› ›

The DANIEL CRAIG Appreciation thread - Discuss His Life, His Career, His Bond Films

1…8384868889…177

Comments

  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    Well, thankfully he doesn't have to
  • noSolaceleftnoSolaceleft
    Posts: 1,162
    peter wrote: »
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7... you obviously are passionate about this character, and shouldn't have to prove to anyone why you connected to an actor who depicts a subtext from the original works. As you and I are simpatico in this regard, I'm at the point where I can also remove myself from our POV and I see what @noSolaceleft is saying...

    However, as I said to noSolace, his pure and literary interpretation of the character could not be, I'm guessing, be shared and accepted, celebrated and bought, in today's modern, global, cinema universe.

    To people like you and I, we agree that DC has taken the Fleming character, and updated it to fit our times. He has made his characterization into a global phenomenon, not seen since SC (in the days that barely saw the franchise compete against other forces, unlike this modern era;

    People who want a change, who want DC gone, should be careful what they wish for: at no other time, in Bond's history, have there been so many other elements competing for the public's attention-- from M:I films, to TMFU reboot, to KM, to SW, to Marvel, to all the spin-offs...- and Craig's Bond has competed well...

    Craig's Bond is in a crowded market place, even more than the Brozzer era; all of DC's films, from the Outlier-- SF-- to the other three and their flaws-- killed the competition. He and his films remain competitive...)

    There is nothing to apologize for-- DC is a superior actor, executing in a superior manner.

    If the last four films starred a Timothy Dalton in his prime (and I do like Dalton-- not my fave, but I respect what he was doing), the franchise would sink.

    Brosnan Bond, respect to his fans, couldn't survive this crowded marketplace. The amalagam people celebrate would be a yawn to the international audience of today.

    For whatever reason DC did connect.

    In a crowded marketplace, like no other time in the history of cinema, DC is the goose that lays the golden egg; this is a fact, whether @noSolaceleft agrees, or not...

    You seem to be under the impression, that I am advocating a 100% adaption of Flemings bond. Nothing could be further from the truth. Actually I am of the opinion that no one would remember the Bond movies these days if there hadn't been Richard Maibaum working his magic on the script from day one, giving him whit, ruthlessness and humor, which the Bond in the novels is seriously lacking.
    I also think that one of the main reasons why Dalton didn't resonate with the public was that his take was so close to the literary Bond.
    About Craig the money magnet. It's worth remembering that until SF his movies didn't out gross Brosnan's efforts and that's even though CR had the most massive campaign for it going you might imagine. In the weeks before its release there was hardly a time when you switched on your TV and you didn't hear "see how James became Bond,James Bond."
    MTV was airing in loops the "becoming Bond" documentary and so on. I remember reading in an English newspaper that someone wrote "you almost got the impression that it was an act of patriotic duty to see the movie" so massively it was hyped.
    And SF you ask? Well it had this "M is dying and Bond is crying" thing going for it. Plus The queen parachuting on his back and the anniversary. I remain convinced that just about any bond actor would have had his financial Peak with a plot like that.
    Also, the money numbers only tell half the story. I know for certain that the ticket prices here in Germany half extremely been inflated during the last 20 years. Way back in the 90s I saw GE on this cinemas "cheap day" for the equivalent of 3 euros and 4.50 the other days.
    today, again on the cheap day, I'll pay at least 10 and at least 15 on any other day.
    Kind of tells you something, doesn't it?
  • noSolaceleftnoSolaceleft
    Posts: 1,162
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    noSolaceleft wrote: »
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7
    Maybe I didn't express myself clear enough so let me explain you my point again. All those things your list as Fleming traits have either been present with any of the actors
    or simply part of the script. Before they even started making the movie there was already the script leaked of CR's script (interestingly, it didn't hurt the success of the movie. Might lead to the assumption that SP's financial decline was not a result of the leak.) and all those things you list already written down there. I know because I downloaded the PDF the first day I heard it was available. As I recall the URL had a name like Latino news or something similar like that.
    Things like 'he orders a martini, looks Le Chiffre straight in the eye etc." would have been the stage direction no matter if Brosnan, Craig or Benny Hill had taken place on that poker table in Montenegro, simply because that's just how it takes place in the novel. Mind you, I am completely aware that also all his completely unbondian behavior and displayed attitude in the movies it's also stage direction out of the scripts, but those things I listed show that many of the things he does in his films completely fly in the face of Flemings idea of his James Bond. That's all there is. Actually, my point is that I just don't happen to buy the theory that he nails Fleming better than his predecessors. Come to think of it, when Brosnan touches Electras face on the screen where the tear is running down her cheek is this a more Fleming Bond moment then anything in all of Craig's four movies combined. Flemings Bond just is this way, he can't help about it. That's what makes all those Solange moments in SF so disconcerting (and even disgusting).
    About all those parts of the books you cite. They are only feeding YOUR perceptions (obviously), but don't disarm my arguments in the least. Bond being exhausted, on the brink of complete loss or whatever, was quite a part of the early movies.
    But again the keyword in my original post were lines or quotes right of the books or from Fleming himself that are MIRRORED in his take of Bond exclusively and disarm my point of being particularly unfleming in his take. A "and so it follows" moment if you will.And you didn't give me one.
    That's all there is to it.
    And again let me repeat. You seem to believe in a kind of suppressive fire of words in your replies, but you don't do yourself a favor with it. Actually, in real life it's most often the aimed shot that ends the fight.
    You see, when I look at your posts the sheer word count of them discourages me, which leads me to just skim them, which generally is not my modus operandi.

