Dan Same, just wondering................
Which C-word do you find the most offensive - "c**t" or "Craig"? )
Definitely 'Craig.'
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
I know Eon hired Craig as an actor rather than a spokesperson for the studio but you do get the sense that interviewing him is like pulling teeth. I'm sure Craig doesn't think Bond is beneath him but some of these interviews aren't doing him any favours. I think he should go to lunch with Roger Moore. On The Spy Who Loved Me UE there is a feature called 'Roger Moore in his own words'. In this short section Sir Roger gives an absolute masterclass in the art of answering repetitive questions from journalists with self-deprecating humour and a steady stream of jokes.
I know Eon hired Craig as an actor rather than a spokesperson for the studio but you do get the sense that interviewing him is like pulling teeth. I'm sure Craig doesn't think Bond is beneath him but some of these interviews aren't doing him any favours. I think he should go to lunch with Roger Moore. On The Spy Who Loved Me UE there is a feature called 'Roger Moore in his own words'. In this short section Sir Roger gives an absolute masterclass in the art of answering repetitive questions from journalists with self-deprecating humour and a steady stream of jokes.
I'm with you, Arthur, except that on some level I think an actor is hired to promote the goods. I'm a Craig supporter but I get awfully tired awfully fast of cranky thespians, however talented, who can't deal with the price of movie stardom (in Craig's case, it's apparently eight million pounds, which ain't a bad payday for three flicks). If they think answering nonsensical, repetitive questions is a bitch, they should try our jobs. I'm not saying Craig is there yet -- he has been engaging in several things I've read -- but I'd lighten up a bit if I were him. Enjoy the ride, as Brosnan once told him. He'll never be this "hot" again.
I'm always reminded of a comment I once read by Dustin Hoffman, who to my knowledge has always been gracious with the media and fame in general: He said it can be annoying being recognized all the time, but sometimes when he's not he feels like he should skip down the street whistling "Mrs. Robinson."
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
This thread reminds me of a grammer teacher's name I had trouble remembering...what it "Miss Prussy" or was it, "Miss Crunt?"
"...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.....
Although I have tried, I have never seen the ending of Tomb Rider. I find the film so boring that I think I fell asleep before the ending. Anyway, my point is, doesn't Craig die at the end? If so, why would he have signed a multi-film contract knowing his character wouldn't be in any sequels?
You are right and you are wrong. Yes Daniel Craig's character Alex West dies . . . -ish. Powell throws a knife at his chest, he falls into the pool with the solar system machine and gets ground up. However, Lara Croft captures the magic triangle and reverses time to save him from dying. She then destroys the artifact and beats Powell to death to keep such occurrences from happening again.
*edit* My sister was livid that Craig wasn't in the sequel.
I know Eon hired Craig as an actor rather than a spokesperson for the studio but you do get the sense that interviewing him is like pulling teeth. I'm sure Craig doesn't think Bond is beneath him but some of these interviews aren't doing him any favours. I think he should go to lunch with Roger Moore. On The Spy Who Loved Me UE there is a feature called 'Roger Moore in his own words'. In this short section Sir Roger gives an absolute masterclass in the art of answering repetitive questions from journalists with self-deprecating humour and a steady stream of jokes.
I'm with you, Arthur, except that on some level I think an actor is hired to promote the goods. I'm a Craig supporter but I get awfully tired awfully fast of cranky thespians, however talented, who can't deal with the price of movie stardom (in Craig's case, it's apparently eight million pounds, which ain't a bad payday for three flicks). If they think answering nonsensical, repetitive questions is a bitch, they should try our jobs. I'm not saying Craig is there yet -- he has been engaging in several things I've read -- but I'd lighten up a bit if I were him. Enjoy the ride, as Brosnan once told him. He'll never be this "hot" again.
I'm always reminded of a comment I once read by Dustin Hoffman, who to my knowledge has always been gracious with the media and fame in general: He said it can be annoying being recognized all the time, but sometimes when he's not he feels like he should skip down the street whistling "Mrs. Robinson."
Full agreement,gentlemen.There's really no need for an actor to engage in profanity or coarse language while promoting one of his motion pictures.First impressions always count,regardless of the amount of critical praise or support from his producers an actor might enjoy--this includes Craig.
James Bonds will come and go--what a shame if one of the reasons Craig becomes famous is as the one 007 who could not conduct himself politely during his interviews.
Depends on how it's used, IMO: dropping the odd 4-letter word as descriptive of something or other, or as an expletive, oh well that's what most of us do, just human nature these days. Used as an attack, that's verbal abuse and a form of violence. Big difference.
