Daniel Craig Era in Retrospect:What does he mean to you.

1246

Comments

  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    Posts: 210
    Yeah they definitely had chemistry I'll admit, pretty good chemistry at that. I do often wonder how Eva would've faired with someone else though, would've been interesting to see her interact with say Brosnan imo. But yeah I agree on the Chemistry
  • Posts: 6,709
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    ..., crazy since Eva Green only had like 3 years or so of acting experience at the time I think.

    And was already one of the best actresses of her generation. Her best role still being the one from her first film back in 2003.

    I, for one, loved their meeting on the train. Mostly because of Craig's micro reactions to their verbal poker game.
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    Posts: 210
    Guess Eva Green is just Naturally talented and great, seriously she made Vesper her own and the character wouldn't be nearly as good without her and I don't just mean her "assets" so to speak lol. She's a really great actress with a captivating screen presence
  • Posts: 7,430
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    Guess Eva Green is just Naturally talented and great, seriously she made Vesper her own and the character wouldn't be nearly as good without her and I don't just mean her "assets" so to speak lol. She's a really great actress with a captivating screen presence

    Agree, a great actress, but sorry, she would have been wasted on Brossa!
    As Sophie Marceau was in TWINE!
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    Posts: 210
    I'd argue the opposite, Sophie Marceu wasn't wasted on Brosnan, the 2 played off one another perfectly and I doubt Eva Green would've been any different.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    edited February 2020 Posts: 2,541
    Univex wrote: »
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    ..., crazy since Eva Green only had like 3 years or so of acting experience at the time I think.

    And was already one of the best actresses of her generation. Her best role still being the one from her first film back in 2003.

    I, for one, loved their meeting on the train. Mostly because of Craig's micro reactions to their verbal poker game.

    Iw0V7UD.gif
    Hell yeah, we need separate Eva Green appreciation thread :D and It's been a long time since i watch dreamers.
  • Brother_JohnBrother_John London
    Posts: 10
    I grew up when Roger Moore was the current Bond, but was more familiar with Connery's films as they were always on ITV every Bank Holiday so really he was my 'first', even though RM was in the cinema.

    I'm in my early 50s now, but Craig has totally turned me into a fanboy again (hence my presence on this forum!) The whole Brosnan era passed me by. I didn't like his gun, or his hair, or the way he practically chewed women's faces off during the seductions. He's a genuinely great actor (The Matador, The Tailor of Panama) but - no offence to his fans - he wasn't for me)

    Casino Royal blew me away because it seemed that for the first time in decades they'd actually set out to make a great film, that happened also to be a Bond movie. Craig totally inhabited the role right from the very first frame. He was such a breath of fresh air - the vigor, the drama, the confidence - and I've since come to love his tenure.

    Yes, there were some dodgy haircuts and dodgy suits in the first couple of films (those massive tie knots...!!!), but from Skyfall on the wardrobe has been a deeply enjoyable part of his performances for me: I love the fact that he can wear over two grand worth of clothes (casual or otherwise) and think nothing of having them lost or destroyed in the next scene. Because he doesn't care, and that's part of what makes him appealing.

    Yes, Spectre was ludicrous - the hammy dialogue ('Because right now, I'm your best chance of staying alive' etc.), driving through Rome in the middle of the night where there is no traffic on the roads... (had the producers ever seen an Italian city at night? it never stops!), Bond asking for his dinner jacket to be pressed on an ancient train in the middle of the desert, bringing down a helicopter with a Walther etc., etc., but I have to say, that while I was underwhelmed when I saw Spectre in the cinema, its one I've returned to at home over and over because for all its failures it still contains so much of what is fantastic about Craig's Bond.

