Daniel Craig is James Bond - One year on
i expect u2 die
LondonPosts: 583MI6 Agent
One year ago today (Oct 14th 2005), Daniel Craig was announced as the new James Bond 007.
Debates were heated, and opinions were divided - the atmosphere on AJB was certainly very intense as people fought to make their voice heard.
I think it would be really interesting to use this thread to compare your feelings back then with your feelings now.
I wasn't sure about Craig back then. He certainly didn't seem the best looking actor, and I always had the impression of him being a 'thug'. That was, luckily, later disproved when I watched Layer Cake and found that his character was much suaver than I thought. But when the first promo picture of Craig was released, I was almost immediately converted - he looked great.
Over the course of the last 12 months, so much material and information has been released which has converted me into one of the strongest Craig supporters around. I could even say that I fell in love with the production of Casino Royale, every new image, video clip, piece of news, increased my excitement that little bit more. Casino Royale was going to be a bold film, and thats just what the Bond series needed.
One of the things that I like the most about Craig is his dedication to the job. He has clearly put a lot of effort into this film and has had to battle so much opposition.
So now, one year later, I am 100% in support of Craig as Bond and can hardly wait until Nov 16th.
Debates were heated, and opinions were divided - the atmosphere on AJB was certainly very intense as people fought to make their voice heard.
I think it would be really interesting to use this thread to compare your feelings back then with your feelings now.
I wasn't sure about Craig back then. He certainly didn't seem the best looking actor, and I always had the impression of him being a 'thug'. That was, luckily, later disproved when I watched Layer Cake and found that his character was much suaver than I thought. But when the first promo picture of Craig was released, I was almost immediately converted - he looked great.
Over the course of the last 12 months, so much material and information has been released which has converted me into one of the strongest Craig supporters around. I could even say that I fell in love with the production of Casino Royale, every new image, video clip, piece of news, increased my excitement that little bit more. Casino Royale was going to be a bold film, and thats just what the Bond series needed.
One of the things that I like the most about Craig is his dedication to the job. He has clearly put a lot of effort into this film and has had to battle so much opposition.
So now, one year later, I am 100% in support of Craig as Bond and can hardly wait until Nov 16th.
Comments
I have to say that I think Eon and Sony have done a pretty good job on the marketing front. They have built the anticipation well with the regular release of promo videas, posters, interviews etc. Also a lot of the credit must go to the many Bond fans who have spent hours surfing the web for hidden jems about Casino Royale and kindly posting them here. A pat on the back one and all.
I too can't wait for the release of the film and I think we may have one of the best Bond films waiting for us come Nov 16.
But I knew he was a very good actor and I was willing to give him a chance. I found I liked his Bond better for each picture and trailer I saw .... just the way that he walks reminds me of a young Connery! Now I actually have hope that CR will be the best Bond movie since the early sixties.
I know I can still be disapointed, but I don't think so.
1. Brosnan should have done one more without the 2 year delay and shoddy treatment
2. Eon made an embarrasing mess of replacing Brosnan, none of this was his fault, but the surrounding press and PR for 18-months was a shambles, and they did nothing to help Daniel Craig prepare for replacing a very popular predecessor, quite the opposite.
3. Daniel Craig needs to learn to embrace the role and it's trappings, positive and negative. He's trying too hard to play it like a jobbing actor. Cynicism aside (i.e. that's all Eon want from a James Bond actor), the role demands and deserves much more respect than that.
The only thing I will give at this point is the the trailer looks very like a good movie that I really want to see, but that speaks more to my taste in movies, rather than being James-Bond specific.
My fear is still that I will see a good, well-made, well-written, and well-acted thriller movie, but it will not be a JaesBond movie in the context of what I have come to expect and love about the Bond films.
The promo shot looked good, though, and I decided to watch Layer Cake to see what this Craig guy was all about. I loved it, and have been a huge Craig fan ever since.
At this point I'm looking forward to the film, not really sure what to expect. The buzz is promising though, seems the script, cast, and direction have come together well. Guess we'll find out in a month. I like the idea that EON is finally doing something a bit different with Bond, it's been long overdue IMO, but as usual I'm nervous about the follow-through. Learned behavior.
