76

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

Like many here, I've gone back and read the Fleming books many times, and do
feel that DC brings much  of the Literary Bond to the screen. In much the same
way Dalton tried the first time round.
  As in the past it takes a few films before everything settles down and the actor
gets in to his stride and owns the role.
  The next guy will get the same treatment ....  ajb007/biggrin

“I remember the last thing my Nan said to me before she died.
‘What are you doing here with that hammer?’”..... Lee Mack.

77

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

Loeffelholz wrote:

Fun thread! Reminds me, fondly, of the days of The Craig WarsTM.

Miscast? Not as far as I'm concerned. Craigger made the role his own, and has perhaps redefined it to a degree. He is Bond, to a generation. We all had ours  ajb007/bond

Yeah a mate of mine who is ten years younger (so in his teens when CR came out) said he thinks Craig is the best Bond of them all; I don't know if I'd say that necessarily but I don't think he's wrong, and he's certainly the guy for now.

78

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

When CR first came out, I thought DC had been miscast (mainly because I still wanted Pierce to be Bond), but by second viewing I had changed my mind. I think he’s a gritty Bond but also does have charm. He’s more down to earth. He shows emotion but often it’s controlled so you just get a glimpse of it. From a female perspective, I find DC good looking and having sex appeal. Through watching CR and hearing that it was pretty true to the book, I began reading and enjoying the Bond books. So, I will always connect that to DC. I was introduced to Bond by watching the Roger Moore films and so I have him to thank for that.

79

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

Monsieur Sixte wrote:

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.

Spot on. I think DC would have made a spectacular Grant. He lacks finesse and that sense of Danger with a veneer of sophistication. All that being said he has had some terrific moments and I have warmed to him despite his being mis cast. I cant think of any of the others that could have pulled off the Torture scene in CR with such aplomb, or the relationship with Dench as M. He also has good rapport with Q. He has developed a sly humour which I hope to see more of. So not my Bond by a long chalk, but a fine actor and a good Bond.

Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.

80

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

Yes, Craig as Red Grant would have been good to see, particularly if they had followed up Casino Royale with a remake of From Russia.

I support real-life Craig as he does so much for charity, but as an actor I don't think there's much to his version beyond presenting a sullen thug who pouts too much.

Although I think the series needed a real shot in the arm after Brosnan's tenure, I think Clive Owen would have been a far better choice. But then we're not the ones making the decisions.

In fact, for the little it's worth, I'm a little dubious of Barbara Broccoli's decision making process. Upon seeing Layer Cake at a private showing, she pronounced to her companions, "I'm in love with Daniel Craig! He's going to be the next Bond!"

81

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

DavidJones wrote:

Although I think the series needed a real shot in the arm after Brosnan's tenure, I think Clive Owen would have been a far better choice. But then we're not the ones making the decisions.

Thank goodness! ajb007/smile

DavidJones wrote:

In fact, for the little it's worth, I'm a little dubious of Barbara Broccoli's decision making process. Upon seeing Layer Cake at a private showing, she pronounced to her companions, "I'm in love with Daniel Craig! He's going to be the next Bond!"

If that happened I'm not sure what the problem is there.
Even if you don't personally like him it's hard to deny he's been a critical and financial success in the role. By all measurable standards, she was right to pick him.

82

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

emtiem wrote:

If that happened I'm not sure what the problem is there.
Even if you don't personally like him it's hard to deny he's been a critical and financial success in the role. By all measurable standards, she was right to pick him.

Though I don't like Craig's Bond (for the most part, I am able to get into the story and look beyond it while watching the film themselves), I'm delighted that his tenure has been such a huge success as it's great for the health of the series and bodes well for it's future prospects.

Maybe it's fine for a producer to choose a leading man because she quite fancies him (and I'm not saying that's any way improper or compromised anything - she was already in a relationship with celebrity chef James Martin at the time, after all). An attraction is a belief of sorts. Any casting is an investment and for that you need to have the courage of your convictions. Even Cubby and Harry had to ask Dana Broccoli for a woman's view of Connery. I just think it's an interesting - and, as we've seen, profitable - way of informing a decision.