I recognize that some don't like profanity in any form, I guess for me I don't mind all that much if it's not abusive. Indeed, some of the best laughs I've had at the movies and in life involved "dirty" words...just depends how it's used. "Nice" words can be more hurtful, if used that way...intent is everything, IMO.
I just saw an interview with Toby Jones who plays Capote in the movie "Infamous", which Craig is also in. He was asked if he was intimidated having these intense scenes with James Bond! Toby just laughed and said that this was done before he did Bond, and he just might be now. Hmmm...I guess Pierce was right about his advice!
Then I was reading this article about "Infamous" and the transformations of the actors.
Here's the part I found amusing:
"McGrath and his studio, Warner Independent Pictures, took a somewhat different tack in casting dashing, blond-haired British actor Daniel Craig, the latest inheritor of the James Bond mantle, as the murderer Perry Smith. Mr. Craig’s fair skin, liquid blue eyes and six-foot frame were liabilities, as he attempted to portray a squat, dark-haired killer bearing much closer resemblance to the actor Robert Blake, who played him in the 1967 film version of “In Cold Blood.”
“The first thing we had to do was change his eyes,” Mr. McGrath said. With dark contact lenses, hair dye and a pronounced limp, Mr. Craig submerged his good looks almost as completely as Ms. Kidman’s Virginia Woolf."
Submerged his good looks? ) Wow! Well, that could be your Oscar performance Danny, it worked for Nicole! It's funny he went dark haired for this film and not Bond, but having seen him darkened up, I'm actually glad he stayed blonde.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Ah well. Poor Danny needs all the help he can get. He should be careful, though---paying off feature writers during a press junket can get expensive B-)
You're right about the hair. Craig doesn't look right with dark hair, IMRO. Too much contrast with his skin tone. Better, I guess, to give him a sunburn and go with it...
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
He should be careful, though---paying off feature writers during a press junket can get expensive. B-)
Yeah, I bet he wouldn't call this guy a c***! )
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited October 2006
Hell, no ) He's a conspirator :v
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
I could be wrong but do you think Craig's relaxed use of language could be designed to make him appeal to the younger generation?
I'm not suggesting that he has been told to swear, just that the producers haven't discouraged him from being surly and vulgar (as I'm sure they would if they felt it was harming the movie).
Lets face it, they know they're going to get alot of 30 somethings along to a new Bond film, their big concern is keeping the kids interested.
I think it was why he was cast in the first place, to bring in the younger hip crowd. JMHO.
Please tell me you're not describing Craig as hip?
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
I think it was why he was cast in the first place, to bring in the younger hip crowd. JMHO.
Please tell me you're not describing Craig as hip?
Well hip is possibly not the right expression, but there is certainly a body of younger viewers who will love his rebellious 'I don't give a Sh**' attitude' and sweary nature. (unless teenagers have changed alot since I was one! 8-) )
I think it was why he was cast in the first place, to bring in the younger hip crowd. JMHO.
Please tell me you're not describing Craig as hip?
Well hip is possibly not the right expression, but there is certainly a body of younger viewers who will love his rebellious 'I don't give a Sh**' attitude' and sweary nature. (unless teenagers have changed alot since I was one! 8-) )
You might have something there. As controlling as Eon has been, I wouldn't be surprised if they made a conscious decision to let the swearing go. They must have insisted he keep it clean for TV, though, 'cause he's always on his best behavior there. I've never heard him bleeped.
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
I think it was why he was cast in the first place, to bring in the younger hip crowd. JMHO.
I can see this being true and if it is, what an irony when looking back to Lazenby. The younger, "hip" crowd now, is a cyclical reflection of the younger, "hip," and IMO, genuinely edgier crowd of 1969. Judging by his comments on the eventual demise of Bond with the advent of "Easy Rider," his preference for Blood, Sweat and Tears to do the Bond theme (which kind of happened with LALD), and the defiant sporting of a beard at the OHMSS Premier, Lazenby seemed to personally embrace the trappings of that generation, vs. the more refined sensiblities that the producers were trying to maintain at that time. So, if EON is indeed making a paradigm shift in trying to capture the X-factor of today's culture, some may view EON as finally catching up with the times; on the other hand, others might see this as selling out (which is by no means new to EON).
"...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.....