    Of course a lot of those traits have been seen before in the series (it's 50 years long, for crying out loud), you won't find anything in the books that hasn't in some way appeared in a Bond performance before. That's a ridiculously illogical defense that in no way discounts the way that Daniel has been able to act like Fleming's Bond in many moments.

    You can take elements of the past, like the danger of the Connery films or the vulnerability of Lazenby, and see those elements lifted in a future performance, as I think Dan has managed. My points connecting him to Fleming aren't just him acting like him, it's him giving off the feeling of Fleming's Bond in how human and fallible the movies have made him, which we haven't seen much of across the series for most of the run.

    Fleming's Bond has lust, he is human, he makes mistakes, etc, you're going to see those traits expressed somewhere in the series 40 years before Dan got his turn because those elements make a convincing character. It helps that after the very uninspired and cartoonish appeal of the Brosnan era, a return and expansion of Fleming-esque elements in Bond via Craig have come off so well. We can look at how past Bonds tried to bring out Fleming, like aspects of Dalton, and see how things have improved in the literary character's translation to the big screen since its inception.

    I wasn't arguing that Dan has exclusively brought out Fleming's Bond where none of the others have (duh), as that's an imbecilic argument to make that shows one is misinformed about where the series has been. Every performance inevitably has something of Fleming in it-it has to, it's his character-but it becomes important to compare how each performer is able to realize those elements the best and in what quantity. For me, as I've expressed, Dan has achieved a high quality and quantity of Fleming's Bond, whereas others have fallen short or barely tried at all.

    How that point gets lost in your head, I've no idea. I very much assumed you were skimming my posts, since you have absorbed so little of them, but I guess it becomes easier to complain about a post's length than to actually argue the points encased inside them.

    Does the term "missing a point (completely)" mean anything to you?
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,545
    Logan Lucky: Exclusive Look At Daniel Craig In Steven Soderbergh’s Latest
    empireonline.com/movies/news/logan-lucky-exclusive-look-daniel-craig-steven-soderbergh-latest/

    logan%20lucky%20daniel%20craig.jpg
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    The best actor in that film is probably Adam Driver.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,438
    Yeah.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Yeah.

    Oh Mendes, had he said. Its Channing Tatum, you would have said Yeah as well. BTW, what did Adam do to deserve this merit?

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I haven t seen the film. I meant in general.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Tatum Channing is the worst actor in that film. At least imho.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    But he does play dopey quite well, wouldn't you say @bondjames? (perhaps not a stretch...)
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Yes @peter, that he does. I'm being unduly harsh of course, but he's always come across as somewhat 'one note' to me. I did like him in the Jump Street series though.

    I don't know anything about Adam Driver outside of SW-TFA, so I'm interested to see him in this film.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    @Thunder, I gor that, hence
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    I haven t seen the film. I meant in general.

    I got that, hence my question. Why do you think he is better then DC?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    To me, he just seems a bit more natural, whatever he does.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    When Driver does something as good as Our Friends In The North come back to me.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,588
    DC had a public tarot card reading this past week at the MoMA. (Where was Solitaire?)


  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,438
    Is that Rolf Harris giving the reading?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Jodorowsky to direct Bond 25!
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Jodorowsky to direct Bond 25!

    Wow.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    TripAces wrote: »
    DC had a public tarot card reading this past week at the MoMA. (Where was Solitaire?)


    Solitaire? Where was the translator or subtitles? Lol! Thanks for posting though!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Well, Rachel looks good:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4695134/Rachel-Weisz-Daniel-Craig-attend-Hamlet-New-York.html

    PFLBFy6.jpg
    Ykeh95G.jpg
    XR6JUe3.jpg
  • noSolaceleftnoSolaceleft
    Posts: 1,162
    bondjames wrote: »
    Well, Rachel looks good:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4695134/Rachel-Weisz-Daniel-Craig-attend-Hamlet-New-York.html

    PFLBFy6.jpg
    Ykeh95G.jpg
    XR6JUe3.jpg

    But he? Talk about worn!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    noSolaceleft wrote: »
    But he? Talk about worn!
    He's definitely looked better. May have had a late night.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    Wow, she is edible, lucky man, Mr. Craig... I seriously had to look at those photos several times before focusing on Dan; (shrug), he looks as rugged as ever.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    I like the fact he's ageing. Unlike scientology's Peter Pan.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    He always looked older due to genetics and life style and like I said, he will not bend to the ever lasting youth mode in the film industry. It will always be "you don't like the way I look? Too bad, because that's the way it is."
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    I agree @RC7 and @Germanlady ... I like the rugged look-- lots of character in that face, and, quite honestly, I'm not seeing any major aging going on (to me, he looks similar to when he was in SP).
    He's always been rugged.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Germanlady wrote: »
    He always looked older due to genetics and life style and like I said, he will not bend to the ever lasting youth mode in the film industry. It will always be "you don't like the way I look? Too bad, because that's the way it is."

    And I love that. It's pure Bond. Cruise probably drinks the enzyme shakes he ditched in SP, for real. Craig will neck Whisky with the best of them. God bless him.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,204
    He looks great, IMO. Rugged, strong, masculine and tough. No pretty boy there.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,588
    One thing photos don't/can't do: provide a presence. DC has that. It can't be quantified; it is just an "it" factor that few people have. Much like Mick Jagger or SC, even when old and wrinkled, he will be the coolest person in the room.
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    Much rather have Daniel than Pretty boy Brosnan.

Sign In or Register to comment.