Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

24

Comments

  • sirsosirso Posts: 212MI6 Agent
    chrisno1 wrote:
    I agree that part of the problem with DC isn't that he can't act - he clearly can, he's very good in CR - or that his scripts are poor - well, generally they have been - it's about how he looks.

    The comments by several posters above who refer to him as appearing like a 'thug' or being 'monosyllabic' do have a significant point.

    Whichever way you cut Bond, novels, continuation novels, Connery, Moore etc etc, he's always had an air of studied sophistication about him. Craig's Bond just doesn't. He's a modern 'action' hero lumbered with the same baggage they all have: psycho issues, personal issues, trauma issues; therefore he never says very much and when he does it's a riddle or a joke, he's simply not very personable. CR was great because the screenplay and the intoxicating Eva Green wheedled a decent performance from him. The others? Ah, well...

    Bond might be disdainful of his superiors, but that's not disrespect, he just thinks they're making bad decisions; he never questions their authority. Craig's Bond seems to be very disrespectful and is constantly turfed out to fend for himself because he's made a 2 & 8 of things. Can't follow orders at all. Can't even be bothered to tell them he's still alive. The stuff in Turkey or wherever the opening scenes of Skyfall were set reveal this sweaty, raki drinking boozer who shags sexy women in his beach combo; he'd got no reason to do this and he looked bloody terrible; yes I know he was recovering from taking a bullet, but he couldn't even be bothered to shave. Anyway, that radioactive tip would have killed him way before he ever got back to M's apartment where he gets all stroppy again. I digress...

    Additionally Bond is usually wearing a suit, if he isn't his clothes are still finely cut. Fleming is very clear about this and the early movies got it just about spot on. The rot set in on this in the latter stages of Roger Moore's tenancy with those bomber zip jackets. Dalton's wardrobe in LTK was particularly out of step. Craig hasn't even been given a decent suit to wear. They are the tightest fitting, most impractical outfits a OO7 has ever had to endure. Just watching him crammed into those Tom Ford three pieces at the end of Skyfall made me weep for his balls and his ribcage. Seriously, the man can't even hide his gun with that combo on.

    And he can't stand like a normal person. Why are his arms so far from his sides and his legs so far apart? What's he trying to prove. He doesn't come across as macho, although he certainly seems thuggish, to me he just looks ridiculous. CR apart, of course...

    I don't mind him being blonde, but does he have any hair left? He may as well be replaced by Jason Statham.

    While Bond is a rampant misogynist in the books and treats most of his women shoddily in the sixties and seventies, we'd broken the back of most of that by the time Pierce came along. DC has had a great love affair in CR and this seems to have made the writers think he can be mean to most of his women friends from this point on. If he has any relationships at all they are framed without the slightest wit or substance. He flirts outrageously with the bosses secretary and even with the boss, but those relationships are chaste. He's just no fun to be around. Even his delivery of the clunky one-liners seems designed to be significant rather than merely funny. Why does every sentence have to mean something? This isn't epic high-brow literature, its paperback thriller territory for goodness sake.

    I'm not a big DC fan. It's not his fault. He was great in Our Friends in the North and Layer Cake and Casino Royale, but these recent few Bond movies have done him no favours in my opinion.

    I'll stop now, it's late and I'm sad The Big Bang Theory has ended. The Bond team should hire a few of those writers for a swift one-liner. Might cheer up Craig's demeanour no-end.

    Everything you say I agree with.
  • emtiememtiem SurreyPosts: 5,949MI6 Agent
    chrisno1 wrote:
    emtiem wrote:
    Well if you're comparing to Fleming

    I wasn't, I thought you were.

    From earlier:
    chrisno1 wrote:
    Additionally Bond is usually wearing a suit, if he isn't his clothes are still finely cut. Fleming is very clear about this and the early movies got it just about spot on.


    8-) I'm glad I didn't bother responding to the rest of his post; what a load of contradictory nonsense.
  • sirsosirso Posts: 212MI6 Agent

    Trouble is, keep reinventing, reconstructing and rehabilitating Bond and you may have successfully kept up with the times and “repositioned your brand” in an increasingly tough marketplace, but you end up with a whole new character entirely.


    Good point. It's the crux of the "problem".