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
edited October 2006
That may be the case now, Ben, under Mike and Bab's helm, but it seemed that back in the day, with a sense of obligation to their audiences, Cubby and Harry micro-managed every aspect of production and promotion to a "t," and I think that the series in large part benefitted from the execution of their singular vision, most significantly in longevity and the position it holds in the industry today.
"...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.....
OK -- this is a bit off-topic, but please bear with me, Mods. Given all the discussion about Craig's language, I thought you'd all get a kick out of this, courtesy of Mad TV. It's what "The Sopranos" would look like if it was shown on Pax TV, a religious cable channel here in the States.
Why collide with the press, ben? I think kinda the opposite: Craig is actually interesting in an interview, don't see how cantakerous is a negative when it comes to speaking to the press, they love that ****. There's quite a long tradition of media-hating stars being successful, although I don't see Craig as that at all. He's more of a character, and pretty wry about it. I think it'll give interviewers someplace to go.
Anyway, I can also see where it's plain old personal preference, for me I like a bit of laid back oh-what-the-hell attitude, not hearing much more than that currently. I think what'll hurt Craig/EON the most is if CR bombs or does only so-so box office, then the media will circle like sharks...as they always do. Right now they seem to be in neutral, content to wait till the masses speak. If CR hits, all the obvious differences will be labeled genius; it it bombs those same differences will get roasted. Craig is the biggest difference, he'll get the brightest spotlight--and cheers/jeers, depending--after CR opens. I think what I like most right now is, he's just being himself, not overdoing it, he thinks he's got a winner but knows you gotta wait till the receipts come in...it doesn't seem his life is hinging on the outcome. He thinks he did a good job and he's proud of it, and he comes off as very approachable about it, IMO.
With all the attention he's been getting and will continue to get, he seems to be handling it fine. IMHO.
It's interesting how people are talking about how lousy Craig is at interviews and that he's potentially hurting Bond just because he uses four-letter words. I think that the most profanity-laden interviewee has to be Colin Farrell--I'm trying to remember the last time I saw him interviewed that there weren't multiple bleeps on the soundtrack--yet he's generally considered charming, women love him, and people still go to see his movies. I think too much is being made of Craig's potty mouth.
It seems to be the vogue among some actors to present themselves with some "edge". Colin Farrell does come to mind, and he's the worse when it comes to profanity. Then there's Russell Crowe who is prone to violent antics. Daniel is quite tame compared to these guys. What's strange is, Daniel was better at some recent interviews but now, with this article, it's like he's back to being the awkward Daniel Craig at last October's press conference--uncomfortable and lacking media-savy skills. Eon really needs to prep him for these interviews. First impressions are important, and for an actor who's selling himself as Bond, especially for the first time, he really needs to come across as "Bond" in these interviews, or at least show that outside of the role he still has some of that Bondian magic. To me, the disturbing thing about this article is when the interviewer felt that Daniel looks more like "one of 007’s dull-eyed enemies than Bond himself." If that impression continues with the rest of the media and catches on with the public, it's game over for CR.
It's interesting how people are talking about how lousy Craig is at interviews and that he's potentially hurting Bond just because he uses four-letter words. I think that the most profanity-laden interviewee has to be Colin Farrell--I'm trying to remember the last time I saw him interviewed that there weren't multiple bleeps on the soundtrack--yet he's generally considered charming, women love him, and people still go to see his movies. I think too much is being made of Craig's potty mouth.
Really? Most people and women I know think Farrell's a pig though there are those that find him charming because of his larger than life personality. (as for how many people actually go see his films -- as an IT boy he's actually been a bit of a hard sell.)
Craig's swearing which might be an issue for some (and yes it's no where near Farrell levels) though I think it's the least of his problems as an interview subject. Craig isn't charming in his interviews and definitely isn't larger than life. He's not some fun outrageous raconteur bad boy -- he's a polite guarded interview subject at his best and a grumbling sourpuss at his worst.
The fact is most actors hate to be interviewed, especially on junkets where they're back to back to back, even most of those that do it well hate it. But they put on the smile and pull out the charm to the best of their ability and do their job and they know it's also part of the reporter's job so why be an ass about it? Reading Craig being interviewed here is akin to watching someone pull teeth.
As for the idea that they want Craig to be "hip" ergo the surliness and swearing -- yeah an interview with The Times -- that's one "hip" readership. )
yeah an interview with The Times -- that's one "hip" readership. )
Have you read it recently, then?
Are we still talking about swearing? How dull. I thought of this today, actually; the new Dr Who ag has an interview with David Tennant in which they print his use of the word 'w*****s' And to think it's for kids...
