Sorry, I know Craig was good in Layer Cake, but please the guy doesent even remotely fit the picture painted by Fleming for Bond. As for the 'Lets go back to the beginning 'cliche', oh please...
I agree there were many actors in the running who were more in keeping with the James Bond look, however I too hope to be proven wrong, still unsure if Daniel Craig as James Bond would put me off seeing the film altogether.
Craig,s picture of him pointing a log-barrel gun with him in a tuxedo, looks like a guy in an Al Cappone movie. He would be perfect against Elliot Ness in the Untouchables. His look is SOOOOOOOOOOOOO Wrong.
There are so many comments around here in which no effort has been to back up any opinions.
Sorry, I know Craig was good in Layer Cake, but please the guy doesent even remotely fit the picture painted by Fleming for Bond. As for the 'Lets go back to the beginning 'cliche', oh please...
They should have picked Clive Owen!!!
I take it you have seen his screen-test then ?
Did any of the previous actors fit Fleming's Bond ?
Wasn't the role offered to Owen and he turned it down ?
Just wanted to say I enjoyed reading all the posts today, both negative and positive. They were for the most part well written with emotion and thought. It justs shows how much we all care about this fictional character James Bond. That has to be a good thing for the franchise.
Well, I've had a change of heart too. I've just watched my local regional news and found out Craig's mum lives 2 miles down the road from me, and he drinks in the Green Lodge.
Which, for any golf tourists coming to The Open next year, is about 500 yards from the Royal Liverpool Golf Club.
I was actually impressed with the way he presented himself at the press conference. As someone who thought the smart money was on Clive Owen, I now think Craig has the gravitas to pull it off. I also think the hack who asked him if he thought he was qualified to play Bond, who got a steely stare and the reply "I have lots of qualifications. None of them have anything to do with the role" is probably feeling a bit small tonight.
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
Craig,s picture of him pointing a log-barrel gun with him in a tuxedo, looks like a guy in an Al Cappone movie. He would be perfect against Elliot Ness in the Untouchables. His look is SOOOOOOOOOOOOO Wrong.
There are so many comments around here in which no effort has been to back up any opinions.
I hope that my comments aren't among those you speak about. In fact, I've "backed up" my main Craig concerns on the "CR is shaping up to be a good movie" thread, and I'm still waiting for your thoughtful reply.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
Well, the press release photo shows him with dark hair, so maybe they'll dye it. He definately has the cruel features Fleming described-- he looks like a killer and that may work well with the "darker, grittier" formula of CR. My only prob with his appearance is his nose, even though it makes him look like a tough guy. I've never seen him act, but i say let's give him a chance. I thought Roger Moore was too much of a pretty boy to be Bond and the whole Moore era was a waste of good Fleming titles..
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
I think DC will have no problem delivering 'tough and cruel.' It's how he tackles some of the more sublime aspects of the character which interest me at the moment.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Hurrah! Finally, positive comments from a "higher authority" poster of AJB! All those who's opinions seem to respected have posted nothing but cynicism all day ... I don't like the way AJB is being clouded by so many of the respected members flaunting their negative reactions around the forum.
And neither do I.
I posted yesterday about the vitriol being spouted about an actor. Jeez guys, have you had a chance to read what you are writing? Apart from a press conference and a photo, have you seen anything? Presumptions and assumptions.
(Incidentally, I was at St Catherine's Dock this afternoon to see DC come 'aboard' HMS President. He didn't look scared to me ... perhaps this is some much needed acting coming to the series? In fact he looked completely in control.)
All this talk of long-standing Bond fans of 25 years, 30 years ... there have been highs and lows before - and there are plenty of highs and lows to come. Bond isn't ours ... being a fan doesn't mean you are owed anything. We choose to place our faith in the character, the film, the production company, the writers and even the actor. There comes a time when you simply make a choice - are you a Bond fan who wants to see a Bond film or are you not.
It has been a long time since I cared who was Bond. Bond to me is the film, not the actor. Maybe I am lucky, maybe not. Story is the key. As has been said already, we have a middle-aged white Englishman in the role. He can act. He can do action. I can see why he was chosen.