83

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

emtiem wrote:

DavidJones wrote:

In fact, for the little it's worth, I'm a little dubious of Barbara Broccoli's decision making process. Upon seeing Layer Cake at a private showing, she pronounced to her companions, "I'm in love with Daniel Craig! He's going to be the next Bond!"

If that happened I'm not sure what the problem is there.
Even if you don't personally like him it's hard to deny he's been a critical and financial success in the role. By all measurable standards, she was right to pick him.

That wasn't wat happened. Babs noticed Craig in 1998's Elizabeth and at least saw him as a potental Bond from then on.

84

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

emtiem wrote:

Even if you don't personally like him it's hard to deny he's been a critical and financial success in the role. By all measurable standards, she was right to pick him.

Well put, emtiem.I have to agree with this, and accept that my own disapproval of the casting is merely peeing in the wind and that long-term Bond fans dating back to the 60s is not the demographic they're looking for- and for perfectly sensible reasons.

85

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

Number24 wrote:
emtiem wrote:
DavidJones wrote:

In fact, for the little it's worth, I'm a little dubious of Barbara Broccoli's decision making process. Upon seeing Layer Cake at a private showing, she pronounced to her companions, "I'm in love with Daniel Craig! He's going to be the next Bond!"

If that happened I'm not sure what the problem is there.
Even if you don't personally like him it's hard to deny he's been a critical and financial success in the role. By all measurable standards, she was right to pick him.

That wasn't wat happened. Babs noticed Craig in 1998's Elizabeth and at least saw him as a potental Bond from then on.

No need to take my word for it, it was in a print interview she and Wilson gave for SP. I've also seen her say that she spotted Craig first in Our Friends in the North. Perhaps it's a mixture of all three.

86

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

A mixture of all three seems likely.

87

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

DavidJones wrote:

Maybe it's fine for a producer to choose a leading man because she quite fancies him (and I'm not saying that's any way improper or compromised anything - she was already in a relationship with celebrity chef James Martin at the time, after all). An attraction is a belief of sorts. Any casting is an investment and for that you need to have the courage of your convictions. Even Cubby and Harry had to ask Dana Broccoli for a woman's view of Connery. I just think it's an interesting - and, as we've seen, profitable - way of informing a decision.

I'm not sure how we've established that she ever did fancy him, and as you say even if she did see how attractive he is then I can't see why that's even worth commenting on when discussing the casting of a character who is supposed to be very attractive. It's like noticing he's got enough legs to play 007. Is it supposed to be inappropriate or something?

Our Friends In the North seems a likely place for them to have first seen him: it's the first time I'd heard of him and was his breakthrough role, wasn't it?

88

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

emtiem wrote:
DavidJones wrote:

Maybe it's fine for a producer to choose a leading man because she quite fancies him (and I'm not saying that's any way improper or compromised anything - she was already in a relationship with celebrity chef James Martin at the time, after all). An attraction is a belief of sorts. Any casting is an investment and for that you need to have the courage of your convictions. Even Cubby and Harry had to ask Dana Broccoli for a woman's view of Connery. I just think it's an interesting - and, as we've seen, profitable - way of informing a decision.

I'm not sure how we've established that she ever did fancy him, and as you say even if she did see how attractive he is then I can't see why that's even worth commenting on when discussing the casting of a character who is supposed to be very attractive. It's like noticing he's got enough legs to play 007. Is it supposed to be inappropriate or something?

Our Friends In the North seems a likely place for them to have first seen him: it's the first time I'd heard of him and was his breakthrough role, wasn't it?

Craig is certainly her Bond, in that he was the first lead she cast (Cubby cast Pierce), so I think that choice and the success that came from it is something she is (and should be) very proud of. As for whether she does or has ever fancied him, she does give that impression in interviews, but then she's selling a product at those times, and therefore should be emphasizing her belief in her lead actor.

