Home › Bond Movies › Skyfall
Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
Daniel Craig raring to be James Bond again
<b>Daniel Craig is raring to be Agent 007 again. “We have a wonderful script, which I’m incredibly excited about, if not probably more so when I first read the ‘Casino Royale’ script,” Daniel disclosed in our recent interview with him.
For now, the much-awaited movie’s working title is “Bond 23.” “Sam Mendes is on board as director,” Daniel shared. “He’s working very hard to make everything come together with John Logan, who’s writing the script with him.”
“It has been a great break, but I’m ready to go again,” added Daniel who will costar with Judi Dench (as M) and a lineup of brilliant actors: Ralph Fiennes, Javier Bardem and Naomie Harris. He bared that filming begins in November.</b>
Having done “Cowboys & Aliens,” which required a lot of stunts, and now, faced with the prospect of doing more in the next Bond film, Daniel was circumspect about the physical challenges of these roles.
<b>“I’m 43 now,” said the British actor. “God knows—maybe I can keep this up for another couple of years. Then, I’m going to have to give this up, because I’ll already be too old to do this ‘jumping around and falling over’ stuff.” Wearing a short-sleeved black T-shirt that showed off his muscled arms, Daniel looked fit enough to be Ian Fleming’s beloved superspy for many more years.
“But, I enjoy the physicality of the roles,” Daniel clarified. “I always have. Even before Bond, I liked getting involved with as many stunts as possible.”</b>
With a grin that softened the stare of his ice-blue eyes, Daniel volunteered, “I was joking the other day that the reason I got into this business is because I like pretending and falling over. I had a toy pump action Winchester when I was a kid. My friends and I used to go out to the sand dunes, and we’d pretend to shoot each other. How you rolled down the hill would score you good points. That’s why I wanted to become an actor! I’ve somehow managed to find a way into that.”
“As I grew older, I got more serious about it,” said the actor who appeared in well-received indie films before landing the plum Bond gig. “I enjoy doing theater and doing all those things—a path that has taken me down this route. I don’t seem to be able to get off it at the moment, but it’s a good place to be.”
<b>On playing the iconic British secret agent, he said, “I’ve been lucky to land one of the best roles in movie history. If being Bond was all I did for the rest of my life, I’d be happy with that. Being Bond is a high-class ‘problem’ to have. I’ve always loved acting. Everything I’ve ever wanted to do is act. My biggest pleasure is the collaborative process, and I’ve just lucked out!
“In the last couple of years, MGM had a problem with making the next Bond movie,” he said, referring to that studio’s financial crisis that delayed the making of “Bond 23.” The issue was resolved when Sony Pictures stepped in to cofinance and distribute the movie. “But, the delay gave me space. I got to work with Jon Favreau on ‘Cowboys & Aliens.’</b>
“Then, (David) Fincher called me up and asked if I would like to work on ‘The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo,’” Daniel continued. “It just worked! I couldn’t be luckier. They’re very different films. I don’t think about how big the movies are, how much they cost, and what they would do to my career. I just think about if a project is worth doing, and if I should grab the chance, because who knows what’s going to happen in a couple of years’ time?”
Asked if these are good times for him on a personal level, the private man, who married actress Rachel Weisz in a secret ceremony in New York last June, answered, “It’s a pretty good time, yes. My family and friends are close by. I feel good about life, yes!”
Told that he gives the impression of a man who could live under a bridge with nothing, the rugged actor teased with a laugh, “Not anymore.”
On what his house is like, Daniel answered in general terms: “The nicest homes I’ve been into and the ones I always remember are those that seem to have an open door to people. There are centers in those homes, usually revolving around the kitchen, where there are children, family members and friends. If I were looking at an ideal home, that type would be mine!”
On whether he has gotten used to being stared at in public, Daniel said in his self-deprecating wit, “You get used to it. Yeah, disbelief is right. As in, ‘Really, is that what he looks like?’”
http://entertainment.inquirer.net/9131/daniel-craig–raring-to-be-james-bond-again
For now, the much-awaited movie’s working title is “Bond 23.” “Sam Mendes is on board as director,” Daniel shared. “He’s working very hard to make everything come together with John Logan, who’s writing the script with him.”
“It has been a great break, but I’m ready to go again,” added Daniel who will costar with Judi Dench (as M) and a lineup of brilliant actors: Ralph Fiennes, Javier Bardem and Naomie Harris. He bared that filming begins in November.</b>
Having done “Cowboys & Aliens,” which required a lot of stunts, and now, faced with the prospect of doing more in the next Bond film, Daniel was circumspect about the physical challenges of these roles.
<b>“I’m 43 now,” said the British actor. “God knows—maybe I can keep this up for another couple of years. Then, I’m going to have to give this up, because I’ll already be too old to do this ‘jumping around and falling over’ stuff.” Wearing a short-sleeved black T-shirt that showed off his muscled arms, Daniel looked fit enough to be Ian Fleming’s beloved superspy for many more years.