I'm sorry, but I was impressed by DC earlier today. It certainly wasn't easy for him and must have been terrifying to be thrust into the international spotlight in the space of 5 minutes, but he still looked pretty calm and collected throughout.
To those who think him ugly: well, that's your choice. I know many who do find him attractive.
To those who think him too blond: )
To those who think him unsuitable: wait and see
To those who think that because of Craig then CR will "suck": Brosnan has gone. Live with it.
I really can't believe the attitude ... we are talking about a film. One that might just be excellent, one that might erase the CGI travesty that was DAD.
I saw a picture of Craig somewhere on the 'net the other day, next to a picture of Hoagey Carmichael, and there is definately a resemblance. (Fleming once compared Bond to Carmichael). Dalton wasn't my favorite Bond, but i think he probably resembled Fleming's vision of Bond more than any of the others with his cruel, piratical looks. I like the way Craig looks in the new "gun pointing" pic (he didn't look at all blonde there). Bond should look rather cold and menacing, and i'm relieved to hear they will be cutting back on the corny one-liner jokes and far-fetched Q gadget props. I'm looking forward to seeing Bond's character developed more in the films.
I do wish Brosnan could have returned for one more, and I agree Craig doesn't look young enough to play a Young Bond. Fleming described Bond as being in his mid-30's throughout the whole series of novels. At age 37, Craig is the right age for a contemporary Bond, but you would think the producers would have found someone much younger for a "origin of Bond" film.
The bottom line with me is... I'm not hugely excited by the choice of Craig, but i am always excited to see a new actor's interpretation of this great character, and i don't want to criticise him until i see how he performs.
I'm also excited to hear that CR will return to
the more down-to-earth formula of the earlier Connery films. More plot, better characters, fewer gadgets, less comedy... hopefully leading to a grittier, more suspenseful and believable spy thriller. And hopefully never again will we ever hear a Beach Boys surf tune playing in the backgound of a ski-chase battle, utterly killing the suspense.
Then you won't be overjoyed by the front page of The Mirror tomorrow given over to Craig-bashing, Predator. The headline: James Bland.
(Does Elliot Carver edit The Mirror?)
No, Craig was joking about being scared about his motorboat ride, it's no biggie.
But what is a biggie is the pics of him, sorry guys, but he just looked like a wimp to me on that motorboat. And, not to be a body fascist about it, but looks are sort of important, Pred.
Incidentally, would anyone out there go for a blond Superman? Why would you? Cos you can't find anyone else, I suppose.
Craig is about as welcome as an outbreak of bird flu at KFC...
And with that cheery thought, Pred, I shall turn in for the night. What are you still doing up, anyhow, watching Peeping Tom?
Then you won't be overjoyed by the front page of The Mirror tomorrow given over to Craig-bashing, Predator. The headline: James Bland.
Well ... they sell papers. What do you do?
As for me (and I will repeat for those who are hard of thinking) I was there and he looked pretty cool on the launch. Shame you didn't find him as reassuring ... you won't be seeing CR then?
I'm not happy with Craig but now that it's official, I feel it's only right to give him a fair go.
There's no doubting the guy acting ability. Most descent centres around his looks (or lack of).
I'm counting on the fact that EON believe they can lick him into shape to make his apperance on the screen credible. Fix his hair, the right make up, black tux and PPK and who knows.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
I'm with you, Predator. I wasn't a proponent of Craig, not at all, but I'm looking forward to see what happens when the white dots move across the screen next November.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
One more comment on the "hair issue", and i'll give it a rest:
I agree Bond shouldn't be blonde, and i'm sure the special-effects crew will work wonders with a little dye and styling. As I said before, his hair looks jet black in the official press release photo.
Let's keep in mind that Connery was BALD when he made DAF and NSNA!
I had no issues with Brosnan and would have loved him to do one more, but that's in the past now. Let's also face the fact that whomever was to follow Brosnan had one hell of a job on his hands, I don't think any actor could deliver the box-office returns (in the role of Bond) that Brosnan has, so I don't think that can be used as a fair yardstick.
Then what was the sense in the change of actor? There was every opportunity for a change of tone and direction within the Bond formula, as has been proven with Roger Moore (FYEO) and Timothy Dalton (LTK).
