Home › Bond Movies › Actors
Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
Who Still Has a Difficult Time Getting Into Craig?
Ok, I just want to be clear. This discussion is not meant to be a Craig bashing one; however, I feel compelled to share my piece of mind -in regards to him as OO7- and invite others share their constructive opinions.
Ever since the announcement/initiation into the EON clan in 2005, I've been nothing but bamboozled by the choice of his casting. The only person that came to mind, while watching the ride on the Thames, was Andreas Wisnewski whom many may know as Necros from 'The Living Daylights.' This guy, clearly, was physically the polar opposite of what Ian Fleming envisioned as his hero.
Now, I gave Craig a chance when he did 'Royale,' and its taken me a long time to accept the film, since it was a hard reboot featuring a very unorthodox looking Bond. I will say that he did a good job in the film and seemed to have handled the role to the absolute best of his abilities. I'm personally, one of the appreciators of Craig's non-Bond films such as 'Layer Cake' and 'Defiance.' Anyway, the further along he got into his career as Bond, the more I couldn't gel with his casting decision.
In my eyes, 'Casino Royale' was his peek and everything else weak in general. I felt that in each successive film he started to look less Bond-like, especially in 'Skyfall' and 'Spectre.' On top of that, I didn't feel his conviction to the role like when he portrayed Bond in CR. So, between the questionable scripts, the increasing Putinesque/Steve McQueen look and the rugged, depressed state that he's always in, nothing has really helped me to get into his incarnation of James Bond.
Again, don't mean to offend any Craig fans. Just sharing my thoughts on the subject.
Ever since the announcement/initiation into the EON clan in 2005, I've been nothing but bamboozled by the choice of his casting. The only person that came to mind, while watching the ride on the Thames, was Andreas Wisnewski whom many may know as Necros from 'The Living Daylights.' This guy, clearly, was physically the polar opposite of what Ian Fleming envisioned as his hero.
Now, I gave Craig a chance when he did 'Royale,' and its taken me a long time to accept the film, since it was a hard reboot featuring a very unorthodox looking Bond. I will say that he did a good job in the film and seemed to have handled the role to the absolute best of his abilities. I'm personally, one of the appreciators of Craig's non-Bond films such as 'Layer Cake' and 'Defiance.' Anyway, the further along he got into his career as Bond, the more I couldn't gel with his casting decision.
In my eyes, 'Casino Royale' was his peek and everything else weak in general. I felt that in each successive film he started to look less Bond-like, especially in 'Skyfall' and 'Spectre.' On top of that, I didn't feel his conviction to the role like when he portrayed Bond in CR. So, between the questionable scripts, the increasing Putinesque/Steve McQueen look and the rugged, depressed state that he's always in, nothing has really helped me to get into his incarnation of James Bond.
Again, don't mean to offend any Craig fans. Just sharing my thoughts on the subject.
^ 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
That might change in later years as the new Bond is announced and I might go through a reappraisal of the Craig era. My childhood was the Brosnan era and it took me a while to warm up to the other 4 actors who played James Bond
Craig's Bond has been subconsciously or deliberately influenced by the Jason Bourne spy franchise. In all probability Eon looked back on Die Another Day and compared it to The Bourne Identity and found it too old fashioned and, dare I say, silly. The Bourne Identity was released in the summer of 2002 so it must have had a big impact on the Bond producers. Did they want to have another Brosnan film with the puns and outrageous action scenes or did they want to start again, a soft reboot, with a gritter, less obvious choice Bond actor? If you look at it from that perspective you could argue Craig's casting was the way to go. The casting reinvented the franchise. On the other hand, if you feel Bond should look and act a certain way, act with more panache and refinement, a character deep rooted in the 1950s/1960s, remaining essentially the same as each decades comes and goes, you could argue Craig was miscast in the part. It's possible there were other actors with a bit more natural charm, perhaps.
Craig's Bond persona has always felt rather blunt and a tad one dimensional. You could argue Roger Moore's Bond was one dimensional, Connery's too, but they seemed to have a greater understanding of the balance between the character's nihilistic quality (Bond is a killer with dubious morals) and his gentlemanly charm. Craig's Bond could never be described as a gentleman. Jason Bourne is not a gentlemanly spy. Barbara Broccoli didn't want Bond 6 to be a gentlemanly spy with a ruthless licence to kill. She wanted a rougher round the edges Bourne inspired Bond and she found Craig.
