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
I am not against Craig returning for a Swansong. I'm sure they can make him look much younger, and I enjoy older Bond. Turner can wait another 3 years, no biggie. :)>-
Yes, it was just a passing comment ... hope that cools your fire :)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3503406/?ref_=fn_tt_tt_1
If only he knew if he was doing the next Bond film ...
Bugs Bunny, obviously, with a landslide victory over Mickey Mouse.
He's aging, and it is sad that he is moving beyond the leading man age range and keeps passing on film work. No doubt the stage work is his first love, but it does not leave much of a mark on his resume given the tiny number of theater goers who ever see his plays. Othello will have only 199 seats, so next to no one will see it. At least Purity sounds like it could be a great role, but it will also totally depend on how well gets executed.
This so much.
Dan's acts for the sake of it, so yeah, it's not surprising the decisions he makes. He wants to play interesting roles, and if he finds that on the stage or in more understated character roles, then those are the projects he'll gravitate more towards.
People seem to be negatively surprised that Dan isn't the typical Hollywood acting type who will sign up for anything promising a big paycheck, regardless of whether or not the job is an interesting or fulfilling one. Do some really think that low of him?
Furthermore, why a lot of big name actors get criticized for doing theater over film astounds me. Some in the field have made their name and are done with the stuffy set environment, and simply want an enthralling, instant gratification acting thrill that can only happen on the stage. It's their career, and nobody else's: they can do what they want with their time and energy.
He wanted to be a film actor, and for years he did 2-4 roles a year as do most film actors, some like Weisz do more.. I'm stumped as to why he suddenly stopped. He has had the time between Bonds to fit in some films that weren't long shoots. I note this as a fan of his talent. Bond is an increasingly limited acting exercise. Millions of film goers haven't a clue of what he is capable of. Many talented actors do both. Denzel Washington is a good example. I noted that Purity looks like a good role, so I hope it doesn't take years to appear.
1. I prefer to spend time with my family;
2. Bond takes a lot out of me, not just in filming but in planning;
3. I keep hearing how I should be doing other things, but then I'm like, "I'm James F'ing Bond." That's plenty.
So, that seems to be it.
I wish DC would do more, because I think he's a tremendous actor. It's too bad the Millenium trilogy didn't go anywhere.
Yes.
Hell no. Who the heck said that? Signing up for anything for just money - especially when one doesn't need the money - would be a terrible idea. Paychecks aren't the point, doing interesting acting work is. I love actors picking roles and projects they they find interesting even if they barely get paid or there is practically no chance of box office success, or they work with unknown (or "unproven") people, etc. It's not like there isn't a huge variety of potential movie work out there, too, and it's surprising if someone of high stature couldn't get interesting offers or many people wouldn't be interested in working with him. If he's just sick of doing movies of any type and size then that's a pity. Nice to have Broadway, then.
Sure.
And indeed, if all my favorite actors stopped acting altogether and I never saw them in any new movies, I couldn't complain, because it's their career. And of course it is. I totally get that.
However... It's just a pity if one doesn't see one's fave actors act and do new movies. It's such a thrill to see actors one likes in new movies. I'm selfish like that. (I also like it when musicians I like release new albums or do tours I can attend.)
I don't object anyone doing theatre if they want to. I won't be able to go see Broadway plays, though, so if that's all he does besides Bond, I find it regrettable and unfortunate, and I'm not happy about it. I've said it all before as well. It's not a character assassination or lack of respect. I'd just like to see him do more movies of different types. If he doesn't care to, fine. I must say that I'm very happy that so many other actors I like are into making movies, so that I get to see them in a new movie (or a couple, or more) every year. Supporting roles are cool, too. Shoestring budgets. First-time directors. Peculiar art films. There's so much variety. And some films don't take months to shoot, or months to promote, either.
Yup.
Yes.
One can probably spend as much (or more) time with family when doing smaller film projects than when doing theatre - unless one prefers not to do films. I'm sure Bond is exhausting, so doing very different kinds of film work might be a good idea. If Bond is plenty for him as an actor, fine, too, but since he wants to do Shakespeare or whatever anyway, then clearly it actually isn't.
But it is what it is. We all agree it's a pity, though.
