The thing I like about Craig is that he's NOT Pierce Brosnan. I'm not saying I didn't like Pierce, but with Craig we are assured that they're not simply trying to emulate what came before. Craig will bring his own mark to the series and is without a doubt a "unique" choice. Once we see DC in a tux and properly dyed hair wielding a Walther, I'll think many fans will be intrigued to what he brings to the table.
Personally I think we will just have to all wait and see what the film is like. When Pierce Brosnan was cast, it was Pierce who? I didn't really know the guy and so never had any assumptions or expectations. I think it will be important to take this stand with Daniel. When the film is released, watch it with an open mind. If you watch it with negative thoughts then you will have already made up your mind.
Sorry to jump in as a new member to the forum, but Pierce had long been considered for Bond before he actually got the part. The only reason Tim Dalton (who turned it down before Moore got it because he considered himself too young) took the role was because Pierce couldn't get released from his contract with Remington Steele in time.
I think the way things were going, Pierce was in danger of doing a Moore and running the franchise into the ground, becoming a camp caricature of Bond.
It was time for a change, but I don't think this was the right one. I'm not knocking Craig as an actor, I think he's very good, but not for Bond. I've been convinced it would be Clive Owen since 2000 when he was in the TV police drama Second Sight, and every stage of his grooming process has made me even more sure. The Croupier, internet BMW ads (when BMW was the Bond car), assassin in Bourne Identity, more big budget movies introducing him to the US market etc. So today's announcement has come as a big shock and disappointment to me.
I'll still be queuing up to see Casino Royale on its release, because that's what Bond Anoraks do, but I'm going to take some convincing that Craig was the right choice over Owen.
I'm excited Daniel Craig is the new Bond. He may not be male model handsome, but so what. The man gives me the vibe of a cold secret agent. That's what I want out of Bond.
Who cares what general polls think of the man based on a few photos they may not approve of. Daniel Craig is the start of a new era of Bond pictures and it will be a long wait for the next year until Casino Royale premieres.
scaramanga1The English RivieraPosts: 845Chief of Staff
If you follow this link there are acouple of clips from Archangel which put Craig into a spy thriller sort of setting. Check him out -he looks pretty good as in some lights his hair is not quite so blond and you can imagine him as 007 -also note the line about Martinis!
Well, I've pretty much had my say on Mr. Craig elsewhere, so here's how it stands now. First of all, congratulations, Daniel--your life has now changed, perhaps not for the better (as reading some of the comments here may show you). Second, as for Yours Never-So-Humbly, I find myself in the unusual position of Loyal Opposition. Like a career politician whose party is out of power, I will remain loyal to the concept of James Bond while opposing the current regime. EON, it's now up to you. You have one year to convince those of us in the Opposition that Daniel Craig is the right man at the right time. You also owe us a damned good movie. Since Craig is hardly an A-list actor (yet), the rest of the cast should be made up of the cream of the crop. The script that Paul Haggis is currently revising should have sparkling dialogue, real human interaction, and a solid plot. The action should be exciting and believable. Casino Royale should be a movie I will be proud to put among my DVDs, not one that I have on hand just to complete the collection. Again, EON, the ball is in your court.
For the present, my feelings can be summed up thus:
It's over with. Months and months and months of debate and discussion and plain old fashioned whining and now it's settled. It's sorted. The ink has dried and Daniel Craig is Bond #6. And milliseconds after his announcement we are getting posts of Worst. Bond. Ever.
Points in Craig's favour, as far as I'm concerned:
1) He's a good looking British white male in his late 30s. Which, last time I looked, was the description of James Bond on his passport. (And quite frankly I can't believe that there's a debate about his looks!)
2) He's a fantastic, charismatic actor who, though looking suave and sophisticated, also looks like he could beat the living daylights out of you if he wanted.
3) He's not Orlando Bloom, Henry Cavill, or any other of the candidates who looked like they were just developing pubic hairs for the first time.
I think we're on to a winner here, personally. And though I'm still nervous about Casino Royale as a film (no Q, fine; but no Moneypenny!?!?!) I'm pretty sure Daniel Craig won't be the reason it fails. And as for the decision on whether or not it has failed, I'll wait until next Winter to decide - instead of making my mind up before a single frame has been shot.
Oh and PS for all the comments about him being a coward - Roger Moore freely admitted that he used to ruin takes by flinching when guns went off, not to mention the fact that he handed over to Martin Grace without a moment's hesitation. He's an actor. So long as he acts brave and heroic and indestructible, what else do you need?