Was Craig inspired casting or not much like Bond at all? Pro and anti Craig Bond fans could argue their case and never find a compromise position. I belong in the anti-Craig camp however after the release of QOS I accepted him in the part. Acceptance is not the same as liking, of course. ;)
Right?
Yeah, good discussions from both commentators. I honestly cannot help, but think that Barbara Broccoli has some deep attraction to Craig to cater to his every need. I don't think a single Bond actor has received the treatment that Craig has. It's amazing to herald someone for being so one dimensional, blunt and lacking of charisma.
I'm curious to know if there's still a wide audience, eager to see the return of a more dynamic lead who also looks like a more traditional Bond. I'm just worried that EON have lost their step in regards to having a clear picture laid out. The films will always fair well in the box office, due to the legacy, but I'm afraid they'll misfire again with the script writers and of course casting choice. I'm pretty much unimpressed with most of the contenders and somehow I don't feel like Barbara Broccoli is really in tune with the lifelong, hardcore fans. The films were Cubby's baby and I'll just leave it at that. We'll never know, but I hardly doubt that Cubby would have given Craig the time of day, let alone allowed him to audition.
But I'll leave this thread to others, no worries. I simply wanted to say I cannot relate to that point.
Is it the looks? I don't know, but he's far from the image I see of Bond when reading the books for example. All the other Bonds have traits and features that somewhat influence the way I picture the character when reading. I'm currently rereading Forever and a Day, and I've been picturing all the other actors at some point; either in whole chapters or just briefly when reading a sentence or two.
Then there's the direction they've taken the character. I know the books have explored darker moments of Bond too, but as far as the films go, this is four pretty depressing films, IMO. I'm sure that works well with Craig's qualities as a dramatic actor, but it alienates me from the current era. I'm curious as to how Fukunaga will approach Bond, but it'll take a lot to make me really excited.
This.
I've never settled comfortably in thinking Craig is Bond. Although I do appreciate his era a lot. And these have been the best years of my life, so I associate the two.
I do like him, he looks interesting and came to prove Bond doesn't need to be a pretty boy. The blunt instrument thing never resonated with me. I like my Bond smart and savvy and suave.
Having said that, I dread the day they choose a new Bond. I can't help but think that the next one will be so far from the Bond I imagine while reading Fleming that there will be nothing left from it on screen.
I think I'll come to miss Craig in the role, despite not being my favourite Bond, not even my second, third or fourth. I actually came to appreciate Lazenby more, because of him.
So, I like Craig, and I love his era of films. But Sean and Tim are my Bonds. And I grew up with Pierce as the character and the love I had for him as Bond died a violent death when I saw DUD in the cinema and was embarrassed by it. I was never embarrassed by Craig. That's something, I suppose.
There's something to be said for EON's choice after DAD, that's for sure. It was risky, but it has paid off in many ways, no doubt about it. If anything, Craig has an unique look which is instantly recognisable and anything but a bland pretty-boy (as you write, @Univex). Even so, he doesn't resonate with me as Bond, unfortunately. Hopefully the next guy will have a more a traditional look. It's safe to go back to that now, I think.
I too dread the day when they have to pick a new Bond. Finding the right guy will be as tough as ever for EON. I just hope they have a clear vision what they want to do with the character before they do so. I also hope they won't take too long a time before finding the next guy; Bond needs to be relevant – and I'm not just thinking in terms of characterisation and plots, but in terms of there actually being a Bond film "around the corner". If they wait too long, it might end up feeling like they're reviving a franchise (much like Hollywood seems to do with almost every film these days).
After his era finishes, I might end up missing Craig in the role too, but there are a couple of films I probably never will like, so my opinion of this era will rely a lot on what Fukunaga delivers. I wish to feel as excited putting on a Craig film as I do with the other actors.
Charisma free, it's amazing how differently some of us see his portrayal but I was never convinced that Pierce was Bond, maybe asthetically but the actual character and the conviction, not one jot I'm afraid.
Craig to me is the most cinematic Bond since Connery, no other actor took the mantle from the get go and went with it.
It took Roger till SWLM to cement his portrayal and be comfortable and Dalton despite being great still looks awkward in some aspects of his portrayal.
Though DC for me from the moment he says "yes considerably" and holsters his PPK I felt the 21st Century Bond had truly arrived.
I'm willing to give the next guy a chance but feel I'll mourn DC when he's gone and despite the haters, the next guy will have a tough hill to climb and they know it.