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
It's interesting how people are talking about how lousy Craig is at interviews and that he's potentially hurting Bond just because he uses four-letter words. I think that the most profanity-laden interviewee has to be Colin Farrell--I'm trying to remember the last time I saw him interviewed that there weren't multiple bleeps on the soundtrack--yet he's generally considered charming, women love him, and people still go to see his movies. I think too much is being made of Craig's potty mouth.
As a personality, I dislike Farrell enough to not bother reading/watching any of his interviews (though I will watch his movies if they seem interesting), which is not how I feel about Craig, who I actually like. As an aside, though I don't like it, I am intrigued by the fact that Craig is the resident Bond, as well as the fan boy nuances (which I suppose makes me one) about current events in production.
"...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.....
go back to the source, you will find "Bond mutters an expletive" every other page
if Craig is to BE the new Bond, then cussing in public is authentic, like when Darryl Hannah was demonstrating her kung fu stylings outtside the Kill Bill premiere
Bond the character would resent having to do PR sessions for the press too, and would be muttering expletives as the reporters pummeled him with mindless questions
if you choose to believe James Bond is this suave debonaire dude who looks good in a tux, perhaps it makes sense to consider that this is a role James Bond plays because he is a spy and as part of his job has to be able to confidentally infiltrate the upper eschelons of respectable society
this persona would be a skill he learns as his career progresses, not his true self, and in his Origin Story we should be seeing the raw, real Bond before he learns the skills (filling out the tux, remembering not to mutter an expletive, etc etc) he needs to save the world
I can see this being true and if it is, what an irony when looking back to Lazenby. The younger, "hip" crowd now, is a cyclical reflection of the younger, "hip," and IMO, genuinely edgier crowd of 1969. Judging by his comments on the eventual demise of Bond with the advent of "Easy Rider," his preference for Blood, Sweat and Tears to do the Bond theme (which kind of happened with LALD), and the defiant sporting of a beard at the OHMSS Premier, Lazenby seemed to personally embrace the trappings of that generation, vs. the more refined sensiblities that the producers were trying to maintain at that time. So, if EON is indeed making a paradigm shift in trying to capture the X-factor of today's culture, some may view EON as finally catching up with the times; on the other hand, others might see this as selling out (which is by no means new to EON).
But isn't turning up to your star appearance as tidy-haired, suited servant of the crown James Bond in a beard a little too little too late? I mean, he publically made loads of cash in a silly pop culture film playing a civil servant. It's called 'On Her Majesy's Secret Service' ! Not exactly the Sex Pistols' 'God Save the Queen': he'd sold out before he even started.
But I will say this: Craig is going to collide with the press over and over and it's going to escalate over the next two movies (if he makes it to #3). We can keep making excuses for him, but the fact is it IS part of his job and if he does battle with the press, he WILL lose. Watch this space.
Haha! 'Fact'! If he turns out not to be very interesting, then they'll get bored of him. And that's about it. There's plenty more to write about with Bond films and it's hardly like he's refusing to do interviews. I don't remember Dalton ever lighting up the printed page, polite though he was, and we got through that okay. Craig has one iffy one in amoungst a load of very servicable ones in which he talks about the film very well and apparently he 'IS going to lose'!
I don't remember Dalton ever lighting up the printed page, polite though he was, and we got through that okay. Craig has one iffy one in amoungst a load of very servicable ones in which he talks about the film very well and apparently he 'IS going to lose'!
Dalton, to my rememberance, always had something interesting to say. He may not have liked doing an 'interview' but he certainly seemed capable of having an intelligent conversation...even if he didn't care for the topic.
To me it's not a matter of 'does he swear like Bond' or 'does he not come off as Bond'. That's silly to me. It's a CRAIG interview, and the point of an interview is to convey something about the subject to the audience. I have yet to learn ANYTHING from an interviw with Craig that makes me want to A)know more about him or hear what he thinks/feels about a particular topic or want to see him perform his craft on film/stage. I don't blame Craig for disliking interviews, I don't blame Craig for having a potty-mouth, but I do blame Craig for wasting his time, the interviewer's time, and my time on subjecting us to such bland journalistic fare.
Are we still talking about swearing? How dull. I thought of this today, actually; the new Dr Who ag has an interview with David Tennant in which they print his use of the word 'w*****s' And to think it's for kids...
You know what's dull em? Your tedious attempts at subtle sarcasm. I don't like the way you make it your personal agenda to make non Craig fans feel somehow put in their place by your jabs. I'm sure your dig didn't faze MBE in the least, but as someone who respects her opinion, it did me.