    I have high hopes for No Time to Die. Connery was 'The Man', of course - the first, but Craig has brought something amazing to the Bond movies, and I shall be forever grateful.
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    edited February 2020 Posts: 210
    I mean I'll also be greatful for the genuine fun memories Craig gave me as a kid and some of my own video projects wouldn't exist without him so I'll give him that although I disagree with his direction of Bond and how it's negatively impacted Bond as a whole And as such I have 0 hope for NTTD and yall may find this harsh but I am low-key hoping it flops so that EON can learn the hard way that they can't mess with Bond's character badly and get away with it but I digress. For those who are looking forward to the movie I hope you enjoy it and you have a fun time seeing it. I won't go see it, I'll probably catch it on DVD or rental or something like that idk. I look forward to seeing what will happen with Bond 26 though if we get a new actor
  • Posts: 7,430
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    I mean I'll also be greatful for the genuine fun memories Craig gave me as a kid and some of my own video projects wouldn't exist without him so I'll give him that although I disagree with his direction of Bond and how it's negatively impacted Bond as a whole And as such I have 0 hope for NTTD and yall may find this harsh but I am low-key hoping it flops so that EON can learn the hard way that they can't mess with Bond's character badly and get away with it but I digress. For those who are looking forward to the movie I hope you enjoy it and you have a fun time seeing it. I won't go see it, I'll probably catch it on DVD or rental or something like that idk. I look forward to seeing what will happen with Bond 26 though if we get a new actor

    I hope you get what you wish for.
    I believe Daniel Craig is going to be a a very hard act to follow!
    (And I wouldn't take bets on it being a flop if I were you!!)
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    I grew up when Roger Moore was the current Bond, but was more familiar with Connery's films as they were always on ITV every Bank Holiday so really he was my 'first', even though RM was in the cinema.

    I'm in my early 50s now, but Craig has totally turned me into a fanboy again (hence my presence on this forum!) The whole Brosnan era passed me by. I didn't like his gun, or his hair, or the way he practically chewed women's faces off during the seductions. He's a genuinely great actor (The Matador, The Tailor of Panama) but - no offence to his fans - he wasn't for me)

    Casino Royal blew me away because it seemed that for the first time in decades they'd actually set out to make a great film, that happened also to be a Bond movie. Craig totally inhabited the role right from the very first frame. He was such a breath of fresh air - the vigor, the drama, the confidence - and I've since come to love his tenure.

    Yes, there were some dodgy haircuts and dodgy suits in the first couple of films (those massive tie knots...!!!), but from Skyfall on the wardrobe has been a deeply enjoyable part of his performances for me: I love the fact that he can wear over two grand worth of clothes (casual or otherwise) and think nothing of having them lost or destroyed in the next scene. Because he doesn't care, and that's part of what makes him appealing.

    Yes, Spectre was ludicrous - the hammy dialogue ('Because right now, I'm your best chance of staying alive' etc.), driving through Rome in the middle of the night where there is no traffic on the roads... (had the producers ever seen an Italian city at night? it never stops!), Bond asking for his dinner jacket to be pressed on an ancient train in the middle of the desert, bringing down a helicopter with a Walther etc., etc., but I have to say, that while I was underwhelmed when I saw Spectre in the cinema, its one I've returned to at home over and over because for all its failures it still contains so much of what is fantastic about Craig's Bond.

    I have high hopes for No Time to Die. Connery was 'The Man', of course - the first, but Craig has brought something amazing to the Bond movies, and I shall be forever grateful.

    Nicely said @Brother_John -- you nailed many reasons why I am most passionate about Craig (and nicely summed up why the Brosnan Era just didn't work me either)...

    Welcome to the forum!!
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    Funny you'd call me a troll Shardlake, if you must know I've been a member here since last year and posted a fair amount back then but I stopped as I got busy and forgot about this place due to HAVING lots of other places to check. But the fact that you're calling me a troll because I'm expressing my actual real life feelings on Craig in a civil and respectful manner is disrespectful. I figured you'd be at least respectful back but I see I was wrong. I figured I'd come back and express my thoughts on the franchise in an environment like this to see other's thoughts on the same topics but see people like you who accuse others of being a troll just cause they have an opinion you don't like is what makes me want to not bother engaging in a place like this, don't make this place like R/JamesBond, that place is a literal echo chamber where people are ridiculed for not having an opinion that's considered the Norm. You don't have to like my opinions or me, but I'd at least appreciate if you'd show some decentcy and respect for me as I have for everyone here because this place should be a civil place of discussion regardless of someone's opinion being controversial. But regardless have a nice day good sir.

