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
Ok, I'll take the millions; you can have the pubs :)
He worked out like crazy for Casino Royale and although he overdid it somewhat he looked bloody great.
Great Idea!
Deal.
Because then your pub becomes, 'that one owned by Daniel Craig'. An even worse scenario than trying to go incognito.
As someone who has been involved in health and fitness for all of my adult life, I find it amusing when Craig is described as looking like a bodybuilder or in any way bulky in Casino Royale. I am a professional Firefighter; I work with a lot of guys who are ex-military. Our bodies are tools of the trade. For most of us staying I shape is in both our professional and personal interest. Bond, as ex-military who operates in a very physical occupation would do the same.
If you look at Casino Royale, Craig only looks really jacked in the scene where he comes out of the water in the Bahamas; lighting, and the fact that the shot is fairly tight and he fills the frame makes him look bulkier than he really is. No doubt he's in shape but looks nothing like bodybuilder. As he arrives at the Ocean Club he looks muscular but trim.
Craig didn't look like a bodybuilder (at least I never said that) but he had extensive work out done.
I'm involved in fitness and sports too since my early youth.
It might be that Craig looked more trim in other scenes as the movie is shot over several months.
I would think the scenes filmed in the Bahamas were filmed at close to the same time.
Is it the first time he so explictly confirms what was reported earlier by someone here ?
I think you will find Daniel to be one of those people who gives back but operates quietly behind the scenes. He will probably be spending time working with ORBIS, the UN, S.A.F.E. etal, he loves art and photography so I imagine hell have some time for those along with enjoying quality time with his family and if an acting project of interest pops up in between he’ll do that. As he’s such a private person anyway don’t be surprised if he has got a project on the go as him and wife Rachel rarely court the press for self publicity.
He looks his age and not airbrushed to satisfy those who don't want to see imperfection
http://www.esquire.co.uk/culture/film-tv/8782/daniel-craig-interview/
He opens up about playing Bond. There's also some mention on why he had been absent on the big screen:
“I worked a lot before [Casino Royale]. I did lots of things, I worked with amazing directors. I was very relaxed about what I did. I knew I could act.” Then Bond happened. “There’s kind of a rigidity to it. You’re playing this very specific character and everybody starts looking at you in that way, and you’re like, ‘I’m not that.’
“I did feel like, ‘I’ve got to look like I’m doing other stuff.’ But then it was, ‘Who for?’ So the public think, ‘Ooh, isn’t he versatile?’”
“I relaxed. It was like, ‘Fuck it. I’m James Bond, for fuck’s sake. So I’ll do James Bond.’ The fact of it is, it’s not a bad position to be in. I used to get asked all the time, ‘Don’t you worry that you’re going to get typecast?’ ‘And?’ I mean, talk about a high-class problem.”
“It wasn’t because I couldn’t get the gigs”.
I'm pretty confident he will do his fifth Bond film aswell.
Will he miss James Bond, when it’s another actor carrying the Walther PPK, at the wheel of the Aston Martin?
“Yeah, of course I will.”
What will he miss most? “Doing the films; just that.
But then, it is not my opinion that an actor has to please everyone. Better to have someone in the role of Bond that divides people but brings something unique to the role as Craig does than have an everybody's darling that is kind of a repetition of things past.
I want Craig to be back for a fifth movie, but only if that movie is released by the end of 2017.
If EON doesn't manage to do that, then they should end this era, and start a new one in 2018, 19 or whenever they can do it.
Another thought:
If actually EON and Craig already know Spectre is the last one, then they should go public with it.
Just imagine what a marketing coup that would be. Spectre would shatter Skyfall's success only because of that.
Finales of beloved movie franchises and TV Show ALWAYS get the highest box office and TV ratings.
He has been an excellent and believable Bond to date, has restored my interest and faith in the franchise which I had become a little ashamed of some years back (for the first time), and has given us some phenomenal films (although too few) in his run. I hope he continues to have a long and successful career as James Bond.
I will add though that I will not get my knickers in a twist if he chooses, for personal and professional reasons, to step down from the role and pursue other career options. I want him to do what he feels is best for his life and for him, no matter how disappointed I would be if he chooses to leave. He's earned that right.
You forget one important thing. Daniel Craig is perhaps the first Bond actor that's under constant scrutiny from current day's spoiled dictator-ish social media generation. And that same generation is mentally fed by lots of self-made computer hackers. Within that frame, the negativity always wins from the positivity if you ask me. And proper, nuanced interpretation of articles or opinions ions is already gone.
This is what Daniel Craig had to endure from day 1 he became Bond. And it's unfair. That's the very reason opposition could thrive on it. Because let's be real now: $1.1 Billion worth of tickets for "Skyfall" haven't been sold because the opposition for this particular James Bond has been so stiff.
I don't really know what to make of this kind of stuff, but maybe you guys do.
Enormous financial donations to politicians has always seemed like a greasy thing to me.
I don't think it's necessarily greasy for private individuals to make political donations. Democracy requires citizens to be engaged in the political process, and that includes providing financial support to candidates and parties. I don't think Craig is looking for any personal advantage from doing this.
Is Craig a U.S. citizen though? I would question whether it's wise for him to be interfering in the politics of another country in this way. I suppose he does spend a lot of time there, even if he can't vote there. I would suggest he limits his political donations to the UK until he becomes a US citizen himself.
as it's bound to alienate half your audience.
I mainly lives in NY for some time now and I even think, he applied for citizenship and it got granted.
Weiz holds dual nationality therefore is a Citizen, Craig previously lived and work in America on an Artist visa, However being a UN ambassador he is now treated as a diplomat in terms of National Security and can freely work and travel without a Visa. Craig and Weiz have a large home in New York State.
I feel you. 4 movies seems too little.
It was the same for me first with Dalton (I was 14 and 16 when his movies hit the theaters) and again with Brosnan (age 21 to 28).
The actor(s) you grow up to you don't want to let go.
I hate that EON wasn't able to put out more Craig movies within the decade that Craig now is serving as Bond.
One more would mean he would be 50 years old and in his 12th year. I'm not sure that is a good thing.
In any case I believe this was the last era where the same actor has more than 3 or 4 movies. EON seems not to be able or willing anymore to make Bond movies with less than 4 or 3 year gaps.
I'd love to see Craig back for one or even two more. He is an excellent James Bond. However, the more I think about it, I'd actually prefer that his 'era' be a contained creative period of rejuvenative excellence. It will better cement his legacy (which he deserves) in the history books, and allow us to move forward cleanly with a new vision with a new Bond and most likely a new studio.
So from my point of view, it will depend on how SP fits in with the rest of the Craig films, and whether it comes full circle (as it may) and wraps up his story nicely or not. If it does, then I'm ok with him leaving, reluctantly, if he chooses.
IMHO, he can spend his money as he likes. I agree that outside money is a big problem with US politics at the moment but it occurs across the political spectrum, e.g. Sheldon Adelson.
Why there is even a discussion about it escapes me.
Maybe some people are just mad because they think he gives the money to the wrong political party?
The article comments on the Super PAC being a little shady and perhaps not using the money for the advertised purposes, which is concerning. The fact that Sanders' campaign itself is asking for it to cease activities is also interesting.
Super PACs are a disgrace, but sadly were legitimized by a Supreme Court decision.