Do you genuinely believe that Eon and Sony are not in the game of making box office returns? This whole saga has been about Eon's ego vs. Pierce Brosnan's popularity, and Eon decided enough was enough and they needed to exert some form of control and send the message that Bond is bigger than any jobbing actor that plays him.
I genuinely believe that Sony have the Bond franchise under their biggest microscope at the moment, and they will close in for the kill unless Casino Royale is spectacular DAD box-office.
But what is a biggie is the pics of him ... but he just looked like a wimp to me on that motorboat. And, not to be a body fascist about it, but looks are sort of important
Sorry, but you are ... yes, looks are important, but you must understand that not everyone agrees with you.
And with that cheery thought, Pred, I shall turn in for the night. What are you still doing up, anyhow, watching Peeping Tom?
Nope, but I have had a long day and only got back from London an hour or so ago. You lot have had all afternoon to moan like a bunch of old fishwives ... only fair for me to have my say?
Hurrah! Finally, positive comments from a "higher authority" poster of AJB! All those who's opinions seem to respected have posted nothing but cynicism all day ... I don't like the way AJB is being clouded by so many of the respected members flaunting their negative reactions around the forum.
And neither do I.
I posted yesterday about the vitriol being spouted about an actor. Jeez guys, have you had a chance to read what you are writing? Apart from a press conference and a photo, have you seen anything? Presumptions and assumptions.
(Incidentally, I was at St Catherine's Dock this afternoon to see DC come 'aboard' HMS President. He didn't look scared to me ... perhaps this is some much needed acting coming to the series? In fact he looked completely in control.)
All this talk of long-standing Bond fans of 25 years, 30 years ... there have been highs and lows before - and there are plenty of highs and lows to come. Bond isn't ours ... being a fan doesn't mean you are owed anything. We choose to place our faith in the character, the film, the production company, the writers and even the actor. There comes a time when you simply make a choice - are you a Bond fan who wants to see a Bond film or are you not.
It has been a long time since I cared who was Bond. Bond to me is the film, not the actor. Maybe I am lucky, maybe not. Story is the key. As has been said already, we have a middle-aged white Englishman in the role. He can act. He can do action. I can see why he was chosen.
I'm sorry, but I was impressed by DC earlier today. It certainly wasn't easy for him and must have been terrifying to be thrust into the international spotlight in the space of 5 minutes, but he still looked pretty calm and collected throughout.
To those who think him ugly: well, that's your choice. I know many who do find him attractive.
To those who think him too blond: )
To those who think him unsuitable: wait and see
To those who think that because of Craig then CR will "suck": Brosnan has gone. Live with it.
I really can't believe the attitude ... we are talking about a film. One that might just be excellent, one that might erase the CGI travesty that was DAD.
Sorry but to alot of us this isn't just another "film". It involves a character we all love,a character being played by an actor some of us just don't agree with,is that so wrong.Is AJB all about supporting the Bond franchise regardless of our opinions? In my eyes the reason some of us are bleating is because we do deeply care and don't just want a film but a Bond we can believe in,isn't that the point of a film,escapism into something we know is a fantasy and not real life but something to draw us in and believe in.
Since i was a child,probably like many others here,Bond is my hero,not just a film. Yes i love the films but to me the actor in that film makes all the difference in the world. That is my humble opinion,and yes im one of those 20-30 year followers and feel i am owed something in that without us would Bond be as big as he is?
At least all the different attitudes today have shown how passionately we all feel about Bond and thats good,isn't it?
This whole saga has been about Eon's ego vs. Pierce Brosnan's popularity, and Eon decided enough was enough and they needed to exert some form of control and send the message that Bond is bigger than any jobbing actor that plays him.
I don't think so ... or at least this is only a contributory factor. Money is a big incentive, and PB has gone on record to say that he asked for a lot and perhaps priced himself out.
Can you really be sure what went on behind closed doors though? PB was/is a master of spin (actually since Eon called his bluff, he has looked on shakier ground) but recent events have shown that the actor is not bigger than the part. I would go so far as to say thank goodness that this is so. I like Brosnan, but I have always loved Bond.
Hurrah! Finally, positive comments from a "higher authority" poster of AJB! All those who's opinions seem to respected have posted nothing but cynicism all day ... I don't like the way AJB is being clouded by so many of the respected members flaunting their negative reactions around the forum.
