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

1106107109111112177

Comments

  • Posts: 4,410
    This sounds absolutely terrific. However, I think the article is getting both Craig and Rose Perez’s name from an off-handed comment by Bill Murray. It seems that the other cast members are confirmed.

    This is exactly the type of project that I want Craig to do. I hope it’s true. I want to see Craig in this type of film (working with someone like Jim Jarmusch) more than I want to see him in another Bond film.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,545
    Doesn't he have a place near by? Maybe he was just visiting, or a small cameo.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,589
    Lookin' good and ready.
  • Posts: 1,548
    The only bad thing I have to say about Dan is his appalling choice of football team he supports!
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,589
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    The only bad thing I have to say about Dan is his appalling choice of football team he supports!

    He'll never walk alone!
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    I did not see Craig‘s tattoo until now. Lookin‘ fit ... very good.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,589
    SeanCraig wrote: »
    I did not see Craig‘s tattoo until now. Lookin‘ fit ... very good.

    Here's an interesting tidbit: the bird tattoo on DC's shoulder is the Nazca bird, one of the enormous sand carvings in the Peruvian desert:

    Nazca%20Bird.JPG

    Years after getting that tattoo, DC found himself filming QoS in the Chilean desert, just a few hundred miles south of where that bird is located.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    @RichardTheBruce, this is something for the Birding Bond thread.
  • marketto007marketto007 Brazil
    Posts: 3,277
    Not sure if someone watches Casey Neistat's Youtube channel. In today's video, Will Smith drops by, and I saw a similar face in the video, his bodyguard, the same bodyguard of DC.



    Daniel-Craig_Cardona_290518-1.jpg
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,916
    @RichardTheBruce, this is something for the Birding Bond thread.

    Right you are, @Thunderbird. I mean, @Thunderfinger. Thanks, @TripAces.
    5d2e452afbd66e16d6ea2fc161c6f074--cherokee-indian-tattoos-native-american-tattoos.jpgad3001641709d179daa8a75e9a058551.jpg


  • edited July 2018 Posts: 4,622
    Finally saw Logan Lucky (2017) and I quite enjoyed it. An entertaining caper film, set around the Charlotte Motorspeedway. There's several cameo from established Nascar stars, and roles for country music stars.
    I'll probably watch it again to get clear on how the whole job went down.
    Dan is real funny, with his southern accent and redneck con persona.
    It's an entertaining light-hearted romp with a solid cast also featuring Channing Tatum and Katie Holmes
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,584
    I quite enjoyed it. I thought the scene in the prison where Dan is telling the brothers about his nest egg and his reaction when they tell him that his ex has made off with it. Very funny.
  • edited July 2018 Posts: 4,622
    Dan really steals the show in this film. He plays one of the more eccentric characters. Channing Tatum's role is kind of understated, but Dan let's it all hang out. The lead girl Riley Keough is quite funny too.
    It does require a second viewing I think to really suss out what actually went down.
    It's a good natured film but still with some bite.
    4/5 stars. It might be my favourite non-Bond, post-Bond Craig film, along with Dream House.
  • Posts: 19,339
    You liked Dream House @timmer ? i thought that was awful,even after a 2nd attempt to like it a while back.
  • edited July 2018 Posts: 4,622
    No, I actually really liked it. Big problem though is if you watch the trailer first, the big reveal is revealed. Brutal, but luckily, I hadn't watched the trailer before viewing, so I was caught off guard by the big twist.
    I think the movie works just fine. It's got a strong cast with Craig, Rachel Weisz and Naomi Watts.

    Edit
    Its a movie that probably could have been done a whole lot better, considering it seems to have had a decent budget, but still, I think the cast saves it, plus the basic mystery-suspense driven story

    Something is not quite right here, but what is it!?



  • Posts: 19,339
    timmer wrote: »
    No, I actually really liked it. Big problem though is if you watch the trailer first, the big reveal is revealed. Brutal, but luckily, I hadn't watched the trailer before viewing, so I was caught off guard by the big twist.
    I think the movie works just fine. It's got a strong cast with Craig, Rachel Weisz and Naomi Watts.

    Next time its on TV i will give it another go,i have actually forgotten most of it actually so that will help !