Then they picked Craig. I probably would have turned thumbs down on him like a lot of people, but I remembered him playing Ted Hughes in "Sylvia" with dark hair. Ironically, I had him pegged as pretty much the standard-issue Bond when he was first announced. Then the **** hit the fan. A blond Bond did seem strange.
But I also remembered other instances of oddball casting that turned out to be brilliant: John Malkovich in "Dangerous Liaisons," for instance. Ugly as a hedge fence, but just reeking of the kind of oily, sleazy sexuality the part of the Chevalier required. By comparison, Colin Firth, an otherwise terrific actor and certainly a looker, seemed like someone's kid brother by comparison when he played the same character in "Valmont." Connery himself as Bond, who was far rougher than anything Fleming had envisioned.
So I started checking out various Bond fan blogs for the first time, and jumped into the AJB fray. By that time I had educated myself about the CR approach and Eon's promise of a more -- OK, I'll say it -- "grittier" Bond that would be more rooted in reality and harken back to the old days of DN and especially FRWL and the novels. That really got me excited, and the atypical casting of Craig started to make sense and I started to look at him and his "look" as a key component to the break with the past. No more cartoonish Bonds. Then all the stuff came out about how Craig was afraid of guns, couldn't drive, was unattractive etc ... Then I saw "Layer Cake," where he seemed to have no trouble killing people, romancing Sienna Miller, driving, being ffunny, etc ...
And everything I've seen about Craig and the film so far I've liked, right down the "armor" line in the trailer. I'm ready for a more emotionally involving Bond and Bond movie, a tougher more serious Bond, a Bond that bleeds and feels pain, a more real Bond.
I am too. It could all turn out to be a disappointment. But I don't think so. I don't expect -- or want -- it to be "GoodFellas" or "Citizen Kane," but I do believe it will be different enough to be interesting, which in and of itself ought to make it one of the best Bond flicks. Different, of course, is the dividing line between the pro- and anti-Craig/CRerss. Some people are more traditionalists than others and will hate it. I say we've beaten the traditions to death, let's mess with them a bit, to make it interesting. The bigger question for me is: Are these differences sustainable, or, once we've "introduced" this new Bond and delved into his various quirks, will the series slip back into a comfortable, albeit different, formula?
I still don't understand why they couldn't have cast Gerard Butler and still made the exact film they've just completed. I know some fans and Eon themselves want a tougher Bond and a more serious film (I'm completely open to that myself) but why they had to cast such an unconventional Bond is beyond me. I'm sure Butler or Alex O'Lachlan wouldn't have camped it up and walked around like a wooden shaving-gel model.
I'm more interested in the film than Craig, if that makes any sense. I want to see how much Eon have delivered.
Wrinkles and all, he appears like he's lived his years and not like an unblemished suburban teenager who just got older. In this sense, he seems very much like the character Fleming created . . . alas, even without the dark hair.
I am SO bored with the standard bland type that is touted as a "leading man" today. Craig certainly isn't the leading man of old, but he's closer in the sense that he has a combination of handsomeness and a worldly look about him. I suspect that's exactly what EON was going for, and I applaud the desire to shake things up (or, perhaps, return things to what they once were).
After a couple of decades of nauseating Tom Cruise clones, JCPenney catalog models, pop star knockoffs, and, yikes, Tom Hanks, I'm glad we're finally seeing something different. But mark my words, as I said months ago and will say again, if "Casino Royale" becomes a big hit, you will see Craig clones popping up in films, and a lot more "pretty boys" trying to toughen themselves up.
Babs & Mickey in their infinite wisdom decided that a major shake up was required, which in my opinion was not necessary. A few tweaks certainly were required here and there yes, but a re-boot with Daniel Craig as Bond? That certainly was a shock to the system. Naturally, I felt rather flat when it was all announced, but at no time have I dismissed Craig or the re-boot completely out of hand. I believe in the benefit of the doubt, innocent until proven guilty and all that.
I have definitely warmed to Craig in the last year, as a man and as an actor. However, his unconventional looks (regarding Bond) still remain an obstacle for me. Looking at the full trailer for CR there are some shots where he looks more like a middleweight boxer than Bond. Having said that, there are other shots where he looks quite cool and it doesn't require a huge leap of faith to believe he is Bond.
The re-boot also remains an obstacle for me. I know that continuity has far from being adhered to in the previous twenty films, but the boat's really been pushed out with an unconventional looking 38 year old rookie Bond along with Judi Dench as M.