And neither do I.
I posted yesterday about the vitriol being spouted about an actor. Jeez guys, have you had a chance to read what you are writing? Apart from a press conference and a photo, have you seen anything? Presumptions and assumptions.
(Incidentally, I was at St Catherine's Dock this afternoon to see DC come 'aboard' HMS President. He didn't look scared to me ... perhaps this is some much needed acting coming to the series? In fact he looked completely in control.)
All this talk of long-standing Bond fans of 25 years, 30 years ... there have been highs and lows before - and there are plenty of highs and lows to come. Bond isn't ours ... being a fan doesn't mean you are owed anything. We choose to place our faith in the character, the film, the production company, the writers and even the actor. There comes a time when you simply make a choice - are you a Bond fan who wants to see a Bond film or are you not.
It has been a long time since I cared who was Bond. Bond to me is the film, not the actor. Maybe I am lucky, maybe not. Story is the key. As has been said already, we have a middle-aged white Englishman in the role. He can act. He can do action. I can see why he was chosen.
I'm sorry, but I was impressed by DC earlier today. It certainly wasn't easy for him and must have been terrifying to be thrust into the international spotlight in the space of 5 minutes, but he still looked pretty calm and collected throughout.
To those who think him ugly: well, that's your choice. I know many who do find him attractive.
To those who think him too blond: )
To those who think him unsuitable: wait and see
To those who think that because of Craig then CR will "suck": Brosnan has gone. Live with it.
I really can't believe the attitude ... we are talking about a film. One that might just be excellent, one that might erase the CGI travesty that was DAD.[/quot
I'm surprised by your whining about how people feel. This is an open forum that allows people to express their feelings, people are expressing their feelings, which happen to be negative. That's the way it is. I would agree that some comments are over the top, but I posted earlier that I enjoyed readings most of todays post, both good and bad. This character is very important to some people and they feel let down. Let them express themselves. I think expecting everybody to say nice things or accept whatever EON provides is pollyanaish. Their would be no need for this forum if everybody agreed and marched in step.
Like i have said before today-i am not a lemming,i have my own thoughts and opinions which i stick to and respect others,i am an individual and proud of it
I agree with you Barry Nelson
I am not saying you are a lemming Predator it is not aimed at anyone at all just a figuare of speech
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
Hurrah! Finally, positive comments from a "higher authority" poster of AJB! All those who's opinions seem to respected have posted nothing but cynicism all day ... I don't like the way AJB is being clouded by so many of the respected members flaunting their negative reactions around the forum.
And neither do I.
I posted yesterday about the vitriol being spouted about an actor. Jeez guys, have you had a chance to read what you are writing? Apart from a press conference and a photo, have you seen anything? Presumptions and assumptions.
(Incidentally, I was at St Catherine's Dock this afternoon to see DC come 'aboard' HMS President. He didn't look scared to me ... perhaps this is some much needed acting coming to the series? In fact he looked completely in control.)
All this talk of long-standing Bond fans of 25 years, 30 years ... there have been highs and lows before - and there are plenty of highs and lows to come. Bond isn't ours ... being a fan doesn't mean you are owed anything. We choose to place our faith in the character, the film, the production company, the writers and even the actor. There comes a time when you simply make a choice - are you a Bond fan who wants to see a Bond film or are you not.
It has been a long time since I cared who was Bond. Bond to me is the film, not the actor. Maybe I am lucky, maybe not. Story is the key. As has been said already, we have a middle-aged white Englishman in the role. He can act. He can do action. I can see why he was chosen.
I'm sorry, but I was impressed by DC earlier today. It certainly wasn't easy for him and must have been terrifying to be thrust into the international spotlight in the space of 5 minutes, but he still looked pretty calm and collected throughout.
To those who think him ugly: well, that's your choice. I know many who do find him attractive.
To those who think him too blond: )
To those who think him unsuitable: wait and see
To those who think that because of Craig then CR will "suck": Brosnan has gone. Live with it.
I really can't believe the attitude ... we are talking about a film. One that might just be excellent, one that might erase the CGI travesty that was DAD.