  • Posts: 4,622
    barryt007 wrote: »
    timmer wrote: »
    No, I actually really liked it. Big problem though is if you watch the trailer first, the big reveal is revealed. Brutal, but luckily, I hadn't watched the trailer before viewing, so I was caught off guard by the big twist.
    I think the movie works just fine. It's got a strong cast with Craig, Rachel Weisz and Naomi Watts.

    Next time its on TV i will give it another go,i have actually forgotten most of it actually so that will help !

    I made an edit above to last post.
    The movie is not without it's problems. I don't think Craig was too happy with final cut.
    In fact I think he disowned it and refused to promote it, but still I find the final salvaged cut is at least watchable.
    A decent little timewaster I thought.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,545
    timmer wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    timmer wrote: »
    No, I actually really liked it. Big problem though is if you watch the trailer first, the big reveal is revealed. Brutal, but luckily, I hadn't watched the trailer before viewing, so I was caught off guard by the big twist.
    I think the movie works just fine. It's got a strong cast with Craig, Rachel Weisz and Naomi Watts.

    Next time its on TV i will give it another go,i have actually forgotten most of it actually so that will help !

    I made an edit above to last post.
    The movie is not without it's problems. I don't think Craig was too happy with final cut.
    In fact I think he disowned it and refused to promote it, but still I find the final salvaged cut is at least watchable.
    A decent little timewaster I thought.

    Sadly, it was one of those films where all involved signed onto a script, which was changed so much over the course of production all involved wanted nothing to do with the final product. Which I like you, didn't think was terrible (also didn't see the trailer first).

    The director, unsuccessfully tried to have his name removed from the film altogether.

    Regardless, things worked out nicely for DC and RW.
  • Posts: 4,622
    Yes, that's right, that's where the pair met, working on the Dream House film set in Toronto
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,545
    timmer wrote: »
    Yes, that's right, that's where the pair met, working on the Dream House film set in Toronto

    They'd actually worked together before in a play in their early 20's.

    Perhaps it was a case of the one who got away, or poor timing back then.
  • Posts: 4,622
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    timmer wrote: »
    Yes, that's right, that's where the pair met, working on the Dream House film set in Toronto

    They'd actually worked together before in a play in their early 20's.

    Perhaps it was a case of the one who got away, or poor timing back then.

    Sounds about right or they found amore in their shared experience of the chaotic Dream House experience :)
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited August 2018 Posts: 4,589
    As I suspected would eventually happen, DC has been taken off "The Dead Don't Die" on the IMDB site. The rumor that he was in this film somehow became "news," even though there was nothing to substantiate it.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    It looks like if Craig is still interested in starring in Purity, they'd do less episodes to accommodate his schedule:

    https://deadline.com/2018/08/james-bond-daniel-craig-007-purity-update-showtime-series-tca-1202441127/
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Is Daniel Craig fatigue well and truly set in?

    I ask because I get the feeling that some are well and truly had enough of his time in the role and when you see some saying Brosnan was more natural in the role I have to wonder that the tide seems to be turning.

    I guess it will come down to what he delivers with Bond 25 and if that film can make up for the utter disaster that is SPECTRE.

    Although some seem to be trying to rewrite history suggesting that Craig did not make a big impact on the role or shift what kind of actor could be suggested to play Bond.

    We seem to be shifting back to handsome clothes horses again with the likes of Cavill being considered. I've no problem with a more classic Bond again but please lets set the bar a bit higher than this.

  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,916
    I'm not a bit tired of Craig, he's been consistently great and entertaining in his Bond films.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    I'm not a bit tired of Craig, he's been consistently great and entertaining in his Bond films.

    I agree apart from in SPECTRE although I can see this forum as more than a few who seem to be turning on him.

    I'm just looking forward to seeing him coming back with something to prove with Bond 25, I think he knows SP wasn't great and that his 5th film needs to be something special.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    @Shardlake -- some have drunk the Kool-Aid of negativity. But, as I said in another thread-- the faults of Sp (according to the Sony leaks), should be laid at the feet of Sam Mendes who, from the beginning, wanted a brother-gate/emotional connection to Bond. It was Mendes, not Craig. And Craig did the best with the material he was provided.

    Yes, a negativity has seeped into a bit of the DNA on this forum.

    But I think they're a passive-aggressive minority.

    The rest of us have accepted their perception as their perception, and we await B25. They project their frustrations onto Craig, but the majority are just waiting...

