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
DC "Look, Sam (Mendes) said this best last night, if you have run a marathon and your 200 yards to go, and someone stops you, and says when you get to the finish do you want to run another marathon, you say two words which you can't say on morning television. I have had fun doing this movie, more fun than the past 3 put together, I have enjoyed every moment, but at the moment I don't want to think about it, I want to reunite with my family and my friends and put it out of my mind"
Host "Well your great"
DC "Well thank you, I might do another one".
Thanks for that Sir Hilary. I think this sentiment has been expressed by DC in quite a few other places too. If anyone came up to me at just after I'd successfully completed a long, complex, arduous, but no less fun and well-paid project, I'd be inclined to say the same as him. In my eyes, he has lived up to my expectations by saying the comments you quoted above -- I don't think he would be human if he hadn't.
I'd bet my pension that he comes back for one more outing, so at least your wife will have the pleasure of writing DC-oriented dialogue for Bond 25. ;)
** minor SP spoilers ahead **
1) Craig, the actor and the Bond
Though it feels like blasphemy not to cite Connery as the proverbial "best Bond ever" and though I myself am a fierce Daltonite, I will argue that Craig, over the span of four films, has been the most consistently awesome Bond to date. Connery was excellent in about half his Bond films, including DN, FRWL and GF, but there were signs of fatigue and loss of interest in parts of TB and almost throughout YOLT and DAF entirely. Craig, by contrast, always pushed himself to deliver the best performance, both in terms of classy acting and in terms of doing the physical stuff. Whereas Connery stopped playing Bond after a while and went fully automatic, and Moore stopped playing Bond and started being Roger Moore, Craig kept draining himself of the last bit of energy in his body to be truly legendary in every aspect of being Bond. How he walks, how he throws a punch, how he delivers a joke, how he shouts in anger... Despite the initial backlash on the Internet from moronic naysayers who even created silly websites to supposedly demonstrate Craig's inabilities as Bond, this man went far and beyond, not just to be outstanding, but to be unique and different. I honestly believe that when they go hunting for the next Bond, they will, for the first time in the history of Bond, not try to find the next Sean Connery but the next Daniel Craig instead.
Yes, Daniel Craig lived up to my expectations.
Here we go again: 24, Bourne, Batman Begins
Yes, we went through all of this before! But it's a post 9/11 thing. We live in a different world now. The Cold War is political pre-history at this point. We fight different villains, we use different tools for that and we can no longer pretend that ordinary citizens are totally clueless to what's going on. People tend to see the future as anything but bright and CNN never fails to remind us that the world is slowly going to hell. For our beloved heroes to play a tougher game in a more cynical world while bringing a lot of personal issues with them, is merely a cold reflection of the way things are going today. Perhaps Jack Bauer (JB), Jason Bourne (JB) and even Batman beat James Bond (JB) to the punch, but Bond would have gotten there eventually, perhaps even sooner had not all of those ridiculous problems surfaced between DAD and CR.
Yes, the tone of the film lived up to my expectations.
Going rogue, personal and wondering who can be trusted at all
My only beef with the Craig era so far is the constant trust issue thing. Despite Bond's efforts and successes, everybody seems eager to restrict his movements and wonder if he can be trusted at all. In fact, this things was first brought up in DAD in '02! M no longer trusts Bond so he goes "rogue" and finds Zao. In CR, M doesn't trust Bond and so he goes on a personal mission in the Caribbean to find more bombers. In QOS, M doesn't trust Bond after he shot a member of special branch and restricts his movements, so Bond has to go ask Mathis for help. In SF, M at least trusts Bond and clears his medical records but now other forces conspire to keep him off the job, it seems. And in SP, there are once again trust issues; Bond once again has to figure things out on his own.
