Does anybody still have doubts over Daniel Craig being goodlooking enough for Bond?
mooreisbest
Posts: 49MI6 Agent
Obviously he has the fittest body than any of the other Bonds but does anybody still think he is not handsome enough? Just reminded me today when I was watching A View to a Kill and noticed that Roger Moore in his white tux looked more handsome at his grand old age of 103 than Daniel does at any one time (even though he is an amazing Bond and Casino Royale was fab!) But as Jonathan Ross said, he does look like a handsome Sid James...a back handed compliment if ever there was one
Comments
And I think you may need a trip to your occulist very soon
That, and the fact that I like the screenplay, make me happy.
Seriously, Roger Moore at 58 better looking then Danny at 39?
Yeah! Right!
Lookswise, I'd have to agree that ol'Rog looked a darn sight better than Danny at a similar age, and still managed to knock spots off him when 20 years older.
And I haven't even mentioned the others. Timothy Dalton's acting talents were more than equal to the part of Bond (I can't remember who it was who likened TD to "Patrick Stewart with hair" but it seems apt enough) and he looked the part a lot more than DC; George Lazenby looked the part but was too inexperienced; and Pierce Brosnan was simply born to be Bond- he looks the part (present tense deliberate) and could carry it off well enough.
Still, there's one man who had the acting abilities to play the part (said abilities honoured by an Oscar much later); who won over an originally doubtful Fleming ("A good choice as Bond") and most of filmdom; who was the number one choice for the role until age overtook him.
But I digress. DC doesn't look like Bond, period. He manages to overcome this superbly in CR, aided by a better than normal screenplay (which is more faithful than normal to Fleming), better than normal direction from Campbell (having seen both Zorro flicks several times and GE God knows how often, Campbell's work on CR continues to impress me more), and better than normal music from David Arnold (streets ahead of DAD and TWINE).
It's the next movie that will determine DC's status for me. Will Craig capitalise on his CR success or simply go along for the ride? Will the producers manage to create a blend satisfying enough to traditionalists while appeasing the modernists?
Yes, definitely. I liked DC in CR,but the next couple of films will really define him. I can't wait for the next film to see if all the hard work is over, or if they are going to bust their asses again like they did on CR to make a damn fine Bond film. I really hope they do.
As far as Craig's looks. Brutally handsome captures it. He doesn't look like Bond does in my mind, but he pulls it off anyways, I believed him as Bond mid CR, but I hope that I will still believe him as Bond in 22. We will see.
Seriously, though: once the announcement became official, an idea formed in my head about how this Bond was going to be played...and it simply made sense to me---then, astoundingly enough, the film turned out to be pretty much what I'd anticipated, and I think it works brilliantly.
The thing about Craig's Bond, to me, is this: if there were a man named James Bond, Agent 007, licenced to kill for Her Majesty's Secret Service, I think he'd be far more likely to look like Daniel Craig than Roger Moore (to cite the alternative previously discussed in this thread)---up to and including the muscled SBS veteran's torso.
The scene in which Craig's Bond charms Solange into "one drink" at his place convinced me that he could sell the 'ladies' man' aspect of the character as well as the dangerous, professional killer aspect.
It was an admiringly bold bit of casting---and IMO it was integral to putting CR on the fast track to being a Modern Bond Classic. The Vocal Minority will disagree...but Oh Well
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I pretty much feel the same way. Before Craig was announced, I had seen him along with the other prospects and knew less about him than the others, and he didn't look like Bond physically to me. But after he made the cut, it occurred to me that my only reason for doubting Craig was habit: just as the films had become formulaic, so had the casting of Bond. EON constantly picked the same dark-haired (Moore a bit less than the others), classically gorgeous actor. But they were never able to recapture the effortless "toughness" of the original, Sean Connery. They didn't look dangerous in the least bit. Connery was (is)a very good looking man, but all the tailors on Savile Row couldn't disguise the rough, tough customer -- the Scottish truck driver as Fleming once called him -- under the tux. And that manner is essential to Bond. Rather than decribed in physical detail, he's more often referred to in the novels as cruel-looking and somewhat taciturn. Connery had that without even breaking a sweat.
Craig projects the same dangerous air onscreen (just to be clear, we're not talking about him in real life. I don't care what he's like in real life. Bond is a fictional character). I don't think the question should be whether Craig is good looking enough to be Bond (he is; he's got sex appeal in spades, from what I hear and read from women); the question should be where did Eon get the impression that any dark-haired male model could be 007?