Then again, that probably has a lot to do with the writing and directing of some of the recent films.
That said, the Brozza films were pants compared to the Craig era.
So, does anyone have a difficult time getting into the cinematic Bond? I do. But I love them all. Just not as much as the books, with the exception of the first four films (and the masterpiece that is OHMSS).
Around here probably not controversial. Unconventional perhaps. While you can't 'get into' cinematic Bond, doesn't mean you can't appreciate and like them :)
You're going to get a lot of answers if you ask the fan community. Honestly I don't think the wide audience cares who plays Bond as long as the movie is good
Plus these films have never been made for the hardcore fanbase, that is just your perception even Cubby realised this was for a mass audience and you might be right about Cubby not giving DC time of day, although I think he'd be proud of what BB and MGW achieved after his death.
The idea that they've soiled his baby is totally preposterous.
Exactly my sentiment @Shardlake ... Ugh, it guts me to think of another Bond at this point... And yes, for me it went: CONNERY............. CRAIG.
Good bits with Laz, for sure (and my favourite Bond film in OHMSS), and some comfortable years with Rog; Dalton was a little too angry, but I loved his edge... Brosnan, I wished I took to more-- never did...
DC captured Fleming and cinematic Bond within seconds of CR.... and never let it go (his weakest being SP, but I felt he tried to instil integrity into a very flawed film)....
Agreed. For me Bond begins and ends with Fleming. Would love to see the books adapted properly as period pieces, although there's a slim chance of that ever happening. Probably why the first 3 films for me are untouchable. They were pretty faithful to the novels overall. For me the books and films are very seperate entities.
Craig for me was my kind of James Bond straight away. It helped that the makers brilliantly updated Casino Royale and kept the spirit of Fleming in the film. I think he's an excellent actor and really succeeds being the 'blunt instrument' Fleming wrote about. Unfortunately in the last film he was saddled with a poor script and even worse dialogue. When the makers get it right i think Craig makes a convincing 007. He'll be a bloody hard act to follow that's for sure.
My preference for 'Flemingesque' material is evident in my top 5 Bond films; GF, FRWL, DN, TLD and CR.
1) He was a close friend of Barbara Broccoli. That's the golden ticket into the Bond franchise. Craig initially turned down the part but I guess Babs persuaded him. If you're a friend of the producer of the longest running film franchise that gives you a huge advantage over the rest of the actors' field.
2) His first Bond film was based on Ian Fleming material. Updating Casino Royale to the 21st century was a great decision. Craig was introduced as the new Bond battling a classic Bond villain Le Chiffre. Craig couldn't have asked for better material for his debut Bond film. The film critics and the general audience loved the film, it established Craig in the role. Stuff like "blond Bond" or "not that Bond looking" became irrelevant.
Luck is attributable to all the Bond actors. For example, Sean Connery was fortunate to look like Bond and he become an actor. He happened to become an actor at the right time to play the part. Had he not become an actor and chosen a different path in life, no Connery Bond. That one decision in his life - "shall I become an actor?" was key to the start of the Bond film franchise. That one moment in his life could be why we're all here posting on this forum! Incredible, really.
Perhaps Craig was meant to be Bond in the same way Connery and the others were meant to be Bond. Fate took its course? Who knows!
FRWL I think, has perhaps the closest Fleming Bond vibe. Yes, OHMSS was true to the book, book Laz was more playful than the book Bond.
But that said, Fleming purists can't really moan about the Craig era. We've had a quite faithful adaptation, albeit updated in CR, and the Skyfall plot acknowledged the books as well. I'm hoping for some more doffed cappage to the literary Bond in Bond 25.
I picture whoever played them in the movie
That's what I thought,Nackers.
Babs on Craig:
Was he friends with BB? That's news to me. I thought she saw him in Layer Cake like the rest of us.
BB was also the one who pushed to buy CR, which in retrospect was even smarter than getting the Spectre rights back.
Don't underestimate Barbara Broccoli, just because she's a woman! She's smart and savvy.
I accept he's going to look leaner and more buff in Bond 25 - no cream cakes, Daniel! - but I think he'll call it quits after his fifth Bond film. For better or worse, I look forward to a new actor becoming agent 007 in Bond 26: A Reason Not To Die.
;))
Craig was chosen because Babs fancies him. That’s it. And that’s why he sticks around.
I can't see any attraction between the two of them:
=))
(I think this thread should end before it gets even more silly!) :P
:))