    I think Craig's tenure as Bond will be seen as curious experiment.
  • sirsosirso Posts: 212MI6 Agent
    The funny thing is that a blond actor could have made a decent Bond. I think of a young James Fox. Or even his shorter brother Edward. The latter's performance in The Day of the Jackal could be said in parts to have been "bondlike".
  • AugustWalkerAugustWalker Posts: 880MI6 Agent
    The thing with Craig’s tenure is that it mostly took place off-screen.
    CR & QoS had him at the very beginning of his 00-career whereas already in SF, he was called being too old. SP was a bit quieter on the age thing, but I think we‘ll see more of It in B25.

    In a nutshell: we never saw Craig’s Bond on regular missions, we only got to see the striking ones, e.g. beginning and end.

    Hadn’t there been these overlong gaps and hiatuses, they could have made an additional 2 or 3 standalone pictures showing the haydays of his career. That would have bben a perfect run from a storytelling standpoint.
    The name is Walker by the way.

    IG: @thebondarchives
    Check it out, you won’t be disappointed :)
  • SilentSpySilentSpy Private Exotic AreaPosts: 765MI6 Agent
    The thing with Craig’s tenure is that it mostly took place off-screen.
    CR & QoS had him at the very beginning of his 00-career whereas already in SF, he was called being too old. SP was a bit quieter on the age thing, but I think we‘ll see more of It in B25.

    In a nutshell: we never saw Craig’s Bond on regular missions, we only got to see the striking ones, e.g. beginning and end.

    Hadn’t there been these overlong gaps and hiatuses, they could have made an additional 2 or 3 standalone pictures showing the haydays of his career. That would have bben a perfect run from a storytelling standpoint.

    Which is one of the biggest disappointments of Daniel Craig's run. The lack of his early missions after Casino Royale, which wasn't perfect but it was a very good start and had me looking forward to the sequel. But it's been almost consistently downhill since Casino Royale for me. I can live without seeing Quantum of Solace and Skyfall ever again. I do like Spectre and I wish that closed out his run. As from what I'm seeing the new movie will once again have references to past Bond films to make us think, yes this is the same guy even though this is a rebooted series. He's supposed to be making new memorable moments.

    But I don't think Daniel Craig was really miscast. If he was then so were many other Bonds. It is the material that will let them down.
    "Better late than never."
  • sirsosirso Posts: 212MI6 Agent
    Yes, he has been served with bad material and at least one bad director (Sam Mendes). I think Craig could have been a better Bond had the dialogue, storylines, music and direction of QOS and SF been better. Spectre, was a bit better but ran out of steam towards the end.

    All the Craig Bond films would have been better had Martin Campbell and David Arnold still been involved with them.
  • Miles MesservyMiles Messervy Posts: 1,772MI6 Agent
    edited July 2019
    I do not think Craig was miscast. CR and QoS are a great one-two punch, and I think he is excellent in both. Skyfall was moody and retro in a way that worked for the 50th Anniversary, although the plot didn’t make much sense, his portrayal of the character was not as sharp, and he was starting to show his age (I realize the plot dictated that to an extent). Spectre wasn’t any good and he wasn’t good in it. Overall, I would say the early promise of the Craig era has not been realized. If Bond 25 ends up being lackluster, I think his tenure will be remembered mainly for the quality of Casino Royale, the length of time he held the role, and ill-fitted suits.
  • OrnithologistOrnithologist BerlinPosts: 585MI6 Agent
    Overall, I would say the early promise of the Craig era has not been realized.

    Exactly how I feel, so far. Overall, I am still a fan of all the craig movies, but they lost momentum and reverted a lot of their initial decisions after CR and QoS. The excessive retconning in Spectre bothered me in particular.
    "I'm afraid I'm a complicated woman. "
    "- That is something to be afraid of."
  • Gassy ManGassy Man USAPosts: 2,972MI6 Agent
    Snort. Craig almost single-handedly reinvigorated a sagging, predictable franchise that had become the punchline to an old joke, and people are still wondering if he was miscast?
  • BarbelBarbel ScotlandPosts: 37,870Chief of Staff
    I've never wondered, Gassy. :(
  • HigginsHiggins GermanyPosts: 16,619MI6 Agent
    Glad to see the danielcraigisnotbond folks still being present and angry :D
    President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.

    Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
  • emtiememtiem SurreyPosts: 5,949MI6 Agent
    Gassy Man wrote:
    Snort. Craig almost single-handedly reinvigorated a sagging, predictable franchise that had become the punchline to an old joke, and people are still wondering if he was miscast?