DC has been quoted as saying he is "very pleased" with the script for Bond 22. Leaving aside the fact that every actor has to say that. I dont think our Danny wouild say that unless he meant it. Its not in his character.
I think we will be OK for Bond 22 mainly due to that Haggis fella. Pierce Brosnan never had one of those and it showed.
Danny was a ladies man before now. He hit the London tabloids regularly seen with Sienna Miller or Kate Moss. He was known as a swordsman on the Lonodn gossip scene.
Maybe this was one of the things that got him the role.
Craig's looks certainly aren't what we've come to expect from an actor considered for the role of James Bond. He’s blonde for one thing. And it doesn’t help that he's sporting the more modern 'spiked' look. Craig is buffer than the average Bond too. Never before has Bond been so objectified, swaggering through the waves in those tight little blue swimming trunks. And how many times are we going to hear Craig confirm/deny his willingness to bear all in a future Bond film? I guess the days of seeing a lot of the ladies and very little of Bond are finally over. It may sound a little selfish, but it was fun while it lasted. I suppose the ladies need something to look at too. And by all means girls, feast your eyes on this hunk of a man known as Daniel Craig. :v
Accompanying Craig’s abs and pecs has come a toughening of the Bond image. Bond has become more of a superman than ever. He smashes through walls and falls atop dumpsters, but merely shakes it off and presses on. Camp shirts and leather jackets compliment his “bad boy” persona. He seems to be a complete stranger to suits, formalwear, and lavish, upper-class settings. Just watch the scene in which Bond puts on the tux and observes himself in the mirror. He looks awkward. I picture Craig more in jeans and a t-shirt, watching the big game at a bar, eating a hamburger and drinking a beer. I don’t picture him in a suit, playing high stakes poker in an extravagant casino, eating caviar and sipping champagne. He just looks out of place. Instead of blending in with the upper-class crowd, he sticks out like a sore thumb. He looks like a monkey in a suit, a man taken right off the streets, way out of his depths. It’s rather disheartening to me.
Even worse than losing sight of the Bond image is losing touch with the Bond character. Craig’s Bond is tough, as Bond should be. Craig excels at displaying the ruthlessness of Bond. However, Craig falters greatly in portraying Bond’s softer side. Craig’s Bond simply isn’t charming, suave, or sophisticated. His Bond doesn’t have much of a sense of humor either. These are key features of the Bond character. Without them Bond is just a thug. Sadly, this is how I would describe Craig’s Bond.
Minority view or not, Daniel Craig will never be Bond to me. He IMO neither looks nor acts the part. He is just plain wrong for the role.
That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.
Now don’t get me started on the reboot… X-(
-Roger Moore
When Craig was announced as Bond I was against is big time. I thought, plain and simple, that he was too ugly for the role. And short. And blonde. And after seeing the film, I forgot all those things because the film was so good. But from the neck up Craig is not good looking, but because he is now so linked to the role everyone is used to it. Roger Moore was an amazingly good looking Bond. Just watch The Persuaders! to see how he looked around the time of Craigs age now. He had the kind of looks any guy would kill for, the same with Pierce Brosnan. In Mrs Doubtfire he looked fantastic, I mean his looks made me look twice, and I'm straight! Lazenby was a great looking guy who, I think, has aged the best out of all the Bonds (and made the most money-that NEVER happened to the other fella!). And Dalton was a great looking Bond, especially in a suit. Craig's looks can be summed up when Lois Maxwell was shown a picture of him and she said "Oh, he's not handsome like Roger or Sean is he. He's got an, erm, interesting face" Craig though put a load of muscle on and therefore took the spotlight of his face and onto his body. Which is great, cos a secret agent should be super fit, although as this is the start of his adventures he may lay off the weights when he starts getting all his gadgets (!)
He looks good in some scenes, rough in others. That said, I think since CR he's had some work done (ahem!) and will look better in the new film, not so bulked up and 'no neck' as Craig put it...
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Craig in CR comes across as a younger, badboy version of 70s Moore/Bond. The transition from the fantastic TSWLM to the more down-to-earth CR works quite well, mainly due to the Moore-to-Craig transistion working so well (blue eyes, blond hair both). And, I can see Craig's Bond growing up and becoming Moore's Bond. Weird.
Aahh, the power of denial -- it's not just a river in Egypt.