I'm getting a little annoyed to be honest. Audiences didn't like Bond's disobedience in OHMSS and LTK, but they dug it in DAD and certainly in CR and that was enough to bring back the same rogue/trust thing for the next three films! I understand it makes things a little edgier but there are times when I long for a simple, straight-forward plot where Bond takes his orders from M and performs a great job without all of this Bond-is-on-the-loose stuff time and again.
As far as the perpetual return to those same vibes is concerned, the Craig era did not live up to my expectations. I'd hoped they could have stopped doing that after one or two films.
CGI, cinematography and more
After DAD, the Bond films got more careful with CGI. Only when necessary did we get some CGI shots, most of which were actually done very well. But in 2006, we got some of the best stunt work ever in a film, all done for real. The Craig Bonds were not completely seduced by the indulgence of CGI, and I'm thankful for that.
No 3D either. Thank the heavens for that. Since Avatar, it seemed like everything had to be 3D and some have, on this very forum I might add, suggested that Bond should go 3D too. I'm glad the producers gave those people the finger and stuck to old-school filmmaking instead, 2D and with mostly real stunts.
I felt, since CR, that they would keep things that way. And so naturally I'm quite happy. The shaky stuff in QOS had me a trifle annoyed back in the day but I'm more or less okay with it now. More or less... Because at least SF and SP didn't go there. :)
Oh yes, and then there's the infamous gun barrel. Look, it's been all over the place
Thanks for those thoughts @DarthDimi, I enjoyed reading them. And I'd have to say I completely agree with you on all fronts. Hopefully the rogue Bond will be put to bed for awhile now.
Very nice analysis.
I agree that Craig is consistent in his acting through 4 movies quality wise. But he gives different performances. He has given us 4 different Bonds. Something not even Moore did.
And Moore more or less playing himself worked wonders, by the way.
I said this before: Craig moves smooth, cool and with ease through Spectre as Moore did in OP or Brosnan did in DAD. Finally, Craig has found his definite Bond with Spectre.
I do hope he will do more. I don't even mind his age at this moment if Bond 25 is similarly awesome as Spectre is.
And I too want at least one more Bond for Craig. Look, if Tom Cruise can hang on plains while six years older than Craig, Craig has at least TWO more Bonds in him! :D Some men age well, simple as that. If Craig continues to age well, he can continue to be an excellent Bond.
playing Bond, I'm sure he would love the chance to give us all a few thrills
and surprises in future Bonds. :)
Has SPECTRE converted you in to a fan of Dan, if you were not already?
And why?
I feel he owned the role from the start back in '06 but SP solidified his status as a fully fledged and quintessential Bond that we haven't seen since early Connery.
Craig was a very mixed bag for me up to SF.
While it started perfect with CR it was a big let down with QOS and especially SF.
I do appreciate QOS for being a highly entertaining action and kick-ass movie though but it left the impression Craig is only excellent at running, jumping, hand to hand combat and looking grim and angry.
SF is a disaster but at least Craig carried the movie.
With SPECTRE the Craig-era is now on the same level for me as Connery's era objectively speaking and has surpassed for me personally even...
...the Brosnan era...
...something I would never thought possible.
With two perfect movies CR and SP and one great action rollercoaster ride QOS I declare myself officially a Daniel Craig fan
Spectre is Craigs Goldeneye for me with some OHMSS and FRWL in it.
I still rank Dalton higher than Craig actor wise and that will never change.
@SirHilaryBray thank you for asking the question.
He exceeded my expectations in CR. He has not lived up to that promise since, including in SP. In QoS, SF & SP, he has brought elements of what he showed us in CR, but in no film has he brought everything to the table so completely as he did in that first film, which is unfortunate for me.
The man can do so much more, with the right director and the right script.
It 's nothing to do with Craig abilities, I personally like both SF & SP more and actually prefer Craig's performance in SF more. This my personal opinion but I don't think he's not giving himself any less in his performance. In SPECTRE he's playing Bond more relaxed and confident.
Do some of you just want wounded loner from him for his whole tenure? Yes that aspect is more interesting from a range point of view but why is that better than a more confident version of the character. Also he takes a journey in SF like in CR.