I think the Craig era, in terms of the current regime, is ground zero in the way that the Connery era was for Cubby. And that's as it should be. A new heyday. A resetting of the clock.

I'd imagine Our Friends... was when she saw him first, but with the long hair he had in the role, didn't seem him as Bond. Then she saw him with short hair in Elizabeth, and seeing him finally do action in Layer Cake would've nailed it.

89

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

Craig already proved he had the sex appeal to play Bond in both Tomb Raider and Layer Cake. Which is what really comes first before anything else when casting Bond. Both films having scenes showing off his chiseled torso and hooking up with attractive women. It didn't take much imagination to picture him as Bond from there.

@deanwdunlevy

90

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

My opening caveat is, I actually like Craig as Bond.  I didn't in the beginning, was wowed by CR and was sold completely with QoS. However, I do think he was miscast, I'm hopeful at the potential of the guy after him, and I somewhat lament the lost time of not having a "proper" Bond in place...and since 2006, that's at least 5 movies, and possibly even more like 7 with "a proper Bond."

To the question if DC was miscast, in terms of box office, no he was not, in terms of audience likability, no he was not, but in terms of the essence of the character, he was for the sentiments Barbel touched on above.

I don't like the line of thinking among DC's most ardent fans, that because they're convinced that he's all that with a side of fries, everyone else must acquiesce and agree, unless there's something wrong with their thinking. And to assert that view, the pro's will try to argue on those three criteria I mentioned.  No one can argue against the first two, box office and the wide appeal of DC's Bond to audiences, which are linked together. But when such fans try to argue for the third criterion, it's an argument too far.  What is that type?  Lazenby is the embodiment that there is indeed a Bond type and he and everyone else who followed up to Brosnan fit the profile, with some deviating a bit, but not too much.  But there is indeed a Bond type and DC fits it, as much as Michael Keaton did with Batman and as Robert Downey Jr. did as Sherlock Holmes.  Lastly, caliber or credentials does not necessarily make a performer more right for a role.

"...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.....

91

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

I think technically he was miscast for CR as the script seems to be be specifying someone younger.

Otherwise I’m not sure what you mean about ‘types’: your examples kind of show how those are irrelevant. Looking at the comic books I’d say Downey Jr was miscast to play Iron Man too, but does anyone really believe that?

walther p99 wrote:

Craig already proved he had the sex appeal to play Bond in both Tomb Raider and Layer Cake. Which is what really comes first before anything else when casting Bond. Both films having scenes showing off his chiseled torso and hooking up with attractive women. It didn't take much imagination to picture him as Bond from there.

Although I did think he was pretty nothing-y in Tomb Raider: he didn’t really get the chance to do anything. Layer Cake though definitely: it’s almost a Bond audition piece.
I’m sure Road To Perdition helped too.

92

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

If you say you don't know what I'm talking about with the Bond "type," you're just being coy, or you are genuinely ignorant that would warrant the benefit of the doubt.  The inclusion of Tony Stark/Iron Man is also a bit stretched, since a major interpretation that has never been done since the character was created would have needed to be done retro if strict adherence had been the goal. Rather, Robert Downey, Jr.'s rendition reasonably captured the essence of the character.

"...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.....

93

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

superado wrote:

If you say you don't know what I'm talking about with the Bond "type," you're just being coy, or you are genuinely ignorant that would warrant the benefit of the doubt.

That’s unnecessary and is based on a misinterpretation of what I said. Let’s not call each other ignorant. 
I can guess what you mean by ‘type‘ in Bond’s case (although I’d say Moore doesn’t fit that either and until Craig came along Bond was basically defined as either Moore or Connery), but what I don’t understand is why you think it’s relevant anymore. Craig, Moore, Keaton, Downey etc. show that it’s not important.

For me the only ‘type’ that Bond needs to be cast to is that he should be vaguely athletic, convincingly British, attractive in a masculine way. Hair colour, height, exact style of looks, ethnicity even I think are all debatable.

superado wrote:

The inclusion of Tony Stark/Iron Man is also a bit stretched, since a major interpretation that has never been done since the character was created would have needed to be done retro if strict adherence had been the goal. Rather, Robert Downey, Jr.'s rendition reasonably captured the essence of the character.