Predator, I have been a Bond fan for 32 years. I say that because people have tried to lend credence to "where you're coming from" in this Craig debate and I guess, you've topped the validity of every other opinion since you got to see the press con in person.
People in the Bond fanbase, in differing degrees have their hopes, emotions and expectations invested in this new movie, that includes you, and me. Maybe you can look beyond who's playing Bond in a Bond movie with a good story, but I cannot, I am not like you. As much as I love the 1989 Batman movie (story, feel, art direction, etc.), I cannot overlook the miscasting of Keaton. Likewise, it means a lot to have an excellent and cleverly adapted Casino Royale and I desperately and sincerely hope it will still happen.
And yes, as a Bond fan, I've made a choice to watch the next movie, but aren't my concerns for the central element to a Bond film, i.e., the character, apperance and all, valid? Frankly, I don't care if they use a Craig or a CGI actor to portray Bond, if either could convince me that it's Bond up there, at the very least near to the same degree that Moore or Lazenby did, then I will be happy; I am a Bond fan who is easy to please, and I love all my 21 "children" (which includes NSNA).
On the blonde aspect, what's wrong with expecting a dark haired character to be portrayed by a dark-haired actor? I thought Moore was the blondest they'd go, but I was wrong, and Campbell has decided against a color change. At least, despite his hair color, Moore had enough factors going for him to convince me he's Bond, and I hope that somehow Craig will likewise have enough going for him to do the same...fair enough?
And to Blade, clamp it. Don't be such a hypocrite. I wish you took your own advice about being positive over a year ago, over Craig, Brosnan, Purvis and Wade, etc., and maybe your post count would be less than half its size.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
Is AJB all about supporting the Bond franchise regardless of our opinions? In my eyes the reason some of us are bleating is because we do deeply care and don't just want a film but a Bond we can believe in,isn't that the point of a film,escapism into something we know is a fantasy and not real life but something to draw us in and believe in.
Since i was a child,probably like many others here,Bond is my hero,not just a film. Yes i love the films but to me the actor in that film makes all the difference in the world. That is my humble opinion,and yes im one of those 20-30 year followers and feel i am owed something in that without us would Bond be as big as he is?
At least all the different attitudes today have shown how passionately we all feel about Bond and thats good,isn't it?
Perhaps, but how many of those who are dismissing Craig idly have actually seen Casino Royale? Precisely.
Wait. And. See.
If it is disappointing, perhaps it will be down to Craig. Perhaps it will be P&W's original script, Campbell's directing or any number of things that can go pear-shaped with a film's production.
We have no way of possibly knowing.
Absolutely James Bond is just that. It is not Absolutely James Bond But Not If James Bond Is Played By Someone I Don't Like the Look Of. That we can get passionate and animated about the franchise is fantastic. Heck, there are those who never liked PB (stand up my feline friend!) or George Lazenby or Roger Moore or Timothy Dalton or Sean Connery.
The difference with Craig is that he is the first new Bond to come along in the "AJB era" (so bigheaded! OK, the internet era!!!). There are so many more expectations on him and the franchise because of Bond's recent history.
I don't particularly want us all to roll over and whimper "Craig is the Bond for me", but I would prefer to see a little more objectivity. It is just a film. Sorry, but it is. It is, however, a film that we all want to work, but at last count there are over 4000 different ways that the franchise could go, plus thousands more on the other Bond sites and film sites in general.
The one thing that we must remember is that without a film to judge him on yet, what is the point in criticising the decision to hire him? When there is something concrete then sure let's review that. Who's to say that a vast proportion of us will get engrossed with CR ... you just cannot say that yet!
Like i have said before today-i am not a lemming,i have my own thoughts and opinions which i stick to and respect others,i am an individual and proud of it
I agree with you Barry Nelson
I am not saying you are a lemming Predator it is not aimed at anyone at all just a figuare of speech
Great comments Predator. Personally I am more a fan of the literary portait of Bond, and in my mind, Dalton gave me the finest interpretation. Bond is a SPY... someone who should be able to operate covertly without being noticed. Brosnan was OK as Bond, but being so tall, smooth, well groomed and goodlooking, how could he operate covertly without being noticed?
Craig, I have not seen any films he has been in, but if we want realism, I think he would be comparitive in looks to current MI6 agents operating today.