It is obvious that the poster only demonstrates that after months of deliberations and viewing dozens of actors, it only occurred to the filmmakers that Craig just wasn't good looking enough to be Bond after they hired him. I can just visualize the panic as Babs cried "What shall we do? I never saw him in daylight. He was my brother's idea. He's a troll. How could I have been so wrong? ... " Fortunately, a quick-thinking poster artist came up with a solution. He is now the highest-paid poster artist in Hollywood!
And naturally, he would have had "work" done by now, which will explain why he'll likely look better in Bond 22. No doubt that was the real reason for the "raise" he got a few months ago.
Hitting the eggnog a little heavy, are ya, Nape?
I agree with Tee...although not as harshly.
His acting prowess helps me endure through this I guess. I can't say that CR was a bad film because it wasn't. My stance hasn't changed on the guy but I won't make a big fuss over it...
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice is UNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
I disagree with your assessment, but here, have a cookie:
Beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder. Actonsteve, if you think Daniel Craig's a real looker and you like what he's brought to the role, that's great. I'm happy for you. I really am.
But as much as you have a right to like what you see, I have a right not to like what I see. Just because every female you know thinks he's a stud, doesn't make me wrong.
As you are obviously referring to my earlier post, I just want you to know that I have nothing personal against Craig. There's no question that this man can act. And CR was a good film; I enjoyed it. It just didn't feel Bondian to me.
How boring the world would be if everyone agreed. Cheers! {[]
-Roger Moore
-Roger Moore
"The big screen hunk was spotted honing his speed boat skills on a lake in Hampshire at the weekend, in preparation for the start of filming on the big screen spy thriller in January."
Quite a difference from over a year ago, no? I think the whole scenario speaks volumes about the press and the media these days.
The numbers don't lie, it's the most successful Bond film of all time. Everyone is entitled to their opinion; some (dare I say most) find him good looking, and some don't. I doubt the film would have done so well if people didn't find him attractive.
A great deal of that success comes down to the casting, it's that simple.
EON gave him a BONUS outside of the contract he signed - I guess there's a first time for everything! I wonder how that sat with Sean...yikes! They already had him for two more films and yet they signed him for MORE after the success of CR!
If he was as "unattractive" as a lot of people make him out to be, we'd be discussing who they're going to cast next!
Not really, Tee Hee.
What I'd honestly prefer is a major, monotheistic religion built around me, with my prescience regarding Craig as Bond as its leading Article of Faith. Of course, the naysayers would have to be persecuted, unless they were willing to fall to their knees, bow and repeat "There is no Bond but Craig and Highhopes is His Prophet" three times while turned West toward Sacramento, Calif.
But barring that, your idea will do.
In that case, I'll see you on the gallows.
-Roger Moore
Only doubt I hold is whether the world wide web is really that good an idea. It's defense, the fastest global linking communication device held by man, in it's offense, the tool of a billion self ignorant and often homophobic idiots!
This is not aimed at anybody of course. But after years of comradery and good natured ribbing, the maturity and fellow 007Hood of these boards plummetted to the lowest point imaginable. I truly hope the dignity of Bond fans, and people in general, never repeat the moronic period of hatred which spewed forth on the boards after Craig's announcement. (often without A SHRED of celluloid to base it on) WTF!?
PS. I hear there's a new Bond flick a coming. Craig fan or not, that's the most welcome news of all! :007)
I had a feeling my true wishes would go unfulfilled, especially since no one is going out of their way to congratulate the pro-Craiggers on their foresight
I generally feel that the peace has been restored since the onset of The Craig Wars. Is there still a voice of dissent against Craig? Yes, and there always will be. I mean let's face it, it's been years since the likes of George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, and Pierce Brosnan last wore the tux, but they still have their critics today. Even Sean Connery gets attacked from time to time.
I don't think we'll have to worry about war breaking out again any time soon, at least not until the next Bond is cast.
In the meantime, I'll just smile my way through Craig's tenure and enjoy the present restored state of chumminess here at AJB.
Indeed. Although I may not like Craig's incarnation of the character, I'd still find it hard to live in a world without Bond. I may have to stomach Craig being around for a while, by my God keep making these films Eon! {[]
-Roger Moore
I actually did a few posts up. I said it sarcastically of course, but that's better than nothing right?
-Roger Moore
Thats pretty much how I felt about Pierce Brosnans tenure. And, yes, I am one of those who feel vindicated at Craig. I saw him in 1998 in 'Our Friends in the North' with Chris Ecclestone and he had star potential then.
A magnificent Bond!