This will be last comment on Craig. I find him to be a very disappointing choice. He simply is not James Bond, all the reasons have been mentioned before so I won't go over them again, he just has the wrong look. The reaction to him has been very poor throughout the world. Why? Because the general movie going public has a perception of what Bond looks like based on 40 years of experiance and Craig does not look like Bond. I predict the box office for CR will be a disappointment and the Bond franchise will once again be on shaking ground. I hope the producers remember a Bond movie above everything should be FUN. Yes, we want thrill, chills, stunts, beautiful women, some gadgets, realistic espionage moments, but mostly we want to have fun at the movies. If the producers turn this movie into some dark sinister violent episode it will be an even bigger disappointment. If they make it a Bourne movie they have made an even bigger mistake because the Bourne movies are a different style, they lack the charm and class of Bond. Bond should not be trying to imitate another movie it should be blazing the trail in front.
I don't know what they are thinking, I wish I was in the room with them when they discussed it, but I think they have made a big mistake. I have nothing against Mr. Craig, he is a fine actor, but Bond is not the role for him.
I hate to keep bringing up Cubby, but Cubby was showman and he knew what the public wanted and he gave it to them bigger and better than they expected. Unfortunately the current keepers of the franchise do not understand this. They treated Brosnan poorly and not they are treating Bond fans poorly.
Well, I've pretty much had my say on Mr. Craig elsewhere, so here's how it stands now. First of all, congratulations, Daniel--your life has now changed, perhaps not for the better (as reading some of the comments here may show you). Second, as for Yours Never-So-Humbly, I find myself in the unusual position of Loyal Opposition. Like a career politician whose party is out of power, I will remain loyal to the concept of James Bond while opposing the current regime. EON, it's now up to you. You have one year to convince those of us in the Opposition that Daniel Craig is the right man at the right time. You also owe us a damned good movie. Since Craig is hardly an A-list actor (yet), the rest of the cast should be made up of the cream of the crop. The script that Paul Haggis is currently revising should have sparkling dialogue, real human interaction, and a solid plot. The action should be exciting and believable. Casino Royale should be a movie I will be proud to put among my DVDs, not one that I have on hand just to complete the collection. Again, EON, the ball is in your court.
For the present, my feelings can be summed up thus:
That pic is friggin' priceless under the circumstances...:)) ) )
Mrs. Man Face: "You wouldn't hit a lady? Would you?"
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice isUNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
If the producers turn this movie into some dark sinister violent episode it will be an even bigger disappointment.
I completely disagree. A dark, sinister, violent episode (a more authentic, literary Bond episode) will at least make up for the poor judgement on the casting.
scaramanga1The English RivieraPosts: 845Chief of Staff
You know I find all the negative vibes about Craig quite dissappointing -he has only just been announced and people are expecting him to fail. Every actor out there needs a break and this is Craig's -so what he wasn't an A lister before getting the part he is one now- He can be menacing and has good screen presence -he's also more likely to be a believable Bond than say if Hugh Jackman had go the part. As Bond fans we should be happy we now have a new 007 -the next thing for us to do is to get behind him and give him the encouragement he may need to see things through and show the fans what he is capable of.
so come on its not doom and gloom -it should be a time of optimism and anticipation.
so come on its not doom and gloom -it should be a time of optimism and anticipation.
Mt problem can be summed up in three expressions: Martin Campbell... Casino Royale... Daniel Craig... For me, these are the biggest problems in this order.
so come on its not doom and gloom -it should be a time of optimism and anticipation.
Mt problem can be summed up in three expressions: Martin Campbell... Casino Royale... Daniel Craig... For me, these are the biggest problems in this order.
Well we are all entitled to our own opinions and it seems I'm flogging a dead horse -but all this negativity is beginning to bring me down -as the "fan" community seem so divided. Instead of at last being happy that things are happening -many of you are being critical through ignorance and assumptions. You all seem to be presuming a huge mistake has been made - yet not one of us has seen CR. The film is yet to be made and despite some mistakes along the way - this franchise is the longest running in the movie business and as a result has people onboard that know what they want and how to make the film they envisage. So lets not put down any individuals but instead apreciate the hard job he's got and only rip him to pieces if his performance lacks believability.
Craig is only my smallest gripe... I'm only afraid that the current "talents" associated with the movie can't kick a good movie under him. And ALL of them have shown me what they can "do" already, sometimes even on more occasions...
Well Craig has to be better than Brosnan who hasn't made a decent Bond picture since 1995. Let's face it the last three movies were cr*p.
Well, since Brosnan neither directed nor wrote the screenplays for the movies, I don't think he is entirely to blame, if you didn't like them, now is he?
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,993Quartermasters
JAMES BOND IS DEAD. LONG LIVE JAMES BOND.