    You knew exactly what you were doing, you wanted to get a rise, I've seen plenty of members on this forum who aren't Craig fans do it much respectfully.

    I don't like the Brosnan but I don't go in there and pour this kind of vitriol on his appreciation or discussion threads yet you think that something clearly written to get people blood up is nuanced criticism and you should be respected for just saying nothing more than Craig is rubbish and that he is Bourne rip off.

    Way to go with your succinct and measured critique.

  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    What's this a fan who doesn't like Daniel Craig!? Gasp! what a shock! Eh not really. Keep on doing what you do @Daniel316, your opinions are more than welcome here. :-bd
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    Posts: 210
    Thanks Murdock I appreciate that, I'll keep this breif Mr. Shardlake: I wasn't attempting to make anyone salty, I was just sharing my opinion in a thread that is all about sharing opinions on the Craig era as a whole, my opinion just happens to be unpopular big whoop. Deal with it.
  • Shardlake wrote: »
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    Funny you'd call me a troll Shardlake, if you must know I've been a member here since last year and posted a fair amount back then but I stopped as I got busy and forgot about this place due to HAVING lots of other places to check. But the fact that you're calling me a troll because I'm expressing my actual real life feelings on Craig in a civil and respectful manner is disrespectful. I figured you'd be at least respectful back but I see I was wrong. I figured I'd come back and express my thoughts on the franchise in an environment like this to see other's thoughts on the same topics but see people like you who accuse others of being a troll just cause they have an opinion you don't like is what makes me want to not bother engaging in a place like this, don't make this place like R/JamesBond, that place is a literal echo chamber where people are ridiculed for not having an opinion that's considered the Norm. You don't have to like my opinions or me, but I'd at least appreciate if you'd show some decentcy and respect for me as I have for everyone here because this place should be a civil place of discussion regardless of someone's opinion being controversial. But regardless have a nice day good sir.

    You knew exactly what you were doing, you wanted to get a rise, I've seen plenty of members on this forum who aren't Craig fans do it much respectfully.

    I don't like the Brosnan but I don't go in there and pour this kind of vitriol on his appreciation or discussion threads yet you think that something clearly written to get people blood up is nuanced criticism and you should be respected for just saying nothing more than Craig is rubbish and that he is Bourne rip off.

    Way to go with your succinct and measured critique.

    I agree, it's very sad to see people not liking Craig. I don't understand, the lame gadgetry and fun factor of Bond is a thing of the past, it doesn't fit in today's standards anymore. I've seen and heard all the critiques of Craig's grittiness this and that but is that really an issue in this day? Times change, Bond always moves with the times and so far nothing has dampened Craig's tenure in the overall run. I find it hilarious to see Brosnan fanboys run around thinking they're some mighty high mountain just because he brought the franchise out of the dead after LTK, so what? Ok so Goldeneye was pretty good, but then he completely bored me with the following movies, and don't get me started on Die Another Day please.

    Shartdlake and others, don't feel bad. This place is only as bad as anyone like Dr Dan makes it. Craig will finish strong with No Time to Die and I can guarantee that, I can feel it. If Skyfall isn't an indication of a great return to a proper reboot Bond, I don't know what is. Get over it guys, the times are changing and if you don't like it, then that's fine, don't come in here insulting other members just expressing their thoughts. You have those old movies to watch, just enjoy them then.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,534
    These recent comments though🤦‍♂️
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited February 2020 Posts: 13,978
    This is not the Craig appreciaton thread, that can be found here:

    https://www.mi6community.com/discussion/5539/the-daniel-craig-thread-discuss-his-life-his-career-his-bond-films/p135