So exactly the same situation as Keaton as Batman then. Downey Jr isn’t the comic book Stark at all, but he shaped the character to himself and was a massive success.

94

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

emtiem wrote:
superado wrote:

If you say you don't know what I'm talking about with the Bond "type," you're just being coy, or you are genuinely ignorant that would warrant the benefit of the doubt.

That’s unnecessary and is based on a misinterpretation of what I said. Let’s not call each other ignorant. 
I can guess what you mean by ‘type‘ in Bond’s case (although I’d say Moore doesn’t fit that either and until Craig came along Bond was basically defined as either Moore or Connery), but what I don’t understand is why you think it’s relevant anymore. Craig, Moore, Keaton, Downey etc. show that it’s not important.

For me the only ‘type’ that Bond needs to be cast to is that he should be vaguely athletic, convincingly British, attractive in a masculine way. Hair colour, height, exact style of looks, ethnicity even I think are all debatable.

superado wrote:

The inclusion of Tony Stark/Iron Man is also a bit stretched, since a major interpretation that has never been done since the character was created would have needed to be done retro if strict adherence had been the goal. Rather, Robert Downey, Jr.'s rendition reasonably captured the essence of the character.

So exactly the same situation as Keaton as Batman then. Downey Jr isn’t the comic book Stark at all, but he shaped the character to himself and was a massive success.

RDJ is closer to being Tony Stark, including physical qualities, than DC is to Bond. By your argument on relevance, then DC is Bond in name only? Maybe a better Holmes comparison is Benedict Cumberbatch's version, because like DC's Bond, Cumberbatch is Sherlock Holmes.  And yet is Cumberbatch really Sherlock Holmes?

"...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.....

95

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

superado wrote:
emtiem wrote:
superado wrote:

If you say you don't know what I'm talking about with the Bond "type," you're just being coy, or you are genuinely ignorant that would warrant the benefit of the doubt.

That’s unnecessary and is based on a misinterpretation of what I said. Let’s not call each other ignorant. 
I can guess what you mean by ‘type‘ in Bond’s case (although I’d say Moore doesn’t fit that either and until Craig came along Bond was basically defined as either Moore or Connery), but what I don’t understand is why you think it’s relevant anymore. Craig, Moore, Keaton, Downey etc. show that it’s not important.

For me the only ‘type’ that Bond needs to be cast to is that he should be vaguely athletic, convincingly British, attractive in a masculine way. Hair colour, height, exact style of looks, ethnicity even I think are all debatable.

superado wrote:

The inclusion of Tony Stark/Iron Man is also a bit stretched, since a major interpretation that has never been done since the character was created would have needed to be done retro if strict adherence had been the goal. Rather, Robert Downey, Jr.'s rendition reasonably captured the essence of the character.

So exactly the same situation as Keaton as Batman then. Downey Jr isn’t the comic book Stark at all, but he shaped the character to himself and was a massive success.

RDJ is closer to being Tony Stark, including physical qualities, than DC is to Bond.

Gosh I wouldn't say so. He's quite short and slight. Comic Stark is, like all comic book men, a big tall musclebound, chiselled and perfectly handsome chap. Downey is way more interesting! ajb007/smile

DC is an alpha male, very masculine type who pretty much matches Bond. And when we say matches the Bond description, that's a sort of vaguely agreed-upon definition reached by combining the movie actors who have defined him- it's moved beyond Fleming's version of Bond which none of the actors have really matched all that well. Maybe Dalton because he's actually a bit slimmer than the rest, and that's what IF seemed to have in mind physically.

superado wrote:

By your argument on relevance, then DC is Bond in name only? Maybe a better Holmes comparison is Benedict Cumberbatch's version, because like DC's Bond, Cumberbatch is Sherlock Holmes.  And yet is Cumberbatch really Sherlock Holmes?

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by the two suggestions in this paragraph.