Gritty realism is the order of the day with this choice I think, I think EON have listed to the fans in the light of the CGI and dialogue fiasco in DAD.
Bring on Nov 2006.
People in the Bond fanbase, in differing degrees have their hopes, emotions and expectations invested in this new movie, that includes you, and me. Maybe you can look beyond who's playing Bond in a Bond movie with a good story, but I cannot ... And yes, as a Bond fan, I've made a choice to watch the next movie, but aren't my concerns for the central element to a Bond film, i.e., the character, apperance and all, valid?
Apologies for editing down your original post in the above quote but the posts are getting long tonight!!
I have no axe to grind with someone's perceptions, but I must stress again that we have seen nothing yet ... I know you will go to see the new Bond. And who knows, you may like and I may dislike it. Until that time, we just do not know.
And as a Bond veteran of just a couple of years less than you, I remember well when TD took over from RM. An actor as Bond ... a classically trained actor? Dear oh dear! And that chaotic press conference! And he doesn't look like Moore or Connery. He doesn't sound like them ... I only remember him being in Flash Gordon. (etc etc)
But TLD was a fresh new Bond film ... that contributed massively to the development of the franchise.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
I think of the top 3 shocking Bond candidates Craig was second to Visnjic and Cavill in 3rd. Imagine if Goran Visnjic was at that press launch instead, it would have caused even more rumblings.
1.Croatian
2.Blonde, not very handsome
3.Classic looking Bond but very young
I think maybe they chose Craig as the best actor to pull off the closest thing to Flemings CR that they can do in this day and age, and Cavill will probably end up as 007 a few films down the line when Craig turns in his licence to kill.
Hear hear! Let Henry learn to shave, he's the Bond of the future! :007)
It's DC's job to get us to that point...
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Comments
They should have picked Clive Owen!!!
There are so many comments around here in which no effort has been to back up any opinions.
I take it you have seen his screen-test then ?
Did any of the previous actors fit Fleming's Bond ?
Wasn't the role offered to Owen and he turned it down ?
Which, for any golf tourists coming to The Open next year, is about 500 yards from the Royal Liverpool Golf Club.
I was actually impressed with the way he presented himself at the press conference. As someone who thought the smart money was on Clive Owen, I now think Craig has the gravitas to pull it off. I also think the hack who asked him if he thought he was qualified to play Bond, who got a steely stare and the reply "I have lots of qualifications. None of them have anything to do with the role" is probably feeling a bit small tonight.
I hope that my comments aren't among those you speak about. In fact, I've "backed up" my main Craig concerns on the "CR is shaping up to be a good movie" thread, and I'm still waiting for your thoughtful reply.
http://www.ajb007.co.uk/tagsoup/daniel+craig/
Is that a haiku?
Just asking........................
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
And neither do I.
I posted yesterday about the vitriol being spouted about an actor. Jeez guys, have you had a chance to read what you are writing? Apart from a press conference and a photo, have you seen anything? Presumptions and assumptions.
(Incidentally, I was at St Catherine's Dock this afternoon to see DC come 'aboard' HMS President. He didn't look scared to me ... perhaps this is some much needed acting coming to the series? In fact he looked completely in control.)
All this talk of long-standing Bond fans of 25 years, 30 years ... there have been highs and lows before - and there are plenty of highs and lows to come. Bond isn't ours ... being a fan doesn't mean you are owed anything. We choose to place our faith in the character, the film, the production company, the writers and even the actor. There comes a time when you simply make a choice - are you a Bond fan who wants to see a Bond film or are you not.
It has been a long time since I cared who was Bond. Bond to me is the film, not the actor. Maybe I am lucky, maybe not. Story is the key. As has been said already, we have a middle-aged white Englishman in the role. He can act. He can do action. I can see why he was chosen.
I'm sorry, but I was impressed by DC earlier today. It certainly wasn't easy for him and must have been terrifying to be thrust into the international spotlight in the space of 5 minutes, but he still looked pretty calm and collected throughout.
To those who think him ugly: well, that's your choice. I know many who do find him attractive.
To those who think him too blond:
To those who think him unsuitable: wait and see
To those who think that because of Craig then CR will "suck": Brosnan has gone. Live with it.