    Yes indeed. Skyfall was the biggest grossing British film ever at the time. No Bond has exactly ever done badly(!), but that's nothing to be sniffed at.
  • Dirty PunkerDirty Punker ...Your Eyes Only, darling."Posts: 2,587MI6 Agent
    Gassy Man wrote:
    Snort. Craig almost single-handedly reinvigorated a sagging, predictable franchise that had become the punchline to an old joke, and people are still wondering if he was miscast?
    Can't even be bothered to comment on any of it for that very reason.

    I can comment on one thing, since I do have some authority on the subject as a bi man, he's hot.
    All Bonds are in their own way. Never quite got that accusation about Craig. If he doesn't fit your kinks for what Bond should look like...well :p
    If you want to comment on his appearance other than the fact he's blonde, shout at Roger or Brosnan first.
    a reasonable rate of return
  • BarbelBarbel ScotlandPosts: 37,870Chief of Staff
    I did, at the time. No Internet back then.
  • bonspybonspy Virginia 20505Posts: 38MI6 Agent
    Excellent point regarding Skyfall.
    One thing that has always impressed me about Daniel Craig; at least he looks like a guy who could kick a person's a$$!
    I never got that feeling from Brosnan or Moore. Craig, Dalton and Connery all leave me feeling that they could fight, if need be.
    I definitely agree with Gassy Man; Craig did reinvigorate the character with some much needed masculinity. Don't misunderstand, I liked Brosnan as Bond, I just never got the impression of potential danger from him. Obviously they're actors, but some sense of possible danger should come through from the screen.
    I was wary of Craig playing Bond, but once Casino Royale began, I totally lost all thoughts of disliking Craig's interpretation of Bond. The parkour opening was spectacular and I loved it. It was a really creative way to bring the character into the present day with action.
    Something that gets lost a bit in these discussions is the risk that Craig took in taking on the role of Bond. It was a gutsy move on his part and I think he's done a great job of it.
    emtiem wrote:
    Gassy Man wrote:
    Snort. Craig almost single-handedly reinvigorated a sagging, predictable franchise that had become the punchline to an old joke, and people are still wondering if he was miscast?

    Yes indeed. Skyfall was the biggest grossing British film ever at the time. No Bond has exactly ever done badly(!), but that's nothing to be sniffed at.
    Tertia Optio
    Latebra Factum
    Veritas Vos Liberabit
  • superadosuperado Regent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
    Box office is the ultimate arbiter that Daniel Craig was not miscast...the thread in a nutshell.
    "...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.....
  • BarbelBarbel ScotlandPosts: 37,870Chief of Staff
    Star Wars Episode One: The Phantom Menace beat Star Wars Episode Five: The Empire Strikes Back at the box office (both adjusted for inflation and not) but few would argue that it's a better film in that series... or more to the point, better cast.
  • superadosuperado Regent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
    I guess your point weakens my box office argument. :(|) What’s interesting is that the driver behind box office is vox populi, in that validation depends on the majority. If box office falls on the deaf ears of aficionados, as you’ve pointed out, it has least has the attention of the money people behind the movies who would then ask, “Was Daniel Craig miscast? He’s the ink for our money making machine!” :))

    ...but to seriously go back to the question, the answer depends on the criteria and apart from the BO defense, most of the arguments on this thread have been basically opinionated, disparaging and...weak.
    "...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.....
  • BarbelBarbel ScotlandPosts: 37,870Chief of Staff
    Absolutely. On both sides, of course, since it's all opinions.
  • zaphod99zaphod99 Posts: 1,415MI6 Agent
    sirso wrote:
    For me Craig has been adequate as Bond and to compare him to Connery is just foolish imo. But then Craig has not been well served by the writers. Casino Royale was great but largely due to Fleming, other than that there’s not much to write home about. The one thing that bugs me is how his Bond is this monosyllabic, hands in pockets disinterested looking guy, especially in the scenes with M, Q and Moneypenny and especially in the last 2 movies. The comparison to McQueen is a good one not just due to the facial resemblance but also in the way he plays Bond, very reminiscent of McQueen in say Bullitt. Whether this is down to Craig’s own increasing control over characterisation though as opposed to something the writers have introduced is not something I know. Notwithstanding this my enthusiasm for Bond is as strong as ever and I really hope we fans get the Bond 25 we all deserve after a few lacklustre efforts.

    Yes, Craig is very like McQueen in Bullitt, and the motorbike scene in QOS reminded me of McQueen too.
    It was meant to
    Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
  • Monsieur SixteMonsieur Sixte Posts: 39MI6 Agent
    Craig being blond was not a stumbling block for me, as I think James Fox or his brother Edward would have made good Bonds.

