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
Pierce looks so good in The November Man, just based on various stills of him in Bondian clothing and poses, gives an indication what it might be like had he never left.
I think Daniel is similar that unless preparing for a specific role, his doesn't change that much. Looking at him in SP I'd say he could do several more films.
I always felt if Roger could play Bond until he was approaching 60, any other Bond actor should be able to as well. I'm definitely all for keeping a current Bond for the long term.
"Thanks mate"
His performance in it doesn't help his case though.
As someone who just turned 49 himself, this has made my day.
Still waiting on that sequel, dammit.
Woah don't go too crazy with your praise.
Dan stole the show, really, and when I see it it'll just be to support him and this wacky role. When people talk about him being a crazy talented actor, this is the kind of stuff they talk about. Like a true chameleon, he slips into a part wholly. I think in this film we'll get an idea of how he played some of his more unstable characters on the stage.
C&A? Now I consider that to be a rare DC hiccup.
So I never had Casino down as one of the top 3 Bond films or anything, but I was excited to see where they would go with it. Then Quantum happened. Again, I enjoyed it at the time, but there was this sense building in me, that they weren't getting the most out of Bond. I had my problems with Casino, but I at least understood the reasoning behind taking a step back. With Quantum, it was like they were taking another 2 steps back and it no longer felt warranted. Then there was that huge gap, and I felt sure that they would come back with a Bond film for the ages. Skyfall certainly made a big splash, and I knew Q and Moneypenny were back this time. Initially I loved the film, but gradually I came to realize that it was no different than the other two. It still had the same mindset, it just had a few more of the bells and whistles. I didn't understand why Bond still needed to be broken, tortured, on the mend etc. It was like this idea of a flawed Bond that began in CR had never really been developed or moved forward. It really began to irritate and confound me. The only way they felt they could show drama and realism was to paint with such broad strokes, and have Bond be emotionally crippled again and again. By the time of SPECTRE, I really wasn't holding out hope for anything different. When we saw the trailers, with Craig staring wistfully at an old photo, it was pretty evident we were in for the same thing. And it didn't matter how much Scooby gang shenanigans or how many gadget cars were involved in what was going on.
So the initial feeling of something just be slightly off in CR had developed gradually over time to the point of complete exasperation. It was stupefying to me why they refused to adapt or develop their approach at all. truthfully, I didn't even know what was missing. But then I had something of a revelation. Around the time of SPECTRE, this video was released:
I was kinda taken aback when I saw this. It seemed to sum up what had been missing from Bond for the past 10 years. For the first time I was seeing Craig being Bondian, but not playing it a rookie, or over the hill, or depressed, or nostalgic. He was just being "in the moment". It may sound ridiculous, but I think this is Craig's best performance in this type of role. It made me realize just how few times we see Craig genuinely in control and at ease during his tenure. Not wisecracking per se, but vivacious. It just made me understand what I couldn't quite put my finger on for all those years, because what I was experiencing wasn't a problem but an absence, a deficiency. All of a sudden I began to view the entire Craig era as very two dimensional and crude. They couldn't get past the idea that drama equals personal stakes, and realism just means making everything serious and dour. Again, that works for a one film narrative, but when it is stretched out to such an extent it just becomes absurd. True depth requires a lightness of touch to be present, that enables a starker contrast. And that's why, for me, Craig has perhaps the worst tenure of all Bonds. Because I can see how good Craig could have been in the role and the wasted potential, and I refuse to just ignore it. If that's my way of "pushing an agenda" or denigrating Craig, then I apologize - because it wasn't my intention.
Both of those were incredible. Can't stress enough how bitter I'll forever be that we didn't get a continuation of the TGWTDT series with Craig/Mara/Fincher.