So in the words of your sailor swearing hero, **** off.
Comments
What if DC said "crap" and the Times was just being very censoriffic?
Dan Same, just wondering................
Which C-word do you find the most offensive - "c**t" or "Craig"?
I'm with you, Arthur, except that on some level I think an actor is hired to promote the goods. I'm a Craig supporter but I get awfully tired awfully fast of cranky thespians, however talented, who can't deal with the price of movie stardom (in Craig's case, it's apparently eight million pounds, which ain't a bad payday for three flicks). If they think answering nonsensical, repetitive questions is a bitch, they should try our jobs. I'm not saying Craig is there yet -- he has been engaging in several things I've read -- but I'd lighten up a bit if I were him. Enjoy the ride, as Brosnan once told him. He'll never be this "hot" again.
I'm always reminded of a comment I once read by Dustin Hoffman, who to my knowledge has always been gracious with the media and fame in general: He said it can be annoying being recognized all the time, but sometimes when he's not he feels like he should skip down the street whistling "Mrs. Robinson."
You are right and you are wrong. Yes Daniel Craig's character Alex West dies . . . -ish. Powell throws a knife at his chest, he falls into the pool with the solar system machine and gets ground up. However, Lara Croft captures the magic triangle and reverses time to save him from dying. She then destroys the artifact and beats Powell to death to keep such occurrences from happening again.
*edit* My sister was livid that Craig wasn't in the sequel.
Full agreement,gentlemen.There's really no need for an actor to engage in profanity or coarse language while promoting one of his motion pictures.First impressions always count,regardless of the amount of critical praise or support from his producers an actor might enjoy--this includes Craig.
James Bonds will come and go--what a shame if one of the reasons Craig becomes famous is as the one 007 who could not conduct himself politely during his interviews.
I recognize that some don't like profanity in any form, I guess for me I don't mind all that much if it's not abusive. Indeed, some of the best laughs I've had at the movies and in life involved "dirty" words...just depends how it's used. "Nice" words can be more hurtful, if used that way...intent is everything, IMO.
Then I was reading this article about "Infamous" and the transformations of the actors.
Here's the part I found amusing:
"McGrath and his studio, Warner Independent Pictures, took a somewhat different tack in casting dashing, blond-haired British actor Daniel Craig, the latest inheritor of the James Bond mantle, as the murderer Perry Smith. Mr. Craig’s fair skin, liquid blue eyes and six-foot frame were liabilities, as he attempted to portray a squat, dark-haired killer bearing much closer resemblance to the actor Robert Blake, who played him in the 1967 film version of “In Cold Blood.”
“The first thing we had to do was change his eyes,” Mr. McGrath said. With dark contact lenses, hair dye and a pronounced limp, Mr. Craig submerged his good looks almost as completely as Ms. Kidman’s Virginia Woolf."
Submerged his good looks?
Fascinating indeed.
Ah well. Poor Danny needs all the help he can get. He should be careful, though---paying off feature writers during a press junket can get expensive B-)
You're right about the hair. Craig doesn't look right with dark hair, IMRO. Too much contrast with his skin tone. Better, I guess, to give him a sunburn and go with it...
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Yeah, I bet he wouldn't call this guy a c***!
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I'm not suggesting that he has been told to swear, just that the producers haven't discouraged him from being surly and vulgar (as I'm sure they would if they felt it was harming the movie).
Lets face it, they know they're going to get alot of 30 somethings along to a new Bond film, their big concern is keeping the kids interested.
Well hip is possibly not the right expression, but there is certainly a body of younger viewers who will love his rebellious 'I don't give a Sh**' attitude' and sweary nature. (unless teenagers have changed alot since I was one! 8-) )
You might have something there. As controlling as Eon has been, I wouldn't be surprised if they made a conscious decision to let the swearing go. They must have insisted he keep it clean for TV, though, 'cause he's always on his best behavior there. I've never heard him bleeped.
