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
He played my favorite character on HBO's 'Rome'.
Right, but this started when discussing Craig's behaviour with Vesper and Lisbeth. In both those cases, some refinement is called for (for Vesper because she probably wouldn't react well to someone who was just tough, and for Lisbeth because she certainly wasn't going to take any sh>> from some tough guy). I think Connery could have pulled off the Vesper train thing with ease, but not Blomkvist with Lisbeth (too much machismo).
If Connery had been in CR the way it was made in 2006, I'm pretty sure he would have slapped Dench's M the moment she started her psychological nonsense.
Yes, he was great in that and he was also a standout in Dexter Season 7. It looks like he will bring all his charisma to the new Transporter film as well (the lead in that film has zero charisma imho, based on the trailers).
True. He wouldn't have taken crap from her for sure..
True. Connery and Eva Green would have been great. Just his type I think.
Paul Newman
James Garner
I think the epic fail with Craig and bondgirls is Solange. His expression and body language actually makes him seem desperate when he is trying to pick her up in the Aston, it reminded me entirely of an ancient TJ HOOKER where 50something Shatner is trying to get Lisa Hartman to go on a date. I still can't believe they even printed that take, let alone used it.
LOL. I think he should have slept with Solange.
He definitely should have slept with her. I do remember thinking the rolling around on the floor looked a little uncomfortable and odd. I suppose he's actually after something else, but even so, surely Bond would have been civil enough to give her a good seeing too - her last night on Earth and all that. Not very gentlemanly when he orders the champagne and just buggers off without so much as an how's your father.
Steve McQueen??
Personally as a girl i find Sean Connery much more attractive but Steve amcQueen got the part of Thomas Crown in the 60s because Sean Connery declined it.
so that means at least Jewison thought Mcqueen was the guy that could give Sean Connery a run for his money when he made him the second choice.
Imagine if Connery would have played Thomas Crown opposite to Faye Dunaway
that would have been fantastic and it would have made 1 more character that Pierce and Connery shared.
Now i wonder would Pierce have dared to play Thomas Crown in the remake if Connery would have been the original Thomas Crown?
Personally i think Pierce was much better than McQueen as Thomas Crown. he felt more comfortable in the role and seemed to enjoy it much more.
I love both versions of that story but The Thomas Crown affair is one of few films where i think the remake was better than the original.
Sorry for getting so out of topic i just got carried away since i LOVE The Thomas Crown affair
Anyway I hope and think that he could return once more, if we are lucky. ;) Without Mendes they will need someone reliable to fall back on, and I think Forster didn't exactly have a lot of fun on Bond.
Some say it helps a lot to establish a new actor in the part. While it certainly sounds very reasonable that there's a particular thrill to introducing a new face in the 007 part, the director is still going to play a major part in doing the introduction well.
Campbell, in both cases, took the films in a different direction overall. GE was about doing the things that had always been done, only pushing the envelope even further. CR, in contrast, was about stripping Bond to his bare essentials and going for the less-is-more approach.
Most likely, if Bond takes a 4-6 year break after a critical or financial failure, whoever directs the then long-awaited followup, as long as it's "not like that last one", will be regarded as a genius.
You can see it with Mendes, who also raked in praise for Skyfall after a four-year gap following a somewhat unloved movie. Now, in his case, I can see how Mendes shaped that movie, so I think he deserves the acclaim. But had Campbell done the followup to Goldeneye or Casino Royale, there's no reason in the world, based on his other work, to think that he would have made better received films than Tomorrow Never Dies or Spectre.
Campbell is competent, and knows how to pick his jobs though. Given that every Bond actor's first film is a good one, it seems like a safe bet. Especially if the audience is starving for Bond.
An actor's first Bond film always tends to go down well with audiences (save for Lazenby's, perhaps). There's an appetite and a curiosity there that other films in the franchise just don't have going for them, and Campbell got caught up in that twice, and had the good fortune of doing so coming off of long hiatuses each time as well, which only heightened the anticipation.
I like Campbell and his contributions to the franchise, but at the same time I don't feel like they deserve the unwavering admiration that they tend to receive either.
Against:GE
Very well put. The God like status afforded Campbell around here is absurd.
For my money GE is one of the worst of the lot. And CR amongst the better middle rankers. Both films are massively overrated IMO. Although CR is clearly in an entirely different league to the abysmal GE.
Precisely
Talk of him saving the series is an impossible to test hypothesis as we have no way of knowing what would have happened with different directors. Clearly he did more than just keep the show on the road, in a commercial sense at least. But then given the franchise had survived previous blips and problems, and that there was a huge appetite for a new Bond film, may be we attribute too much credit to Cambell's genius and not enough to the enduring popularity of the character.
However from my perspective his first film ushered in a decade of creative brain death that suggested Bond was ready to be retired.
He definitely redeemed himself with CR though. Although I can't help feeling a lot of the credit goes to a certain I. Fleming and D. Craig.
I'm going to agree to disagree with that statement. I think Campbell rejuvenated the series twice. But I don't think the series has ever needed saving. Bond has always had an audience. It drops off sometimes, and needs kick starting. I think Campbell has done a terrific job of that. Twice.
His contribution to the series is certainly immense, and I'd be more than happy for him to return to directorial duties at any time.
Yes. A more balanced and plausible stance. 'Saved' is hyperbolic and overblown. The world was ready and waiting for another Bond film in 1991, so it's not hard to imagine expectation and anticipation would simply have grown over the next few years. That's because Bond is enduringly popular, almost regardless of who plays him and who directs.
I can certainly see that the six year gap left Bond in a slightly precarious position, and the 'by the numbers' approach that Campbell took was entirely understandable, even if it doesn't really fully excuse the resulting dreck of a movie.
With CR, I'm not sure there was quite so much at stake though. As Brosnan fans are always quick to point out, DAD was a commercial smash, so it's not like there was any doubt there'd be another film. Certainly Bond by 2002 lacked any contemporary relevance or cultural credibility, but as a money making machine, it was still well on track.
But I guess that's his thing. He resurrected another classic hero, Zorro, with great success too. However, if you look at the rest of his career, those three films are without any doubt his only great films.
If there will be a new Bond, give him a shot. If not, I wouldn't pick him. Look at what happenned to The Legend of Zorro. Maybe he never came back to Brosnan or Craig because he put all his inspiration in that one film.
You could say this about anything. You could also equally argue that someone else might've royally f***ed it up. We don't know. What we do know is that GE and CR are two of the most recognisable and successful entries in the series. Campbell knows how to make Bond films.
Campbell introduced two new Bonds and gave them their best outings in their respective tenures. Period.