Congratulations, Mr. Craig. You weren't my first choice---in fact, you were pretty close to my last choice (just before Vern Troyer), but now that you've been cast, I wish you all the best, and you will receive the benefit of my doubt...via one purchased ticket for admission to 'Casino Royale' on opening day. Whether I purchase additional tickets is up to you...and the filmmakers.
I've said my share of negative things about your aesthetically-challenged features, your vertically-challenged height and your smaller-than-usual body frame. All of these are part of who you are, and they will thus be a part of your interpretation of the role.
This won't be a picnic for you, Mr. Craig. You have a hostile fan-base, and you've already been co-opted by a wretched bourgeois poker fad, so you won't have the class of a Baccarat game to buttress you.
My advice to you: Use your new capital with Eon (such as it is) to insist on a few things in the script. Your Bond should be more fastidious, like Fleming's literary character, to offset what some might see as your deficient areas. Tell Campbell you don't want to just order a Martini, "shaken not stirred." Provide complete preparation instructions for the bartender, as your literary counterpart did in the novel. You should be able to tell the difference between a vodka made from grain instead of potatoes. You should be equally picky about your food, and clothing. You should straighten your tie, after brutally killing a man, within the first five minutes of the film's beginning. You should be urbane and smooth in your delivery of the lines, and determine the precise amount of cocky arrogance necessary for you to allow this iconic character to occupy your skin on the big screen.
And, 007? Try not to muck it up. :007)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Well Craig has to be better than Brosnan who hasn't made a decent Bond picture since 1995. Let's face it the last three movies were cr*p.
Well, since Brosnan neither directed nor wrote the screenplays for the movies, I don't think he is entirely to blame, if you didn't like them, now is he?
The accusation on Brosnan can be re-directed towards the producers' failure to get a quality writing team to put together improved plots...
I do believe Brosnan has brought that up on more than one occasion during his tenor...
Mrs. Man Face: "You wouldn't hit a lady? Would you?"
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice isUNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
I wish Mr. Craig all the best. With half of the fans around the world saying they cannot believe it (me included), it will be an uphill battle to convince and win us over to his interpretation.
I am also facinated that the film will not have Miss Moneypenny in it (according to the BBC article) The producers have said that 'M' will be in it but they did not say if Judi Dench will be back. - Interesting.
Perhaps they are trying to bring Bond back to the Cold War era. Now that would make me happy.
I'm actually become quite excited at the prospect of Craig as Bond. The images I'm seeing remind me of the grittier "noir-ish" side of Bond, which I think is exactly what the series needs right now. One of the problem is that over the past few years Bond fandom has been slowly splitting into different factions ( the 'Bring Brosnan Back' party, the "Butler for Bond" league, or the "Clive Owen as 007" lobbyists) and now that everyone has had time to generate their own conceptions of what would make the Best Bond, anything else will be disappointing. Give Craig a chance, I say. If you hate Craig, you can at least give him the chance to prove your feelings about him were right.
RogueAgentSpeeding in the Tumbler...Posts: 3,676MI6 Agent
I wish Mr. Craig all the best. With half of the fans around the world saying they cannot believe it (me included), it will be an uphill battle to convince and win us over to his interpretation.
I am also facinated that the film will not have Miss Moneypenny in it (according to the BBC article) The producers have said that 'M' will be in it but they did not say if Judi Dench will be back. - Interesting.
Perhaps they are trying to bring Bond back to the Cold War era. Now that would make me happy.
If we have to deal and accept Mr. Craig, the least that they can do is get rid of Dench and get the pre-part right. A male M...
I am soooo od'ed on Dench anyway.
Mrs. Man Face: "You wouldn't hit a lady? Would you?"
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice isUNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
Comments
Perhaps the producers are on a power inducing drug, that is mind altering! Whatever it is, I'll take a double of what they are smokin'.
Who cares what general polls think of the man based on a few photos they may not approve of. Daniel Craig is the start of a new era of Bond pictures and it will be a long wait for the next year until Casino Royale premieres.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/drama/archangel/photogallery_kelso.shtml
Apologies, that is how I have solidified how many of us feel.
For the present, my feelings can be summed up thus:
Points in Craig's favour, as far as I'm concerned:
1) He's a good looking British white male in his late 30s. Which, last time I looked, was the description of James Bond on his passport. (And quite frankly I can't believe that there's a debate about his looks!)
2) He's a fantastic, charismatic actor who, though looking suave and sophisticated, also looks like he could beat the living daylights out of you if he wanted.
3) He's not Orlando Bloom, Henry Cavill, or any other of the candidates who looked like they were just developing pubic hairs for the first time.
