, the most exceptionally as of yet. Not because he got the role first.
  • edited February 2012 Posts: 11,425
    Jason19 wrote:
    DoubleOHSeven and Getafix point to the fact that George Lazenby was a male model and also claim that in some scenes he could not act his way out of a paper bag. Firstly it is pointless to point out that he was a male model -Roger Moore was also a male model and modelled knitwear and posed for Colegate toothpaste ads for years, Sean Connery did some modelling and also worked as a milk delivery man and a coffin polisher - nobody throws this up at them : as the American song says 'It's Not Where You Start It's Where You Finish.' Secondly Georges acting ability - I studied drama at a London Drama School (Joanna Lumley's old school ),and later at University and taught Drama at an english school for a couple of years and I see nothing wrong with Georges performance. It is certainly no worse than the other 'would be Bonds' and in most cases a darn site better- with the exception of the excellent Sean Connery. You don't have to play Hamlet to be able to play Bond - on the other hand just because you can play Bond doesen't mean you can play Shakespeare.

    When did I say that about Lazenby? I don't remember saying anything about Lazer's acting abilities. I actually think he was a fairly good choice and am a big fan of OHMSS. The guy who looks (and acts) like a catalogue model is Brozza.
Sign In or Register to comment.