    With Craig, the problem for me is that he is devoid of charm. I was in contact with Roger Moore very briefly in the late 2000s via email, and he mentioned to me that he thought Craig, though an excellent actor, and generally suited as a Bond for these times, lacked charm and wit, which he, Moore, thought essential for Bond.

    Another thing about Craig that has already been mentioned here, is that his suits are too tight, and his gait is too studied “hard man”, as is his facial expression, which is like chiselled rock.

    Indeed, Craig’s Bond is closer to Robert Shaw’s Red Grant than to Bond.
  • opalopal Posts: 32MI6 Agent
    bonded123 wrote:
    Perhaps this video proves that Craig - hand on heart - was miscast:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHsAqcHIhp0


    To be fair to Craig, that scene is where he has been poisoned, and so he is naturally unable to be as blase as Bronsnan is in comparison.
  • opalopal Posts: 32MI6 Agent
    sirso wrote:
    Yes, he has been served with bad material and at least one bad director (Sam Mendes). I think Craig could have been a better Bond had the dialogue, storylines, music and direction of QOS and SF been better. Spectre, was a bit better but ran out of steam towards the end.

    All the Craig Bond films would have been better had Martin Campbell and David Arnold still been involved with them.


    I agree. Mendes is not a good action director. Though I thought the pre-credit sequence for Spectre was good.

    I prefer the old school look of Bond films. The wide angle panorama shots of glamorous locations, slower editing style, Barry's soundtrack, and more visual beauty.

    The Bond films now all look like Bourne films.
  • opalopal Posts: 32MI6 Agent
    bonspy wrote:
    Excellent point regarding Skyfall.
    One thing that has always impressed me about Daniel Craig; at least he looks like a guy who could kick a person's a$$!
    I never got that feeling from Brosnan or Moore. Craig, Dalton and Connery all leave me feeling that they could fight, if need be.

    But the henchmen Moore had to fight also looked tame. So Moore was well-matched.
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,340MI6 Agent
    Craig being blond was not a stumbling block for me, as I think James Fox or his brother Edward would have made good Bonds.

    With Craig, the problem for me is that he is devoid of charm. I was in contact with Roger Moore very briefly in the late 2000s via email, and he mentioned to me that he thought Craig, though an excellent actor, and generally suited as a Bond for these times, lacked charm and wit, which he, Moore, thought essential for Bond.

    Another thing about Craig that has already been mentioned here, is that his suits are too tight, and his gait is too studied “hard man”, as is his facial expression, which is like chiselled rock.

    Indeed, Craig’s Bond is closer to Robert Shaw’s Red Grant than to Bond.

    First I disagree that Craig lacks charm. He has shown charm in many scenes. Charm and wit were Moore's many assets, so it's no wonder his Bond focused on that. Craig does drama and action better than Moore, so he made his Bond more Flemingeque.
  • emtiememtiem SurreyPosts: 5,949MI6 Agent
    Barbel wrote:
    Star Wars Episode One: The Phantom Menace beat Star Wars Episode Five: The Empire Strikes Back at the box office (both adjusted for inflation and not) but few would argue that it's a better film in that series... or more to the point, better cast.

    Liam Neeson, Ewen MacGregor, Natalie Portman, Sam L Jackson, Ian McDiarmid, Terence Stamp... it's hard to argue that it has a significantly worse cast! :D
  • emtiememtiem SurreyPosts: 5,949MI6 Agent
    Although in terms of general attitude, when reading Fleming I find it easier to conjure a mental image of Craig than I do, say, Connery.
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,340MI6 Agent
    Gymkata wrote:
    Indeed, Craig’s Bond is closer to Robert Shaw’s Red Grant than to Bond.

    While I'm actually a big fan of Craig's take on Bond, this observation is absolutely spot on.

    I'd say Craig's Bond is closer to Red Grant than Roger Moore's Bond, but he is also closer to Fleming's Bond than Roger Moore's Bond.
    It's unfair of me to make Moore the symbol of the lighthearted and unrealistic Bond. All Bond actors has played that to some degree, including Craig.

    It's also worth noting that Red Grant is an assassin, something we often forget Bond also is.
  • CheverianCheverian Posts: 1,455MI6 Agent
    Goody, this discussion again.

    How long has he been in the role now?
Sign In or Register to comment.