I'm sorry I don't get CR is a masterpiece when for me that film is as flawed if not more in some respects as some make out SF is.
Some examples of ripe dialogue and a shocking example of product placement that almost ruins such a great scene. I don't dislike anything in SF like I do the Miami sequence of CR, the only other sequence worse is the dog fight and sink hole segment of QOS.
Craig is electrifying in CR but I think he is in SF and now as full Bond in SPECTRE he's extraordinary. He's shown a evolution since CR that no other actor has had the chance but likely would never have been able to.
So I would disagree, he's given so much and Mendes has facilitated that now in two entries. Sorry I just don't like the workman like directors of the series and really couldn't stand GE, another director with that script, cast and Craig could have made CR as good, Campbell is nothing extraordinary he was just handed a gift.
Why?
Timothy Dalton would have been accepted by his third movie (if it had been made) and we all know it would have been made if there hadn't been those outside problems.
Bond No 7 will not have more trouble to become accepted than Moore, Dalton or Brosnan did.
It ONLY depends on the quality of the movie.
If QOS had been Craig's first Bond, his tenure would have been irreparably been marred.
I completely agree...Connery was "my" Bond growing up, and set the bar extremely high for anyone else to reach, at least for me. Craig, however, brings a gritty element to the part that echoes Fleming's "blunt instrument" description quite well. I greatly enjoyed seeing Spectre today in IMAX, and enjoyed Craig's performance in it.
Dalton never showed the confidence Craig did even CR he was running rings around him.
None of the scripts since then (including SP I'm afraid to say) have given him the opportunity to showcase his acting range in the same way that CR did.
With the right script and the right director, Daniel Craig can put every other Bond actor to shame imho.
hard to chose between them. :)
This is a big event … even if it took Craig going full-Roger to get it done.
Craig was evoking some of his performance in TGWTDT in my opinion. Did anyone else get that feeling? Pretty remarkable that we are all able to hold different impressions of his acting. It's truly a testament to his talent.
I'm sorry I just don't hold the CR script up like you do, don't get me wrong it's still top 5 for me and love watching it but I think some get so bogged down in the plot holes in SF and forget the terrific dialogue in there.
I actually think the dialogue not the film as a whole is more consistent in QOS than it is in CR, the actors make that film but the ripe moments really jar. Your right Craig is exceptional in it but I think he is consistently brilliant in all his entries.
@Mansfield
I've always wondered why Craig's performance in TGWDT is so undervalued, he sells the relationship with Salander so much better than his Swedish counterpart and nails Blomvist from the novel more effectively.
The problem is Bond stories such as OHMSS and CR don't, and indeed for variety can't, happen all the time and so a routine Bond mission film may appear a waste of Craig's talents compared to a more personality driven actor like Moore or Brosnan.
If Craig returns and Bond 25 doesn't go down the obvious route we all think it will then to elicit a stronger performance from Craig we might need to take Bond into a dramatic situation he's never been in before away from marriage, betrayal, personal revenge. Not sure what that would be.
I completely agree with this. I really like the likes of CR, OHMSS, LTK etc. but you don't want every Bond film to be those Bond films. For me a series like Bond, which relies so much on formula any way, keeps fresh by doing the familiar in unfamiliar ways. It's like a kid being read a bedtime story. They always want the same story, but a little different each time. CR for me is the best Bond film, but at the same time I really enjoy Spectre precisely because it is not CR.
GALLOWAY: Was Timothy Dalton the right choice for Bond, do you think?
WILSON: I think he was a good choice. I don’t think the public accepted him at all. He was good to work with, you know, but he’s a very dramatic actor, you know, theater-kind of dramatic, so I guess it didn’t sit well with him.
GALLOWAY: Why did the public not accept him?
WILSON: I don’t know. We make the films for the public, not for ourselves.
Huge Dalton fan here, but this is sadly true.