I really can't believe the attitude ... we are talking about a film. One that might just be excellent, one that might erase the CGI travesty that was DAD.
I do wish Brosnan could have returned for one more, and I agree Craig doesn't look young enough to play a Young Bond. Fleming described Bond as being in his mid-30's throughout the whole series of novels. At age 37, Craig is the right age for a contemporary Bond, but you would think the producers would have found someone much younger for a "origin of Bond" film.
The bottom line with me is... I'm not hugely excited by the choice of Craig, but i am always excited to see a new actor's interpretation of this great character, and i don't want to criticise him until i see how he performs.
I'm also excited to hear that CR will return to
the more down-to-earth formula of the earlier Connery films. More plot, better characters, fewer gadgets, less comedy... hopefully leading to a grittier, more suspenseful and believable spy thriller. And hopefully never again will we ever hear a Beach Boys surf tune playing in the backgound of a ski-chase battle, utterly killing the suspense.
(Does Elliot Carver edit The Mirror?)
No, Craig was joking about being scared about his motorboat ride, it's no biggie.
But what is a biggie is the pics of him, sorry guys, but he just looked like a wimp to me on that motorboat. And, not to be a body fascist about it, but looks are sort of important, Pred.
Incidentally, would anyone out there go for a blond Superman? Why would you? Cos you can't find anyone else, I suppose.
Craig is about as welcome as an outbreak of bird flu at KFC...
And with that cheery thought, Pred, I shall turn in for the night. What are you still doing up, anyhow, watching Peeping Tom?
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Well ... they sell papers. What do you do?
As for me (and I will repeat for those who are hard of thinking) I was there and he looked pretty cool on the launch. Shame you didn't find him as reassuring ... you won't be seeing CR then?
There's no doubting the guy acting ability. Most descent centres around his looks (or lack of).
I'm counting on the fact that EON believe they can lick him into shape to make his apperance on the screen credible. Fix his hair, the right make up, black tux and PPK and who knows.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I agree Bond shouldn't be blonde, and i'm sure the special-effects crew will work wonders with a little dye and styling. As I said before, his hair looks jet black in the official press release photo.
Let's keep in mind that Connery was BALD when he made DAF and NSNA!
Then what was the sense in the change of actor? There was every opportunity for a change of tone and direction within the Bond formula, as has been proven with Roger Moore (FYEO) and Timothy Dalton (LTK).
Do you genuinely believe that Eon and Sony are not in the game of making box office returns? This whole saga has been about Eon's ego vs. Pierce Brosnan's popularity, and Eon decided enough was enough and they needed to exert some form of control and send the message that Bond is bigger than any jobbing actor that plays him.
I genuinely believe that Sony have the Bond franchise under their biggest microscope at the moment, and they will close in for the kill unless Casino Royale is spectacular DAD box-office.
Sorry, but you are ... yes, looks are important, but you must understand that not everyone agrees with you.
Nope, but I have had a long day and only got back from London an hour or so ago. You lot have had all afternoon to moan like a bunch of old fishwives ... only fair for me to have my say?
Sorry but to alot of us this isn't just another "film". It involves a character we all love,a character being played by an actor some of us just don't agree with,is that so wrong.Is AJB all about supporting the Bond franchise regardless of our opinions? In my eyes the reason some of us are bleating is because we do deeply care and don't just want a film but a Bond we can believe in,isn't that the point of a film,escapism into something we know is a fantasy and not real life but something to draw us in and believe in.
Since i was a child,probably like many others here,Bond is my hero,not just a film. Yes i love the films but to me the actor in that film makes all the difference in the world. That is my humble opinion,and yes im one of those 20-30 year followers and feel i am owed something in that without us would Bond be as big as he is?
At least all the different attitudes today have shown how passionately we all feel about Bond and thats good,isn't it?
I don't think so ... or at least this is only a contributory factor. Money is a big incentive, and PB has gone on record to say that he asked for a lot and perhaps priced himself out.
Can you really be sure what went on behind closed doors though? PB was/is a master of spin (actually since Eon called his bluff, he has looked on shakier ground) but recent events have shown that the actor is not bigger than the part. I would go so far as to say thank goodness that this is so. I like Brosnan, but I have always loved Bond.
