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
I agree. I think the value gained from the extra year is largely negated by the tendency to overthink things.
I am not a fan of Craig (as Bond or an actor) by any measure, but that's a bit much. If he really wanted out, all he needed to do was sit tight, keep his mouth shut (unless he can answer a question sensibly), let the dust settle from Spectre then announce his departure.
With all the rumours flying around, I would have expected EON to say something, even it it is just them supporting Craig, and shooting down the rumours.
Combine that with other comments he has made up to that point in the past over the years (strangely none like that since that quote if you'll notice), and it suggests to me that he's pretty much had enough.
That's Craig, though. That's always been Craig. I'd take that over a media trained plank any day. Funny, because there's a lot of clamour for a Bond that's un-PC and says f*** you to the system, yet when Craig doesn't play ball with the media and is flippant and abrasive it's a different story from some of those who want him gone.
Being unPC and being abrasive aren't quite the same thing, nice false equivilance though. These attempts at obfuscation are very entertaining.
Pretty much it. The whining entitled school children want news and half will continue to whine when it arrives. It's a no win. EON should take as much time as they need.
I didn't say they were the same thing. But you know that.
You're clearly comparing the two like-for-like here. If you aren't then its a non sequitur.
True, but then, he has a tendency to bring himself into trouble. Guess, you could say, that's his personal edge, that plays off so well as Bond, but isn't for everyone, when he is not. He often stuck his finger in the wounds of stupid questions and, of course, they will pay him back on every occasion possible. IMO, it did hurt his reputation and that is sad, but thankfully I see him as someone, who just moves on and doesn't loose any sleep over it. Maybe with the help of a drink or two at times ;)
He always knew, he was on loose ground with all the love and adoration coming from folks like me and others :x He knew, all that could be taken away in a nano second and never courted it at all. So, I guess, he can live well without it in the future.
As for the franchise - timer wil pass and he will be seen for what he was - as a man, who gave Bond back soul and edge, ruthlessness and a body to drool over as well as total dedication to the role, to the point, where Sam Mendes said - "almost too much"
I think, his legacy is save and sound.
Craig's wrist comments were considered by some to be un-PC and particularly offensive to the relatives of suicide victims. Personally, I think that's nonsense, but then where would we be without the media circus of outrage.
You might be surprised, but I have said quite often now, that I DON'T want him to return for reason mentioned already. In my mind, he is gone. ;)
I agree. He'll leave a revered legacy.
Right, I see what you mean. Personally I never saw that side of it.
Their biggest non-Baz scoop was done by the Mail on Sunday in November 2014, which detailed the whole Blofeld-Oberhauser thing.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2845621/You-weren-t-expecting-007-BLOFELD-S-Bond-having-kittens-evil-foe-returns-double-Oscar-winner-Christoph-Waltz-tipped-play-him.html
Excerpt:
//Waltz’s involvement in the new film – which has the working title ‘Bond 24’ – will be confirmed at a press conference to be held in the first week of December. Eon productions, which owns the James Bond film franchise, will announce the star is playing an unknown character called Franz Oberhauser, son of the late Hans Oberhauser, a ski instructor who acted as a father figure to Bond.
But senior sources believe the casting is a double bluff worthy of 007 himself and that Waltz is actually playing Blofeld. One Hollywood source, who asked not to be named, said: ‘Christoph Waltz is playing Blofeld in the next Bond film. The tone of the 007 films has changed significantly in recent years and the producers have changed the character to fit in with the new-look 007.’//
Having said that, the bulk of the Mail's 007 scoops were generated by Bamigboye until he moved off the Bond beat. His successors have yet to produce the volume of accurate scoops Bamigboye did.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3613983/Rachel-Weisz-46-looks-million-miles-away-typical-glam-self-films-new-period-drama-Cornwall.html
Bit of a difference though, one is a fictional character, the other isn't. And as the face of the series, the actor should conduct themselves in a certain way, no matter who the actor is (I would have though that given how much of a well oiled machine the films are, EON would coach the actor about how to handle).
In the end, they all bring themselves to the table and nobody is perfect. He got through 4 waves of interviews and did them well and willingly. But we should take into account, that he has no jazz hands like some and isn't one to overdo the pleased face, when indeed he is not. He has brought MORE then his share to the films as such and should be granted a mistake or two with the interviews.
I for one am glad Dan is so open about his views, and never sugar coats anything just to sound sun shiny; it's one of my absolute favorite things about him. Some say that this aspect of his personality reflects badly on the franchise, but more than anything, him and his role as Bond has been taking it all, not EON or the films, as if he's now suddenly Atlas in a finely cut tuxedo. I refuse to put all blame at his feet when it's others who've lost the plot, and have taken all his comments at face value instead of looking deeper (it's called subtext), though they know it's Dan and should realize at this point that silly comments like that are par for the course with him and he always jerks around interviewers who ask mindless questions over and over again. As I would, and many others. After a while, you get sick of stupidity and dare to expect more thought and ingenuity. For all the questions asked at press junkets, a glimmering 1% have actual substance or interest attached to them. It's completely understandable why Dan is driven to the responses he sometimes gives.
Dan's reactions to the media frenzy are simply ones that I respect. He doesn't care, has never cared, and dammit, why should he? Rags will report anything to get the presses rolling, no matter what he does, so why would he waste time and energy fussing over that which he can't control? Comments get made, then taken out of context, or completely redacted and reformed into an agenda that can be pushed, so why bother with it all? Dan is keeping his nose to the grindstone, focusing on his family and other work as he mulls over what to do next in regards to Bond. How people can fault him for that at this point is more than a little bogus.
I'll always be here to support Dan when a hunt has been mounted against him, because honest people deserve to be stood up for when they're being dragged through the mud for imbecilic reasons. Day in and day out I still read the words of people who have completely misread this man and his comments, making such exaggerated statements about him, blindly and wildly assuming that he hates Bond and is only in it for the money, letting the dust settle on any objectivity they have left rattling inside their heads. As long as I'm here, that's just not going to stand, I'm sorry. Evolution is real, and we've all still got brains, so let us use them.
And this business of Hiddleston having to quit dancing if he's cast as Bond, as it will be used against the franchise, is another matter entirely. I don't think I've had a greater laugh out of both amusement and shame for weeks now. I've got news for some: Hiddleston, like Dan, doesn't care, and what the media will do, they will do. If the man lets a bunch of pseudo reporters of the lowest order dictate his life and sap away the free will he was christened with at birth, that makes him much less of a man than I know he is. And don't think of adding in any comments as to his levels of masculinity in response, as I've thought of them all. Just thought I'd save some members the time, I know theirs is precious.
Hey I don't want to argue ..debate yes but argue no. To you and whomever else I got snippy with I'm sorry.
I do respect and appreciate EoN for what they have given us. I just get frustrated and don't always agree.
Thanks
Not looking pleased wasn't the problem, he just had to pick his words carefully. That should have been easy for someone who'd been acting as long as Craig has (what, 20+ years?). And for what he has brought to the films, he is being paid for, a lot, he isn't doing it for charity.
Neither were the others, but I believe, its out of the question, that the way, he throw hinself into it, was different to what the others did. But its ok, Major, we won't and don't have to agree.
Craig definitely seized the opportunity, and that's to his credit, but he had it too.