“But, I enjoy the physicality of the roles,” Daniel clarified. “I always have. Even before Bond, I liked getting involved with as many stunts as possible.”</b>
With a grin that softened the stare of his ice-blue eyes, Daniel volunteered, “I was joking the other day that the reason I got into this business is because I like pretending and falling over. I had a toy pump action Winchester when I was a kid. My friends and I used to go out to the sand dunes, and we’d pretend to shoot each other. How you rolled down the hill would score you good points. That’s why I wanted to become an actor! I’ve somehow managed to find a way into that.”
“As I grew older, I got more serious about it,” said the actor who appeared in well-received indie films before landing the plum Bond gig. “I enjoy doing theater and doing all those things—a path that has taken me down this route. I don’t seem to be able to get off it at the moment, but it’s a good place to be.”
<b>On playing the iconic British secret agent, he said, “I’ve been lucky to land one of the best roles in movie history. If being Bond was all I did for the rest of my life, I’d be happy with that. Being Bond is a high-class ‘problem’ to have. I’ve always loved acting. Everything I’ve ever wanted to do is act. My biggest pleasure is the collaborative process, and I’ve just lucked out!
“In the last couple of years, MGM had a problem with making the next Bond movie,” he said, referring to that studio’s financial crisis that delayed the making of “Bond 23.” The issue was resolved when Sony Pictures stepped in to cofinance and distribute the movie. “But, the delay gave me space. I got to work with Jon Favreau on ‘Cowboys & Aliens.’</b>
“Then, (David) Fincher called me up and asked if I would like to work on ‘The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo,’” Daniel continued. “It just worked! I couldn’t be luckier. They’re very different films. I don’t think about how big the movies are, how much they cost, and what they would do to my career. I just think about if a project is worth doing, and if I should grab the chance, because who knows what’s going to happen in a couple of years’ time?”
Asked if these are good times for him on a personal level, the private man, who married actress Rachel Weisz in a secret ceremony in New York last June, answered, “It’s a pretty good time, yes. My family and friends are close by. I feel good about life, yes!”
Told that he gives the impression of a man who could live under a bridge with nothing, the rugged actor teased with a laugh, “Not anymore.”
On what his house is like, Daniel answered in general terms: “The nicest homes I’ve been into and the ones I always remember are those that seem to have an open door to people. There are centers in those homes, usually revolving around the kitchen, where there are children, family members and friends. If I were looking at an ideal home, that type would be mine!”
On whether he has gotten used to being stared at in public, Daniel said in his self-deprecating wit, “You get used to it. Yeah, disbelief is right. As in, ‘Really, is that what he looks like?’”
http://entertainment.inquirer.net/9131/daniel-craig–raring-to-be-james-bond-again
^ 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
Oh, and after nearly 2 years with the job we'll finally hear Mendes speak - I hope he can write a good script as he seems to be helping Logan.
QOS really did blow, most neutrals were in agreement, a poor bond movie if ever there was
and if they do a repeat of the crap, garbage horrid theme tune / credits as last time I may just be last seen jumping from the top of the Empire State building ~X(
I don't mind Craig that much, a few bond questionable attributes to begin with, but Casino Royale was quite fun even if more than one occasion I had to question what was unfolding before my eyes in the theater
They need to make a drastic improvement on the third Craig movie
We are out there. Good luck with the big jump by the way. Let someone know you're doing it before you take the leap. You'll be unidentifiable.
But what I'm really excited for is this movie. The acting lineup and Craig's excitement alone are enough for me.
As for DIE ANOTHER DAY, that script has dozens of fingerprints all over it. If you watch closely, there is actually some content that is quite strong, but it's lost in all the background noise surrounding it. This, I suspect, is stuff that was left in from the original drafts. Otherwise, repeated viewings reveals the times when others - I suspect EON and Lee Tamahori - meddled with the script. A lot of the call-backs to previous films and single-entendres can be attributed to them.
Then we get to CASINO ROYALE. This really shows Purvis' and Wade's talents. I remember when the film was first released, there were a lot of people crediting "all the good bits" to Paul Haggis. However, Haggis only received a credit as a script doctor; he touched up dialogue and maybe changed some actions, but he only had a limited scope to work within. I'm also told that he was the one who came up with the unpopular sinking house sequence.
Finally, there is QUANTUM OF SOLACE. Purivs and Wade didn't actually write this - Paul Haggis did. Purvis and Wade did the treatment, the initial story pitch. Haggis wrote every draft. They bear no responsibility for the final product.
So as you can see, they get a really rough time - and all because someone higher-up thought they knew better, but their name has to be on the final draft. It happens all the time; ALIEN RESURRECTION, for example, had a really good story, but no Ellen Ripley. The studio decided they wanted Ripley back in, and that changed the whole tone of the film.
