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
Mendes is just using this thread to take side swipes at Craig as he so wrapped up in his Turner must be Bond campaign I've never seen such an example of a broken record.
I don't why this thread has descend into lets slag off DC but there you go that's where it's gone and @Mendes4Lyfe and @barryt007 are leading the charge.
I do agree with @Mendes4Lyfe that the "tortured" angle is getting a bit much now, though. Do hope that Bond 25 can be a film that offers something else – if only just a little bit different.
Craig, unlike Brosnan, has the chance to redeem his era and go out on a high, and I think he'll do great. It's off to a shakey start, but it's not beyond course correction.
I am in the other camp as far as that goes!
Hardly consider his relationship with blofeld in spectre emotional since he treated him like any other villain
QoS sees a man on a mission, with one scene, ONE, where he shows how f***ed-up he is.
SF, he's betrayed by his mentor (he heard her order), and he has to overcome that to see she made the right choice...
SP-- I don't get where, in this film, he's tortured-- other than physically (where he recovers in no-time, unfortunately). But he's a man married to his job at the beginning, who seemingly leaves it at the end...
Craig delivered four, unique perspectives from the one man he was playing. I'd say he was quite varied.
I agree with this @peter
I might not have liked all of the material he's been working with, but I never disliked any of Craig's performances.
Thank you, @FoxRox. It's what I do. That's why I can't make peace with the lack of imagination from the so called writers of the latest scripts. Thinking a bit more on that idea, if the oligarch were a woman, that't would make for an interesting angle. The Property of a Lady could then be used as a title. And it would only be a mission. Nothing personal. No angst. Reminded me of something Sherlock Holmes said about himself. That if we would turn into a criminal, we would be the best one. Or something along those lines. Now imagine that apparently applied to Bond. Wouldn't that be cool? But do it with panache and grandeur, as the flamboyant type he is.
"Never" might be too strong but I hope that they can keep the franchise fresh, single missions are definitely opposite of that.
Period Bond of trilogy of some kind might be a way to go.
One of our members posted a long list of very renowned directors and actors Craig has worked with-- not one has a bad word to say (just the opposite, in fact). You'd think if the guy was a douche, a few of those people would have leaked something.
I have also said that ppl in the industry love the guy. I'm presently working with a man that worked with him on multiple occasions as a second unit/stunt team, and his people love him; an industry member of this site who no longer comments here (because he was verbally kicked and called a liar) knows people who have also worked with DC and admire him as a man and as an actor.
The only ones calling him a diva are some papers like The Sun or the Mirror-- and haters on this site gobble it up...
Deadline, which has consistently broken news on Bond (and has been correct), has never reported this bad behaviour....
Industry people praise him.
And, maybe there's a reason why Babs loves him-- because, apart from his sardonic humour that's purposefully misread so there are headlines tomorrow-- he actually cares about the legacy of Bond, and his role in that legacy.
And @Peter, you're right, on all accounts. Cheers mate.
Thanks! An oligarch Russian villain would make sense. It will be interesting to see what kind of character this Russian will be.
A fair point. The childish cries of ‘I wish he’d just be Bond!’ are amusing. He was, is and continues to be, Bond. Get over yourselves.
EDIT: The funniest thing I’ve noticed recently are those lauding SP as the perfect swan song, having consistently ridiculed it. It really is like being in my daughter’s nursery. We can see you!
All and all, the Craig era so far as been wonderful. I bet that if Thomas Waldek made a trailer with the four films, we would be quite aware of their greatness.
He's terrific in CR and QOS, giving very energetic and nuanced performances.
I thought he was coasting through the last two.
The slit the wrist comment is a prime example. Every time I hear that cited I'm reminded of a remark Craig made to the press after the success of Casino Royale, claiming he'd stopped working out because he "didn't want to be known as the fit Bond."
I've never faulted him for that.
Agreed on these points. Also, QoS is misunderstood by some as a revenge film. The key to the entire Bond character in that film is the very last line. (And it's one of the best lines in the franchise.)
I like CR and SF. I don't mind QoS, but I don't like as much as other members here. Craig gives an excellent performance in it, which fits the tone of the film. I still think his best performance by far was in CR, which was made for him. Sadly, it was too good a film to start a tenure on and he's been chasing it ever since.
In terms of swansongs, I've commented previously that I think SP would be a good note to go out on, despite my dislike for that film - especially given how it ties it all together. Sure, it was done hamfistedly, but I think technically it's a far better film than DAF or AVTAK. Furthermore, as I noted prior to his announcement of return, going out on a somewhat mediocre entry like that helps the new guy to establish himself quicker, and I'm all about the continued success of this franchise - more than I am about any one actor.
I don't see his run as being special personally. I think he's been a decent Bond, but I still far prefer Sean and Rog, as well as Tim (he's moved up to my #3 spot). Craig's interpretation has never hit all the notes I would like, but I've been accepting of it. What choice do I have? Also, with a good script, he can be reasonably good.
I don't deny that I am longing for a change however, as he's been around for what seems like an eon (forgive me..) now. Whenever I hear of things that can potentially further delay his desired 'high', I get upset because it means having to wait longer.
I was ok with Boyle as director but not entirely enthused. Now I just want them to get on with it and give us something worth the wait. If they must get creative to allow him to exercise his acting chops and position himself for his post-Bond career, then so be it. Whatever you want Babs. I draw the line at any radical concepts that could make it more difficult for the franchise to move forward quickly (such as this idiotic rumoured death idea), or that result in further delays.
I agree with your assessment, as well, @Univex ... In the end, like the film, or no, Craig delivers as 007.
P