    After all, Boyle's not Mendes, and he is bringing with him his team. 25 will be a very different beast than 24. And with this, we get arguably the most popular Bond since at least Moore (and I would say, the most popular Bond since the Golden Era of King Connery); yet these vocal minority projectionists will continue spouting their displeasure with this choice until the bitter end.

    It just won't change the reality:

    In the real world, as @RC7 has repeatedly pointed out: DC is a popular Bond; in the film world-- in all realms of production-- the actor is sincerely respected, and he IS beloved as James Bond.

    So, let the passive-aggressiveness have its day, @Shardlake , but know that it is truly insular to this site, and has no bearings on the production of 25, or the general public who will flock to this film.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    peter wrote: »
    @Shardlake -- some have drunk the Kool-Aid of negativity. But, as I said in another thread-- the faults of Sp (according to the Sony leaks), should be laid at the feet of Sam Mendes who, from the beginning, wanted a brother-gate/emotional connection to Bond. It was Mendes, not Craig. And Craig did the best with the material he was provided.

    Yes, a negativity has seeped into a bit of the DNA on this forum.

    But I think they're a passive-aggressive minority.

    The rest of us have accepted their perception as their perception, and we await B25. They project their frustrations onto Craig, but the majority are just waiting...

    After all, Boyle's not Mendes, and he is bringing with him his team. 25 will be a very different beast than 24. And with this, we get arguably the most popular Bond since at least Moore (and I would say, the most popular Bond since the Golden Era of King Connery); yet these vocal minority projectionists will continue spouting their displeasure with this choice until the bitter end.

    It just won't change the reality:

    In the real world, as @RC7 has repeatedly pointed out: DC is a popular Bond; in the film world-- in all realms of production-- the actor is sincerely respected, and he IS beloved as James Bond.

    So, let the passive-aggressiveness have its day, @Shardlake , but know that it is truly insular to this site, and has no bearings on the production of 25, or the general public who will flock to this film.

    Thanks again @peter I was wondering as like you say some have really turned on our current 007 with the exception of SPECTRE I've never doubted this era myself.

    I just find some trying to downgrade Craig's impact on the role, I always continue to argue that Daniel arguably made the most significant stamp on the role since Roger and some degrees since Connery.

    Although some hide behind so called measured comments trying to rewrite history as they have an agenda to promote some TV star that hasn't a hope in hell of being Bond.

    Some might not like Craig in the role like I hated Brosnan but I would never deny what good Pierce did at the time. Also how he made the brand hugely popular again but in the same breath they need to conclude that Craig is one of the most significant actors of the series history instead of trying to underestimate his contributions because they don't like his Bond.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    You'll find no disagreement from me @shardlake.

    Brosnan is also my least favourite Bond, I just didn't take to him. But, like you, I know he played a significant role in putting Bond back on the map again.

    Yes, Sp was a misstep, and the Sony Leaks can paint the picture on where it ran off the rails (it was script development (and the domino-effect thereafter). Logan and Mendes supposedly turned in one terrible draft after another, the next being worse than the one before it; Purvis and Wade, if one is to believe the Sony leaks and the actual players involved, gave Sony and the producers a sigh of relief with their drafts (that's how bad the Logan scripts were).

    However, there were still some working on development that were worried even with the latter drafts-- and especially a weak ending.

    They weren't listened to.

    It's all there in black and white.

    But on this site I hear how Sp and its direction was/is Craig's fault; he was sleep walking through his performance; his gun barrel and the way he swung his arm-- all his fault. He's only in it for the money. He's old. He's this. He's that.

    Forget about the pissing and whining of the Orange Monster in the White House and the so-called "Trump Derangement Syndrome"; on this site, there is an actual Daniel Craig Derangement Syndrome!...

    However, there are others who generally never took to Craig-- like I didn't take to Brosnan. These people have always been consistent and intelligent in communicating what they don't like about his Bond (and his films). They're not bombastic about it. It is what it is. Personal preference and personal taste. And I thank them for their perspective.

    It's the loud projectionists who, as you rightly pointed out, are trying to downgrade Craig's importance to this franchise.

    But, as I said before, this is pretty insular to this site and has no bearing with the general, worldwide, audiences, nor does it have any bearing in the actual film industry where Daniel Craig is a respected actor, and a beloved Bond.
Sign In or Register to comment.