    So by all means have different opinions, but keep it civil, and avoid name calling.
  • Agreed. Let's just respect everyone's thoughts no matter what. Although this feels sort of like a Craig appreciation thread in a way, isn't it?
  • Posts: 7,507
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    Funny you'd call me a troll Shardlake, if you must know I've been a member here since last year and posted a fair amount back then but I stopped as I got busy and forgot about this place due to HAVING lots of other places to check. But the fact that you're calling me a troll because I'm expressing my actual real life feelings on Craig in a civil and respectful manner is disrespectful. I figured you'd be at least respectful back but I see I was wrong. I figured I'd come back and express my thoughts on the franchise in an environment like this to see other's thoughts on the same topics but see people like you who accuse others of being a troll just cause they have an opinion you don't like is what makes me want to not bother engaging in a place like this, don't make this place like R/JamesBond, that place is a literal echo chamber where people are ridiculed for not having an opinion that's considered the Norm. You don't have to like my opinions or me, but I'd at least appreciate if you'd show some decentcy and respect for me as I have for everyone here because this place should be a civil place of discussion regardless of someone's opinion being controversial. But regardless have a nice day good sir.

    To be honest some of your statements were so exaggerated and filled to the rim with bitternes that they can hardly be called "respectful".
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    jobo wrote: »
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    Funny you'd call me a troll Shardlake, if you must know I've been a member here since last year and posted a fair amount back then but I stopped as I got busy and forgot about this place due to HAVING lots of other places to check. But the fact that you're calling me a troll because I'm expressing my actual real life feelings on Craig in a civil and respectful manner is disrespectful. I figured you'd be at least respectful back but I see I was wrong. I figured I'd come back and express my thoughts on the franchise in an environment like this to see other's thoughts on the same topics but see people like you who accuse others of being a troll just cause they have an opinion you don't like is what makes me want to not bother engaging in a place like this, don't make this place like R/JamesBond, that place is a literal echo chamber where people are ridiculed for not having an opinion that's considered the Norm. You don't have to like my opinions or me, but I'd at least appreciate if you'd show some decentcy and respect for me as I have for everyone here because this place should be a civil place of discussion regardless of someone's opinion being controversial. But regardless have a nice day good sir.

    To be honest some of your statements were so exaggerated and filled to the rim with bitternes that they can hardly be called "respectful".

    Exactly
  • Brother_JohnBrother_John London
    Posts: 10
    peter wrote: »
    Welcome to the forum!!
    Thank you!

  • QQ7QQ7 Croatia
    Posts: 371
    I like how some people here think that "not liking Craig" is a bannable offense.
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    Posts: 210
    Yeah tell me about it. It is what it is really.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    QQ7 wrote: »
    I like how some people here think that "not liking Craig" is a bannable offense.

    Not really, if i don't like something i don't constantly go around bashing it. Fair criticism is always welcome, nonsense isn't.
  • Gustav_TrevelyanGustav_Trevelyan The Triskelion, Washington D.C.
    Posts: 9
    You may or may not remember me, but I joined here some 7 months ago and made a few posts and a review of DAF (I think?). Would have liked to post here more often but another bigger franchise I have been missing out on (regrettably) came in between and, in combination with the Bond franchise becoming less interesting, I lost interest. That and I have been busy with studies and such. Anyhow. A bit of a long post ahead so here it goes.

    In all honesty, as much as I hate to say it, the Craig era has been a bit of a disgrace to the franchise, in my opinion at least. On the basis of him being an brooding brute most of the time, I fail to see how he is an improvement on any of his predecessors, and even the emotional angst angle seems rather overdone.

    As far as his movies are concerned, it's a mixed bag that has stripped Bond of what it's supposed to be about and what it was from 1962 to 2002, and made it a needlessly dark and gritty generic action franchise that is stripped of almost all of its' fun aspects and is about a protagonist who is psychologically rough around the edges, whose humor is almost nonexistent, who spends too much time pining after a love lost long ago, who constantly seems angry, bitter and temperamental and who even looks more like a KGB assassin than a dashing, suave British secret agent.