EON has said nothing on the cast as of yet. Only Craig and Dench are confirmed. Did you read anything @shadowonthesun just wrote? Going by that, they don't seem that bad, just very unlucky.
A friend of mine is a screenwriter and it's amazing the meddling you get from the studio sometimes. For one film he worked on they showed him a "chart" of script elements and the projected increases or decreases to box office based on inclusion or loss of certain elements that are in a trailer. They demanded that he write a very specific action scene (which made no sense for the story and was not included in the final cut) because showing a certain stunt in a movie's trailer supposedly increases box office by 5 percent. He ended up writing it as a nightmare (it didn't fit into the plot) the main character had, and it was filmed, included in the trailer, but left out of the finished film.
And I don't think it's bad luck that they keep getting shafted - it's almost an industry standard. Take, for example, Ridley Scott's ROBIN HOOD. Before Scott and Crowe got involved, the script was called NOTTINGHAM and focused on the Sheriff of Nottingham, who was not a corrupt figure, but simply someone who had been forced to compromise by Prince John one too many times. Robin Hood, on the other hand, was an almost anarchistic bandit who was supported by the public because they saw him as a lesser evil than the Sheriff. It was almost CSI-like as the Sheriff tried to track down Robin Hood. NOTTINGHAM was going to be HEAT in the fifteenth century, but then Scott and Crowe decided that audiences didn't want that.
Or look at ALIEN RESURRECTION. The original draft focused on Newt, the girl from ALIENS, who discovered that small ships were disappearing between planets without reason or explanation. She would follow the trail only to discover that the people were being abducted by a group of mercenaries to serve as hosts for a xenomorph research experiment. The aliens didn't even figure into the story until halfway through. Elements of this made it into the final film, but the studio decided it wasn't an ALIEN film without Ellen Ripley, and Joss Whedon was forced to come up with an explanation as to how Ripley could have survived with all her memories intact two centuries after her death. In the end, he had Ripley cloned (because she had an embryo in her when she died in ALIEN 3), and the xenomorphs were given a genetic memory which was shared with the host Ripley. It was a pretty good explanation, but it forced him to move up the revelation about the alien research project up to the very first scenes. The original draft also had a final battle on earth as the main characters fought to stop the aliens spreading to infect the human population, but it was cut.
The only way to really avoid all of this is to do what Christopher Nolan and Quentin Tarantino do, and write and direct at the same time. The studios never really interfere with their work. But that's probably the most difficult way to go about things because you have to be a proven success in order to have that kind of freedom.
If you want a really good example of studios meddling, watch this:
It's Kevin Smith - love him or hate him - talking about how he was attached to a Superman project in 1995/6, SUPERMAN REBORN (which became SUPERMAN LIVES) and how the studio executives kept trying to force their vision of the character and the film onto Smith. It's actually quite funny, especially the part about how people in Hollywood "fail upwards".
I can only hope that someday you will stop sounding like a broken record and grow up.
BORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRINGGGGGGGGGGGG
Endless bickering, eh? Nah, that's you and you alone for anyone who likes the Craig era.
point being, it would be a bit dull if everyone had the same opinion or thought the same way, there is always going to be someone challenging or berating of answers, I try to stay away from real out of hand issues, after all what's the point, if someone doesn't like what you say, move on at the end of the day
for whats it worth and no matter what nobody says I did genuinely feel QOS was a poor effort, oh sorry, everybody loved it, I'm off to build a barricade
apologies
I also really hated the editing and pacing of QOS, but there are good things to be found if one is willing to judge with a mature and dispassionate eye. It wasn't entirely the producers' fault with the writer's strike. Another 10-15 minutes and this could have been a classic like CR. After DAF, I finally got a real sequel and I was happy that they got the ending right and wrapped the story arc correctly as well. Now we can move on to BOND 23 and see what will happen. I'm just happy to be getting another Bond movie.
The only reason they went ahead with it was to cash in on the Star Wars craze of the time, why else would bond go into outer space
I only watched QOS on it's original release, I was never wanted to see it again, there were a few people in the theater that night who left feeling somewhat frustrated
if they can make the next installment as they did CR then it should be a successful event
I would suggest you watch CR and then put in QOS right behind it, which is what I did the night before QOS debuted. I've found that it helps you concentrate on the more important (how well it follows CR in Bond's pursuit of QUANTUM and his quest to avenge Vesper) rather than the more trivial aspects regarding the style of direction, editing, and pacing.
And please don't jump off any buildings in the Inner Harbor. I have good friends in Baltimore and used to play at Hammerjack's back in the 80's. Love that town.
I don't own QOS at home, said it before I only watched it the once, didn't like it.
Got Casino Royale ON dvd, single disc edition, I know there are more recent releases most likely on blu-ray that included the cricket scene at the start that was cut out of the original release, one of the shortest Bond teasers ever, I think From Russia with Love had more time before the credits started :-|