96

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

emtiem wrote:

For me the only ‘type’ that Bond needs to be cast to is that he should be vaguely athletic, convincingly British, attractive in a masculine way. Hair colour, height, exact style of looks, ethnicity even I think are all debatable...

Well, Barbel, TP, myself and a good percentage of the UK fit into that category... and I'm not quite sure that Fleming had such a loose description in mind.  ajb007/biggrin

emtiem wrote:

DC is an alpha male, very masculine type who pretty much matches Bond. And when we say matches the Bond description, that's a sort of vaguely agreed-upon definition reached by combining the movie actors who have defined him- it's moved beyond Fleming's version of Bond which none of the actors have really matched all that well.

I'm not sure that 'the Bond description' should move beyond Fleming's version, or pretty soon Bond will be reduced to just another generic, anodyne action hero. And why stop at convincingly British, attractive and vaguely athletic? If you dispense with the essential 'Bond description' you can pretty much dispense with everything else, so he could be played by anyone from Arnold Schwarzenegger to Danny DeVito...  ajb007/lol

"How was your lamb?" "Skewered. One sympathises."

97

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

Charmed & Dangerous wrote:
emtiem wrote:

For me the only ‘type’ that Bond needs to be cast to is that he should be vaguely athletic, convincingly British, attractive in a masculine way. Hair colour, height, exact style of looks, ethnicity even I think are all debatable...

Well, Barbel, TP, myself and a good percentage of the UK fit into that category... and I'm not quite sure that Fleming had such a loose description in mind.  ajb007/biggrin

Well okay, mid-late thirties too. Fleming describes him as looking like he's got 'mixed blood' in LALD, so ethnicity is fairly debatable.
The best idea we probably get (apart from most probably Bond being a slightly idealised version of himself!) is when he says he looks like Hoagy Carmichael, and very few of the actors so far have been very close to that. Apart from having a rounder face, Craig actually doesn't look all that dissimilar to Carmichael.

I daresay when Connery was cast Fleming probably thought he was a fairly blandly good-looking male model type instead of the more rugged, cruel version he seems to describe in the novels.

Personally I get the impression he was picturing someone like Richard Johnson:
https://forgottenfilmcast.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/deadlier-than-the-male-3.png


Charmed & Dangerous wrote:
emtiem wrote:

DC is an alpha male, very masculine type who pretty much matches Bond. And when we say matches the Bond description, that's a sort of vaguely agreed-upon definition reached by combining the movie actors who have defined him- it's moved beyond Fleming's version of Bond which none of the actors have really matched all that well.

I'm not sure that 'the Bond description' should move beyond Fleming's version, or pretty soon Bond will be reduced to just another generic, anodyne action hero. And why stop at convincingly British, attractive and vaguely athletic? If you dispense with the essential 'Bond description' you can pretty much dispense with everything else, so he could be played by anyone from Arnold Schwarzenegger to Danny DeVito...  ajb007/lol

That's a pretty textbook strawman argument so I'm not really going to go into that.
I would say that it's too late to complain about it moving beyond Fleming's description as that happened a long time ago.

98

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

That’s rich, ad hominem calling the straw man black  ajb007/lol

"...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.....

99

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Fleming's conception of Bond doesn't seem to be as ruggedly masculine as Eon favoured in the early '60s. They were looking for a Stanley Baker type, while Fleming preferred Richard Todd and Edward Underdown.

Having seen quite a few films with all those actors, I'd agree those were good choices.

Richard Johnson would've been good too, as mentioned.

The only time Cubby went slightly off-piste was casting Roger (my favourite, as it happens), as they were trying to pick someone who was already a household name as opposed to establishing a star from scratch as they had done with Lazenby. Dalton was a more organic choice. Brosnan was stereo-typically good-looking which, as it turned out, was a perfect decision for the metro-sexual '90s of lurid after-shave commercials and preening pin-ups.

100

Re: Daniel Craig was miscast as James Bond? I think so

superado wrote:

That’s rich, ad hominem calling the straw man black  ajb007/lol

? I haven't had a go at you?