I can see this being true and if it is, what an irony when looking back to Lazenby. The younger, "hip" crowd now, is a cyclical reflection of the younger, "hip," and IMO, genuinely edgier crowd of 1969. Judging by his comments on the eventual demise of Bond with the advent of "Easy Rider," his preference for Blood, Sweat and Tears to do the Bond theme (which kind of happened with LALD), and the defiant sporting of a beard at the OHMSS Premier, Lazenby seemed to personally embrace the trappings of that generation, vs. the more refined sensiblities that the producers were trying to maintain at that time. So, if EON is indeed making a paradigm shift in trying to capture the X-factor of today's culture, some may view EON as finally catching up with the times; on the other hand, others might see this as selling out (which is by no means new to EON).
http://www.stupidvideos.com/video/just_plain_stupid/Sopranos_Parody/
Anyway, I can also see where it's plain old personal preference, for me I like a bit of laid back oh-what-the-hell attitude, not hearing much more than that currently. I think what'll hurt Craig/EON the most is if CR bombs or does only so-so box office, then the media will circle like sharks...as they always do. Right now they seem to be in neutral, content to wait till the masses speak. If CR hits, all the obvious differences will be labeled genius; it it bombs those same differences will get roasted. Craig is the biggest difference, he'll get the brightest spotlight--and cheers/jeers, depending--after CR opens. I think what I like most right now is, he's just being himself, not overdoing it, he thinks he's got a winner but knows you gotta wait till the receipts come in...it doesn't seem his life is hinging on the outcome. He thinks he did a good job and he's proud of it, and he comes off as very approachable about it, IMO.
With all the attention he's been getting and will continue to get, he seems to be handling it fine. IMHO.
Really? Most people and women I know think Farrell's a pig though there are those that find him charming because of his larger than life personality. (as for how many people actually go see his films -- as an IT boy he's actually been a bit of a hard sell.)
Craig's swearing which might be an issue for some (and yes it's no where near Farrell levels) though I think it's the least of his problems as an interview subject. Craig isn't charming in his interviews and definitely isn't larger than life. He's not some fun outrageous raconteur bad boy -- he's a polite guarded interview subject at his best and a grumbling sourpuss at his worst.
The fact is most actors hate to be interviewed, especially on junkets where they're back to back to back, even most of those that do it well hate it. But they put on the smile and pull out the charm to the best of their ability and do their job and they know it's also part of the reporter's job so why be an ass about it? Reading Craig being interviewed here is akin to watching someone pull teeth.
As for the idea that they want Craig to be "hip" ergo the surliness and swearing -- yeah an interview with The Times -- that's one "hip" readership.
MBE
Have you read it recently, then?
Are we still talking about swearing? How dull. I thought of this today, actually; the new Dr Who ag has an interview with David Tennant in which they print his use of the word 'w*****s'
As a personality, I dislike Farrell enough to not bother reading/watching any of his interviews (though I will watch his movies if they seem interesting), which is not how I feel about Craig, who I actually like. As an aside, though I don't like it, I am intrigued by the fact that Craig is the resident Bond, as well as the fan boy nuances (which I suppose makes me one) about current events in production.
if Craig is to BE the new Bond, then cussing in public is authentic, like when Darryl Hannah was demonstrating her kung fu stylings outtside the Kill Bill premiere
Bond the character would resent having to do PR sessions for the press too, and would be muttering expletives as the reporters pummeled him with mindless questions
if you choose to believe James Bond is this suave debonaire dude who looks good in a tux, perhaps it makes sense to consider that this is a role James Bond plays because he is a spy and as part of his job has to be able to confidentally infiltrate the upper eschelons of respectable society
this persona would be a skill he learns as his career progresses, not his true self, and in his Origin Story we should be seeing the raw, real Bond before he learns the skills (filling out the tux, remembering not to mutter an expletive, etc etc) he needs to save the world
But isn't turning up to your star appearance as tidy-haired, suited servant of the crown James Bond in a beard a little too little too late? I mean, he publically made loads of cash in a silly pop culture film playing a civil servant. It's called 'On Her Majesy's Secret Service' ! Not exactly the Sex Pistols' 'God Save the Queen': he'd sold out before he even started.
Haha! 'Fact'!
Dalton, to my rememberance, always had something interesting to say. He may not have liked doing an 'interview' but he certainly seemed capable of having an intelligent conversation...even if he didn't care for the topic.
To me it's not a matter of 'does he swear like Bond' or 'does he not come off as Bond'. That's silly to me. It's a CRAIG interview, and the point of an interview is to convey something about the subject to the audience. I have yet to learn ANYTHING from an interviw with Craig that makes me want to A)know more about him or hear what he thinks/feels about a particular topic or
You know what's dull em? Your tedious attempts at subtle sarcasm. I don't like the way you make it your personal agenda to make non Craig fans feel somehow put in their place by your jabs. I'm sure your dig didn't faze MBE in the least, but as someone who respects her opinion, it did me.
So in the words of your sailor swearing hero, **** off.