I think we're on to a winner here, personally. And though I'm still nervous about Casino Royale as a film (no Q, fine; but no Moneypenny!?!?!) I'm pretty sure Daniel Craig won't be the reason it fails. And as for the decision on whether or not it has failed, I'll wait until next Winter to decide - instead of making my mind up before a single frame has been shot.
Oh and PS for all the comments about him being a coward - Roger Moore freely admitted that he used to ruin takes by flinching when guns went off, not to mention the fact that he handed over to Martin Grace without a moment's hesitation. He's an actor. So long as he acts brave and heroic and indestructible, what else do you need?
@merseytart
I don't know what they are thinking, I wish I was in the room with them when they discussed it, but I think they have made a big mistake. I have nothing against Mr. Craig, he is a fine actor, but Bond is not the role for him.
I hate to keep bringing up Cubby, but Cubby was showman and he knew what the public wanted and he gave it to them bigger and better than they expected. Unfortunately the current keepers of the franchise do not understand this. They treated Brosnan poorly and not they are treating Bond fans poorly.
With that I am done.
That pic is friggin' priceless under the circumstances...:))
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice is UNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
granted for we fans (well the anti-craig group) the whole movie might be a torture scene...
...sigh...
Funny you should say that...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/classic/gallery/eccleston/images/800/ecc09.jpg
I completely disagree. A dark, sinister, violent episode (a more authentic, literary Bond episode) will at least make up for the poor judgement on the casting.
so come on its not doom and gloom -it should be a time of optimism and anticipation.
Mt problem can be summed up in three expressions: Martin Campbell... Casino Royale... Daniel Craig... For me, these are the biggest problems in this order.
http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/5463/craigbond8sc.jpg
(MGM image removed by jetsetwilly)
I guess it really is the beginning of the end!
Well we are all entitled to our own opinions and it seems I'm flogging a dead horse -but all this negativity is beginning to bring me down -as the "fan" community seem so divided. Instead of at last being happy that things are happening -many of you are being critical through ignorance and assumptions. You all seem to be presuming a huge mistake has been made - yet not one of us has seen CR. The film is yet to be made and despite some mistakes along the way - this franchise is the longest running in the movie business and as a result has people onboard that know what they want and how to make the film they envisage. So lets not put down any individuals but instead apreciate the hard job he's got and only rip him to pieces if his performance lacks believability.
Well, since Brosnan neither directed nor wrote the screenplays for the movies, I don't think he is entirely to blame, if you didn't like them, now is he?
Congratulations, Mr. Craig. You weren't my first choice---in fact, you were pretty close to my last choice (just before Vern Troyer), but now that you've been cast, I wish you all the best, and you will receive the benefit of my doubt...via one purchased ticket for admission to 'Casino Royale' on opening day. Whether I purchase additional tickets is up to you...and the filmmakers.
I've said my share of negative things about your aesthetically-challenged features, your vertically-challenged height and your smaller-than-usual body frame. All of these are part of who you are, and they will thus be a part of your interpretation of the role.
This won't be a picnic for you, Mr. Craig. You have a hostile fan-base, and you've already been co-opted by a wretched bourgeois poker fad, so you won't have the class of a Baccarat game to buttress you.
My advice to you: Use your new capital with Eon (such as it is) to insist on a few things in the script. Your Bond should be more fastidious, like Fleming's literary character, to offset what some might see as your deficient areas. Tell Campbell you don't want to just order a Martini, "shaken not stirred." Provide complete preparation instructions for the bartender, as your literary counterpart did in the novel. You should be able to tell the difference between a vodka made from grain instead of potatoes. You should be equally picky about your food, and clothing. You should straighten your tie, after brutally killing a man, within the first five minutes of the film's beginning. You should be urbane and smooth in your delivery of the lines, and determine the precise amount of cocky arrogance necessary for you to allow this iconic character to occupy your skin on the big screen.
And, 007? Try not to muck it up. :007)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
The accusation on Brosnan can be re-directed towards the producers' failure to get a quality writing team to put together improved plots...
I do believe Brosnan has brought that up on more than one occasion during his tenor...
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice is UNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -
I am also facinated that the film will not have Miss Moneypenny in it (according to the BBC article) The producers have said that 'M' will be in it but they did not say if Judi Dench will be back. - Interesting.
Perhaps they are trying to bring Bond back to the Cold War era. Now that would make me happy.
If we have to deal and accept Mr. Craig, the least that they can do is get rid of Dench and get the pre-part right. A male M...
I am soooo od'ed on Dench anyway.
Batman: "The Hammer Of Justice is UNISEX!"
-Batman: The Brave & The Bold -