I guess the bottom line is that the more I like Casino Royale the more I will be inclined to dismiss the continuity issues from my mind. However, the less I like CR the less I will be inclined to dismiss the continuity issues from my mind.
Yes, I believe in the benefit of the doubt, so I will be going to see CR at the cinema (with my brother who is a big Craig fan and believes he will be a great Bond). And I am looking forward to it.
Pretty OT I know, but you've made me think of a discussion point around here: on the subject of 'Dench as M- is it the same character?'; here's a little pointer: as well as her new 'vampier' dress sense, M has a new office in this film:
http://www.jamesbond-fr.com/news/data/upimages/casinoroyale_bureaum-2.jpg
http://www.jamesbond-fr.com/news/data/upimages/casinoroyale_bureaum-1.jpg
Different office, timeline, genitals. But she is the same "M" character we've seen in in the previous 20 movies. Trying to turn the James Bond movies into a serial is a waste of time IMHO, and at any rate, CR has turned that whole proposition on its head.
Actually, the rookie spy thing (and Craig´s hairsyle) reminds me of the Jason Bourne movies a lot.
Long time, no see {[]
I was never opposed to Craig, since the choice seemed so unlikely to me...therefore, I was surprised by his selection. However, I've always had a 'gut' feeling he could do it. Subsequent things (the script, behind-the scenes reports and trailers) have buttressed my optimism.
I'm expecting great things from CR, so my disappointment threshhold might be lower than those entering the cinema with an anti-Craig inclination---in a pre-disappointed state, if you will
Either way, I applaud the Craig move ex post facto, and have high hopes for the New Era.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Thank you, Loeffelholz. It's good to be back and it's good to see that you are still around.
Now okay the shock has worn off, I like the trailer, but sometimes it just hits me. Sometimes Craig looks pug-ugly and unphotogenic. Perhaps, as with like Helem Mirren in The Queen, maybe we're in for a great peformance that will capture the character's essence without looking much like him/her.
On top of that, those enticing elements to lure you in - a great theme song and poster - are totally missing. Craig looks awful in the poster outside Leicester Square. In fact, sadly, it's the exact same colour scheme as Clive Owen's Children of God film, only Owen's face is framed in a kind of circular gunbarrel type thing... you'd think that was the Bond poster, though not sure Owen is really young enough...
The CR poster is very dreary indeed. The rest, we'll see, but I'm not overly tempted. And looking through that Art of Bond book, it's sort of obvious that Craig is the ugly Bond. Yes yes I know how it sounds, but the other blokes were easy on the eye. It's like The Beatles - love their songs, but if they'd looked like The Magic Numbers it just wouldn't be the same...
Another twist is how we keep hearing stuff like "Women vouchsafe that Craig is the business when it comes to sex appeal..." see The Word this month. Come on... you don't hear stuff like "Apparently women say that Connery in GF is hot stuff, or Elvis circa 68 made their pants moist..." You just know in those cases.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
A year ago I watched Clive Owen for the first time in Croupier and thought he would be a perfect Bond. Then I read an article in The Sun stating it was a toss-up between Owen and this blonde guy who I'd never heard of - Daniel Craig. I thought to myself `Naaa! Not him. He's blonde for starters!'
Then I watched Layer Cake to see what this guy was like. I was quite impressed, but thought EON would never go with him.
When it was initially announced, and I watched the press conference, I wasn't particularly thrilled, especially when he said he wouldn't dye his hair dark.
But since then I began gradually warming to the idea, and after watching him in Munich, and seeing the various photos/clips/trailers circulating the web, I ended up doing a complete 360%. Now I am completely sold on the idea of him as Bond.
I just hope that EON deliver, and that I do not come out disappointed. I have never been so down after watching DAD and I hope that never happens again.
I think you meant a 180 ...;) And I'm with you. I think he'll be terrific. For me anyway, he seems to have "it" as Bond, whatever "it" is. But I still have to see the film to be 100 percent sure.
Is anybody else having a Last Action Hero flashback?
I think the blonde thing is a bit overplayed. That is the least of Craig's problems for me.
Please explain, Night. Arnold may be my governor, but I've never been a big fan of his movies (although I gather I'm not the only one who hasn't seen "Action Hero