All true. He's a gifted actor, and I just want to see him in more film roles. I have high hopes for Purity.
In 2011 he had four films coming out - Tin Tin, Dream House, Cowboys and Aliens and Tattoo.
Three of them - Tin Tin, C&A and Tattoo were meant as franchises. I remember some writing that, by the end of the year, he would be the biggest movie star in the world.
So - in the end - none worked out, which must have been a bummer. Nobody can just swallow that without it having an effect. So, not only was a future, that might have been full of films, empty, but he might have come up with - WTF, is this still worth the effort and working your arse off? I don't know that for sure, of course, but it would make sense.
Plus he might not be seen as very bankable anymore, so the offers might not be that great.
He left Monuments Men for the Pinter play with his wife, which is understandable and The Whole Truth for script reasons.
My guess is, he is a bit desillusioned about what he can do and be successful with.
So, he decided to do less of that and do more of what seems very satisfying - be with the family.
As I see it, at some point, he will hoperfully get great character roles and be done with the leading man stuff. He never cared for that anyway.
What I wanted to say is - he totally went for it post CR - just didn't get lucky. Not his fault, because what I see overall is, that films make the success, not the actors. There is no such thing as a bankable actor anymore. Put the most beloved actor in a film, the audiences don't like and it will sink. That easy. He just got too much of that...
But there is always the chance, that he gets another break and will be back.
BTW - which Weisz films are you referring to, that get bad reviews? As I see it, her recent efforts mostly got prices and good reviews.
Just sayin'.
Yes, those are both excellent. I also wish he'd do for instance stuff like that.
In general, I think there might be too much emphasis on being "bankable" or on being in rather big movies, or even possible franchises like GL pointed out, or being always the lead, etc. Actors who are well-known, are skilled, and have varied experience and connections and friends can do smaller films and/or smaller parts if they choose to, including stuff that have no chance of even actually making money (at all or not much). All projects don't have to be successful either critically nor financially. All projects potentially bring more connections and friends and attention even if in small doses. It all adds up. It's not like actors need to work all the time (when they don't need the money). And it's not like actors can't spend time with family when working on smaller film projects, and families can travel along sometimes, or films can be shot locally, etc. Some shoots take only a few days for an actor to be required on set. Of course there's (almost) always prep before that and usually some promotion when the movie comes out, but most movies obviously don't require anywhere near what Bond does.
But he must have his reasons. Finding the situation unfortunate is not criticism of him personally, like I said above, merely a fan's unhappiness of not seeing more of him.
New York Theatre Workshop (NYTW) (Artistic Director James C. Nicola and Managing Director Jeremy Blocker) has just announced its complete 2016/17 Season. The season will kick-off in Fall 2016 with NAT TURNER IN JERUSALEM by NYTW 2050 Fellow Nathan Alan Davis(Dontrell, Who Kissed the Sea), directed by Megan Sandberg-Zakian (The Convert). It is followed by the previously announced production of William Shakespeare's OTHELLO, directed by NYTW Usual Suspect and Tony Award winner Sam Gold (Fun Home) and featuring David Oyelowo (Royal Shakespeare Company's The Histories, Selma) in the title role and Daniel Craig (Betrayal, Spectre) as 'Iago', in Winter 2016. Spring 2017 will bring THE OBJECT LESSON, by Geoff Sobelle (all wear bowlers), directed by NYTW Usual Suspect David Neumann (Restless Eye), with scenic installation by Steven Dufala. The season will conclude with NYTW Usual Suspect Mfoniso Udofia's SOJOURNERS and HER PORTMANTEAU, presented in repertory, directed by NYTW Usual Suspect and former 2050 Fellow Ed Sylvanus Iskandar (The Mysteries). Performance schedules, casting and full creative teams will be announced at a later date.
Oh that bit from the 2012 Olympics is still brilliant.
This may sound strange, but I actually think he looks younger there than he did in SF, and he filmed that 5 years ago now.
I think in Skyfall they intended for him to look a little older with the whole old/new theme -'old dog new tricks etc' and they achieved that look by having a close cropped haircut.
Yes, the effect was TOO good. He's really 50 now, and he still looks much younger than he did when he was 43.