I agree with you Barry Nelson
I am not saying you are a lemming Predator it is not aimed at anyone at all just a figuare of speech
Predator, I have been a Bond fan for 32 years. I say that because people have tried to lend credence to "where you're coming from" in this Craig debate and I guess, you've topped the validity of every other opinion since you got to see the press con in person.
People in the Bond fanbase, in differing degrees have their hopes, emotions and expectations invested in this new movie, that includes you, and me. Maybe you can look beyond who's playing Bond in a Bond movie with a good story, but I cannot, I am not like you. As much as I love the 1989 Batman movie (story, feel, art direction, etc.), I cannot overlook the miscasting of Keaton. Likewise, it means a lot to have an excellent and cleverly adapted Casino Royale and I desperately and sincerely hope it will still happen.
And yes, as a Bond fan, I've made a choice to watch the next movie, but aren't my concerns for the central element to a Bond film, i.e., the character, apperance and all, valid? Frankly, I don't care if they use a Craig or a CGI actor to portray Bond, if either could convince me that it's Bond up there, at the very least near to the same degree that Moore or Lazenby did, then I will be happy; I am a Bond fan who is easy to please, and I love all my 21 "children" (which includes NSNA).
On the blonde aspect, what's wrong with expecting a dark haired character to be portrayed by a dark-haired actor? I thought Moore was the blondest they'd go, but I was wrong, and Campbell has decided against a color change. At least, despite his hair color, Moore had enough factors going for him to convince me he's Bond, and I hope that somehow Craig will likewise have enough going for him to do the same...fair enough?
And to Blade, clamp it. Don't be such a hypocrite. I wish you took your own advice about being positive over a year ago, over Craig, Brosnan, Purvis and Wade, etc., and maybe your post count would be less than half its size.
Perhaps, but how many of those who are dismissing Craig idly have actually seen Casino Royale? Precisely.
Wait. And. See.
If it is disappointing, perhaps it will be down to Craig. Perhaps it will be P&W's original script, Campbell's directing or any number of things that can go pear-shaped with a film's production.
We have no way of possibly knowing.
Absolutely James Bond is just that. It is not Absolutely James Bond But Not If James Bond Is Played By Someone I Don't Like the Look Of. That we can get passionate and animated about the franchise is fantastic. Heck, there are those who never liked PB (stand up my feline friend!) or George Lazenby or Roger Moore or Timothy Dalton or Sean Connery.
The difference with Craig is that he is the first new Bond to come along in the "AJB era" (so bigheaded! OK, the internet era!!!). There are so many more expectations on him and the franchise because of Bond's recent history.
I don't particularly want us all to roll over and whimper "Craig is the Bond for me", but I would prefer to see a little more objectivity. It is just a film. Sorry, but it is. It is, however, a film that we all want to work, but at last count there are over 4000 different ways that the franchise could go, plus thousands more on the other Bond sites and film sites in general.
The one thing that we must remember is that without a film to judge him on yet, what is the point in criticising the decision to hire him? When there is something concrete then sure let's review that. Who's to say that a vast proportion of us will get engrossed with CR ... you just cannot say that yet!
Don't worry, Bond is my hero too ...
Edit: Didn't think that you were
Craig, I have not seen any films he has been in, but if we want realism, I think he would be comparitive in looks to current MI6 agents operating today.
Gritty realism is the order of the day with this choice I think, I think EON have listed to the fans in the light of the CGI and dialogue fiasco in DAD.
Bring on Nov 2006.
Apologies for editing down your original post in the above quote but the posts are getting long tonight!!
I have no axe to grind with someone's perceptions, but I must stress again that we have seen nothing yet ... I know you will go to see the new Bond. And who knows, you may like and I may dislike it. Until that time, we just do not know.
And as a Bond veteran of just a couple of years less than you, I remember well when TD took over from RM. An actor as Bond ... a classically trained actor? Dear oh dear! And that chaotic press conference! And he doesn't look like Moore or Connery. He doesn't sound like them ... I only remember him being in Flash Gordon. (etc etc)
But TLD was a fresh new Bond film ... that contributed massively to the development of the franchise.
Hear hear! Let Henry learn to shave, he's the Bond of the future! :007)
It's DC's job to get us to that point...
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM