New Interview with Craig- The Times
emtiem
SurreyPosts: 5,948MI6 Agent
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2099-2381828,00.html
Good, meaty stuff. Everyone'll be happy with this one: he's noted for his performance and presence is praised, so there's plenty to like him for, and he's also noted for swearing a lot and talking monotone so there's plenty to hate him for- for people that enjoy that!
It's a tricky interview and feels a bit spiky: I get the feeling the interviewer wasn't won over by him and perhaps isn't a Bond kind of person, but it lets you make up your own mind about him. He's not black and white.
And as a web-active Bond fan I still find it very awkward to hear him talking of going online and looking at what those nasty sites were saying at the time.
Plus he talks about Doctor Who, which is rather fun!
Good, meaty stuff. Everyone'll be happy with this one: he's noted for his performance and presence is praised, so there's plenty to like him for, and he's also noted for swearing a lot and talking monotone so there's plenty to hate him for- for people that enjoy that!
It's a tricky interview and feels a bit spiky: I get the feeling the interviewer wasn't won over by him and perhaps isn't a Bond kind of person, but it lets you make up your own mind about him. He's not black and white.
And as a web-active Bond fan I still find it very awkward to hear him talking of going online and looking at what those nasty sites were saying at the time.
Plus he talks about Doctor Who, which is rather fun!
Comments
You make a good point. Although to be fair, I have read several interviews where he seems to be in a good enough mood and talks with a lot of enthusiasm. I'll chalk it up to pre-release jitters/media exhaustion. But I would advise him that if he's going to be out of sorts, it's probably best to be that way with the Podunk Daily Bugle rather than the Times of London. I would also clean up my language for the occasion (Is that c*** what I think it is? 8-) I wouldn't use that one in a U.S. publication if I were him. He'd be better off using a 12-letter word starting with "m" than that one. I don't think using the dreaded "c-word" is as bad in the U.K. as it is here).
Ever notice that when an actor gets testy, it's almost always in a print interview, rarely TV?
He talks about peeking at the internet, when the worst of the Anti-Craig stuff was at its zenith, and says, "I had a dark couple of days." Yeah; no s**t.*
Encouraging that the boycott site wasn't mentioned by name; just a passing reference to AKB's famous photo comparisons.
"How did he pull off that torture scene she admired? How did he make Bond, naked, come out the winner while baddies whacked his genitals? 'I just got myself angry. Bond thinks he's going to die. It's his last shout.'"
:007)
Also of note is the revelation that we will actually see a bit of blood this time round---for which I'm glad. Seeing people get shot and just fall down, as has been the case in the last few, always serves to remind me that I'm only watching a movie. I welcome a bit of viscera, however limited in scope. :v It was described in the script, but I'm relieved to see that it has survived production and post-....
* A bit of profanity, in keeping with The New Guy's 'earthy' approach to media relations
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
What a stupid question asking them why they make more Bond films when they are already rich! 8-) Keepers of the flame...yeesh.
I'm embarrassed that of all Bond sites, CNB seems to leave such a lasting impression. It certainly isn't a rational representation of Bond fans. I'm sure he peeked in here and CBn as well...but still the fact he had some dark days will delight the CNBers to no end. I guess I would be cranky too if I read stuff like that about myself. Being Bond is definitely not for the sensitive and weak of heart.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
And that was a very daft question to Barbara Brocolli too, "You're rich now, so why haven't you quit?" Maybe because they like making them? Maybe "just because"? I did like the interview, but I thought the interviewer was a bit of a pillock, to be honest.
It is embarrassing that the CnB thing has stuck. Particularly now that it's gone, it's sad that its foul stench is still lingering.
One thing I like about how Craig handles it, his responses seem to minimize it or at least not lend such negative questions any more credence, he comments on them truthfully and moves on. Water off a duck's back, like. Be terrible if he were obsessing on stuff like that, or over-analyzing it. Sounds like he can separate from it and go have a pint. {[]
I'm not against someone doing acting work for the money - it is a job after all- but he does seem to be a bit too casual about the great stuff he's done so far; and I think that frustrated the interviewer slightly as underneath this bluster it seems like Craig actually is passionate about what he does. You've got to be to do that well, haven't you? Perhaps he was just in a mood that day.
And yeah; I do like the Oscar admission. Why the hell pretend you don't want to win one? He is ambitious and now he's got to where he wants to be he isn't finished yet; and he's said in other interviews how he wants these Bond films to be fantastic. I do like his honesty and I'm not sure what's wrong with his answer to the rather pointed 'do you think an actor can an Oscar for Bond?'.
I know what you're saying- I don't think he's really shown any doubts over it, in so much as the press thinking it's a good question to ask him. It is a surprising choice for an actor like him and they've just decided to make a story out of that surpise rather than any real doubts. Obviously he considered the ramifications of taking the role; who wouldn't? I think since they started shooting (beforehand I don't think he'd really prepared himself for the role and so couldn't actually answer too many questions about it; I'm sure it frustrated him taht he was supposed ot be talking about his previous films at the time too!) he hasn't shown anything but serious passion for the character and for making a great film. He's no raconteur and I can't see an after-dinner speech career for him in the future, but he certainly seems as passionate as he could be for the film and for the role.
No problem whatsoever.
I think his honesty and humour shine through in that line alone.
No of course not. Why would I? He's showing how he much he wants an Oscar and how every actor with ambition is vulnerable to that question- what's wrong with that? It's a pretty idiotic question designed to provoke a response because Craig is a good actor on an Oscar trajectory and these journos want a response saying hes regretted his decision to take what they see as the money path rather than the critical appreciation and credibility path.
That sort of struck me as odd, too. And out of character, to boot, for someone who elsewhere has fretted about not being able to get certain parts if he became James Bond. If anything, from reading other interviews, I would have pegged him him as one of those actors with a capital "A," with some of that pretentiousness the Times writer mentions in the piece -- which comes with the territory. So I think you're right about him being in a little bit of a funk that day. It's a little too bad it had to be for a Times guy, that's all.
But, if I'm feeling anxious about CR's opening and the general public's reaction to it, I can imagine how he must be feeling right now. After some of the stuff that's been said and written about him, the success of the film must mean even more to him than it would otherwise.
Oh great...when you're selling a Bond movie, you (the Bond actor, especially one who is appearing in the role for the first time) had better come across as Bond to the public and the media. The impression of this interviewer--that Craig doesn't seem like Bond--is almost an echo of the scoop over at Moviehole concerning the (alleged?) screening of CR, where supposedly the reaction was that “Craig ain’t no James Bond” (http://www.moviehole.net/news/20060914_gossip_monkey_150906.html).
Michael G. Wilson's comment is bizzare: "But then, perhaps worried about selling tickets," the interviewer explains, he [Wilson] added: 'We are still entertainment...We are trying to make it a PG film.'"
PG? If this true, then this film will be a light version of whatever intention the filmmakers had about making a so-called dark, gritty, intense Bond film.
Then there's Craig's line that "Potentially, you cheapen your brand if you do this [the Bond role]." Granted, I don't blame him for taking the role; obviously, it's a great pay day. But this kind of line implies (even if it wasn't his intention) that he doesn't respect the Bond role.
Plus, Craig needs to learn that as the new James Bond he will be asked alot of 'idiotic' questions and how he answers them will affect what the general public thinks of him. It is unlikely that CR will lose box office because of that offensive response, but if I were Wilson, I would arrange for Craig to be given a lesson in public relations before he turns off the public in the way that Tom Cruise has.
Agreed. That is one of my ongoing annoyances with Craig. I'm not asking him to be the world's biggest Bond fan but can't he at least pretend to express an interest in Bond or understand why other people might be so interested in Bond?
Doesn't the interviewer keep saying that Craig is trying (possibly too much) to be like Bond, in a macho casual manner? I think that was the interviewer's problem- that he's too much like Bond; not that he's not Bond enough.
Oh right- it's just the word c*** that upsets you. I've no idea how you've decided he's 'misogynystic' from that, though. A rather bizarre accusation.
Fact is, swearing like that -in good humour- just shows you're passionate about the subject you're talking about. I'm not sure how it shows that you hate women...
Eh? All he's done is talk passionately about making this film great and showing his understanding of the role; from why he wears expensive suits to why being a double 0 means being able to make tough decisions rather than just killing people. In his last interview he said how good CR was how much better he wanted to make Bond 22. I'm puzzled as to where you're perceiving this lack of interest- the same place you saw his apparent hatred of women?
Oh okay- I think I've seen it used in US things in the same way you might call someone a 'pussy'; to suggest someone is being a little unmanly/pathetic. Is that right?
I don't think it is in good humour and nor do I think that it shows passion. Rather I think it shows that Craig has absolutely no idea of how to speak in public and to the media. I don't have a problem with swearing as of itself (although I do think that Craig should tone it down) but I do have a problem with the use of the C word. I don't like it and I don't think that Craig should use it. I find it to be an incredibly offensive word and it is one of several words which I never use under any circumstance. I don't think that Craig should be using it either. Plus, the question that he was asked wasn't that bad. It was a silly question, but he has been asked worse and he will be asked worse, and he needs to learn how to answer the questions in a decent fashion.
Perhaps you're seeing things that I'm not because the only time I ever saw him express real passion was when he was talking about Our Friends in the Northand working with Michael Gambon.
I never said he hated women. However using that word does suggest that he is either disrespectful of women or completely unaware that the way he would speak to his friends is not the way to speak to the media.
Right- it's nothing like that here. It is the strongest one there is pretty much and you generally don't say it around women, but its use doesn't really refer to women: it's just a very strong version of b*****d etc. It doesn't show any kind of hatred of women or anything else anybody's determined to read into it; just that someone feels strongly about something.
It's strong but it's only a word. We're all grown up; I think I can take it.
You said it was an 'ongoing annoyance'; meaning you've had for a while and therefore before this interview. I was talking about previous interviews. No one interview gives you the whole picture.
Obviously as it's upset you so much you're right- he shouldn't speak to the media like that. It obviously upsets some people. I think calling him mysogynistic is a touch strong though- like calling someone who uses the mild swearword 'bloody' a blasphemer: the root of the word isn't really applicable. I'm not sure you'd be able to cope if you had to work on a building site!
He's inconsistant. I can't remember every interview that he gave, but while in some, he did express interest in CR (if one can call it that), generally he came across as someone who might have liked CR's script but didn't really express the level of interest that I would have liked. (I'm not saying that he has to jump up and down in excitement but he could at least express a bit of passion.) I have to say though that this is an old issue. In that particular interview, I was more concerned about the use of the c word, some of the questions asked and the concluding paragraph.
Two things:
One, I think using the c word is a little worse than using the word 'bloody'. Perhaps it is different in England, but here in Australia the word bloody is considered to be perfectly okay while using the c word is not. I often use the word 'bloody' but I have never and I will never use the c word. It is an incredibly offensive word, and as Benskally pointed out, many people find it enormously offensive. As for the root of the word, well, trying using the c word in front of an American or Australian woman and see where that takes you.
Two, this isn't a building site! It's a newspaper interview! My god, can't you see the difference? It does not matter at all wether people use the c word at building sites; you do NOT use it in an interview. Perhaps that's the problem; Craig thinks he is on a building site or something. Em, I am not saying that he should act prim and proper, all I am saying is that in an interview he should not use the c word (and perhaps should tone down his language). Why is that so unreasonable?
Well if you called me that you'd be being unpleasantly nationalistic; which would be extremely uncalled for. Good thing that sort of thing doesn't come to your mind.
C*** is a word; it's a strong word, but just a word nonetheless. Some people swear. And when you tickle them on their achilles heel, they might swear a bit more.
That's pretty inconsistant of yourself- just above you said he never showed any passion at all. Which suggests you've not read many of the recent interviews; all he's shown has been a deep desire to make this film work and an innate understanding of the character.
You're just making up your arguments again- where did I say they were the same strength? Did my point entirely pass you by?
Seriously- read what I wrote. Here; I'll copy and paste it for you: "Obviously as it's upset you so much you're right- he shouldn't speak to the media like that." So why do you think I find it unreasonable?
I didn't say this was a building site- my point was that in real life people swear, and in some places they swear a lot. Yes, Craig is in the wrong environment to swear here (although clearly is able to reign it in when he's doing a video interview); my jocular worry was that if you were to venture to an environment where swearing is de rigour you might find it hard not to cope. It was a joke.
I just can't get upset about swearing. Sorry; but they're just words. I can tell the type of guy he is with this swearing and I can tell how it's intended; and it's just someone who's been in environments where swearing isn't considered that offensive. As you say- he's not there now and needs to watch in print interviews. And he clearly doesn't mean it as aggresively as your (thankfully not real) tirade against me as he's never met the chap before.
With regards the rest of it, I'm surprised no comment on Babs and Mikey, with their PR spiel: "We're awful, we're control freaks" as the always slightly hysterical sounding Babs puts it.
Maybe it was cross purposes, the interviewer tries to get onto Craig's good side by bringing a play along he was once in, instead Craig smells a rat that he's going to be depicted as a worthy luvvy, too high and mighty for all this.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
That was a bit odd, wasn't it? Sort of makes him look like a weird stalker or someone who's after an autograph!
I do wish the interviewer had said what he thought of the preview clips he saw. Even if he's not keen on Bond films as a journalist he should be able to tell if it's been well executed or not.
It's NOT just about swearing. Perhaps you'll never understand, but the c word is considered by many people to be among the worst words in the English language.
I never make up arguments. What do you call "like calling someone who uses the mild swearword 'bloody' a blasphemer"? But even if you don't think they are of the same level, the fact that you constantly imply that the c word isn't a big deal obviously means that you think that it and most other swear words are of a similar strength.
I don't know, the fact that we are having this discussion?
Well, I guess I didn't get the joke.
For the 1000th time, I will simply say that I don't have a problem with swearing; the c word however is different. Benskally mentioned the n word. Well, many people consider the c word to be just as sexist as the n word is racist. Look, why don't we agree to disagree because you will obviously never understand that many people consider the c word to be overwhelmingly offensive and just as offensive in fact as my so-called tirade.
Dan, I've said again and again that I know and agree it's just about the strongest swearword, and I've addressed the meaning behind it with our little 'bloody' skirmish which you failed to understand. It's a shame you can't respect my opinion on it in the same way that I've respected yours and agreed that he shouldn't use it in interviews.