    Casino Royale was admittedly a decent film, though a bit on the overrated side in my eyes. Bond here seems to act against the norms even more egregiously than the old Bond (the embassy incident and breaking into M's apartment are good examples). The supporting characters, as well as the action sequences, redeem it for me, and Eva Green, Mads Mikkelsen and Giancarlo Giannini are all terrific in their roles! And I enjoyed the dynamic between Bond and Vesper too, though the dialogue in the train scene was a bit off and eyeroll, as well as Mikkelsen as Le Chiffre. Quantum of Solace, on the other hand, is a weird one because as much as I hate the Bourne-imitating of the Craig era, QoS is actually for all its' troubles and faults halfway decent. The characters are somewhat interesting, with Camille's revenge plot against Medrano, and Dominic Greene, dare I say it, is the (unless Safin ends up being better) last good villain in the Craig era. The soundtrack is also pretty good again and some of the action setpieces are also pretty nice, such as the Bregenz opera bit and the eco-hotel in the finale. On the other hand, it is essentially humorless, the action scenes are atrocious to watch with the horrible amount of excessive cuts in-between takes, and the plot is rather weak. So Bond has to stop some guy from taking over a third-world country's water supply and that's it? Where's the world-endangering threat in that, other than maybe him running some cover company under the guise of environmentalism?

    Skyfall though, I never really could get into it. I wasn't too crazy about it when I first saw it back in early 2013, and neither when I watched it again for the first time in over 4 years in 2017. And after seeing it the 3rd time or so, I couldn't help but just hate this movie. It really is rather awful: the rather awkward jump from "rookie agent starting out" to "he's too old, does the modern world need Bond anymore??", the plot makes no sense (going from "stolen hard drive with secret agent identities" to this Raoul Silva bloke and forgetting the hard drive as if it never existed at all), the villain is an awful Joker imitation mixed with your cliché obsessed stalker that you see on Investigation Discovery (though Javier Bardem gave a pretty good performance as him and I so wish he got to play a much better villain than Silva!), Silva's plan itself is convoluted and nonsensical, and Bond and M deciding that it would be a great idea to go into Bond's childhood home, seemingly assuming that Silva wouldn't find them, when it would be smarter to, idk, get M into some undisclosed location guarded by MI6? And on top of all that, for all these reasons, it doesn't even feel like a Bond movie in the slightest. And last but not least, Thomas Newman's soundtrack is absolutely awful. Again IMO, but I never got why David Arnold got the boot even considering Mendes's connections with Newman.

    As far as Spectre is concerned though, in all honesty it's, in my opinion again, the absolute worst movie of the franchise. The plot seems to be a combination of a lazy rip-off of Captain America: The Winter Soldier (especially the key "intelligence agency getting inflitrated and destroyed from the inside-out" angle and the character of C is rather similar to Alexander Pierce, and to some extent the "Nine Eyes" program is somewhat similar to Project Insight as well), Austin Powers (the especially godawful "Brofeld" stuff). Also the rather dumb amount of setpieces and scenes that seem to be based off scenes from prior movies, especially the finale that eventually is set on the Thames River with Bond on a boat, similar to the Thames bit in TWINE. And last but not least, the ham-fisted attempt at making SPECTRE look more threatening by linking Le Chiffre, Greene and Silva together with SPECTRE, even though it was implied that the first 2 of them were part of Quantum, an organization that seems to have been thus completely tossed by the wayside. And as good as Christoph Waltz is as the villain, the reboot Blofeld is just awful, seeming to be only motivated out of a desire to get back at Bond because he was treated better in the family! While it's true (and somewhat nice) that they brought back some of the old Bond elements, they felt rather shallow and all that is pretty much undone by how awful and stitched-together the movie is.

    So overall, a bit of a long-winded post, but this is why the Craig era has honestly sucked in my opinion. What could, perhaps, have been a decent, though different, take on Bond (and that's what it really seemed to me as even when I really became a Bond fan in 2017), appears to have gotten stuck in imitating what's popular (Bourne, The Dark Knight, Marvel), in making and keeping Bond a brooding, angsty brute with mental issues and being dark and gritty. To put my thoughts here to bed, though I personally strongly dislike the Craig era, if you enjoy it, well, that's fine and I won't jump on you for that. Bond for me represents this escapist franchise with this awesome suave British secret agent who defeats world-threatening bad guys, seduces any woman he meets and speeds around in fast cars. Not this melodramatic, hopeless in tone, "grounded in reality" casserole that it's now turned into.
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    Posts: 210
    That's quite a long post Zed but yeah that's mostly my thoughts on everything, I did enjoy Craig Ad a kid but now I just can't stand him (I Still can enjoy CR and QOS which I maintain was a good start still). And yeah you can like and enjoy what you want, if you like Craig that's fine, you're allowed to like what you like, I just don't care for him and haven't since late 2017 or so.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    "I love the fact that he can wear over two grand worth of clothes (casual or otherwise) and think nothing of having them lost or destroyed in the next scene. Because he doesn't care, and that's part of what makes him appealing".
    Well said @Brother_John .
    Although I have to disagree about Rome car chase, it was bad no doubt but our forum member here @matt_u mentioned once that there isn't much traffic in the middle of the night there anyway.
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    Posts: 210
    Bruh that car chase was wack, mainly due to having a phone call in the middle of it, like what were they thinking about that?
  • Brother_JohnBrother_John London
    Posts: 10
    "I love the fact that he can wear over two grand worth of clothes (casual or otherwise) and think nothing of having them lost or destroyed in the next scene. Because he doesn't care, and that's part of what makes him appealing".
    Well said @Brother_John .
    Although I have to disagree about Rome car chase, it was bad no doubt but our forum member here @matt_u mentioned once that there isn't much traffic in the middle of the night there anyway.
    Thanks!

    Happy to be corrected on nocturnal Roman traffic (I haven't actually been in Rome for 30 years so maybe its much improved!) but in that chase the streets were virtually empty, except the old guy on the way back from the opera, and it just struck me as a bit implausible. Maybe I'm just assuming that everywhere is just 24hrs like London... :-(


  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    Posts: 5,185
    "I love the fact that he can wear over two grand worth of clothes (casual or otherwise) and think nothing of having them lost or destroyed in the next scene. Because he doesn't care, and that's part of what makes him appealing".
    Well said @Brother_John .
    Although I have to disagree about Rome car chase, it was bad no doubt but our forum member here @matt_u mentioned once that there isn't much traffic in the middle of the night there anyway.
    Thanks!

    Happy to be corrected on nocturnal Roman traffic (I haven't actually been in Rome for 30 years so maybe its much improved!) but in that chase the streets were virtually empty, except the old guy on the way back from the opera, and it just struck me as a bit implausible. Maybe I'm just assuming that everywhere is just 24hrs like London... :-(


    No, it's definitly not like London. Rome after 10Pm is pretty dead. Maybe not as empty as in the film, but close.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    00Agent wrote: »
    "I love the fact that he can wear over two grand worth of clothes (casual or otherwise) and think nothing of having them lost or destroyed in the next scene. Because he doesn't care, and that's part of what makes him appealing".
    Well said @Brother_John .
    Although I have to disagree about Rome car chase, it was bad no doubt but our forum member here @matt_u mentioned once that there isn't much traffic in the middle of the night there anyway.
    Thanks!

    Happy to be corrected on nocturnal Roman traffic (I haven't actually been in Rome for 30 years so maybe its much improved!) but in that chase the streets were virtually empty, except the old guy on the way back from the opera, and it just struck me as a bit implausible. Maybe I'm just assuming that everywhere is just 24hrs like London... :-(


    No, it's definitly not like London. Rome after 10Pm is pretty dead. Maybe not as empty as in the film, but close.

    Yeah correct. Without forgetting that the chase happens after midnight...
Sign In or Register to comment.