To say Craig isn't suave is wrong. He is an actor (and a damn good actor at that) so can play any side to the character he wants.
It's neither wrong nor right. It's an opinion. As far as I'm concerned, Craig isn't suave. I also don't agree that he's a 'damn good actor' as you say. In fact I think he's a very overrated actor.
It's just that CR dictated that Bond was not to be suave in this particular film. But I think this will change for Bond 22.
Perhaps, which is why I think the reboot is a terrible idea.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Maybe. I can't tell you what to think. All I can say is that while you may find it shallow, I think it's as shallow as all of the characteristics that you may think are important; that is, not shallow. So, you can continue thinking I'm shallow but I'll go on thinking you're not, as your essential Bondian characteristics are IMO as (un)shallow as my essential Bondian characteristics such as suaveness. -{
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,990Quartermasters
Well, since the final scene of CR is, in effect, the launching point for future films, I'd say that Bond will be a bit more 'finalized' the next time we see him...
For those of us whose bedrock expectations of Bond's character are rooted in the novels, the pervasive 'suaveness' of the cinematic version---which occasionally veered into 'smarminess' over the course of 40 years, IMRO---has been over-emphasized more often than not.
Thankfully, the thunderous success of CR shows that there is a market for an alternate (read: less dandified) take on the character.
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
As far as I'm concerned, Craig isn't suave. I also don't agree that he's a 'damn good actor' as you say. In fact I think he's a very overrated actor.
True, just your opinion Dan. However, by what we have learned from most film reviewers across the planet, and from most fans on the Bond forum community, you are in the minority with your opinion.
Just back from a week in Hawaii -- aloha! The original post describes Callan more than Bond, and I don't think that's the correct route to go. I also don't think Craig's Bond is all that different than previous ones -- he basically resets the series by bringing testosterone back into the mix, giving us a Bond who feels like 75 percent Connery/Lazenby, 20 percent Dalton, and 5 percent Moore/Brosnan. They can alter the percentages a bit, but I really want a tough and unpredictable Bond for a while longer before we get back to the more formulaic, by-the-numbers figure that dominated later films.
True, just your opinion Dan. However, by what we have learned from most film reviewers across the planet, and from most fans on the Bond forum community, you are in the minority with your opinion.
Well, I don't know if it's just my opinion but it (minority opinion or otherwise) is just as valid as any other opinion out there.
I don't need to have the support of being one of the majority to feel good about my views. It's like with Moore; apparently he's no longer all that popular, which doesn't worry me even though he is still my third favourite Bond (behind Connery and Brosnan.) Does the fact that you are referring to all of these film reviewers and the majority of Bond fans (who like Craig) mean that you aren't fully comfortable with your positive opinion of him? :v
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
I don't need to have the support of being one of the majority to feel good about my views. It's like with Moore; apparently he's no longer all that popular, which doesn't worry me even though he is still my third favourite Bond (behind Connery and Brosnan.)
As a Roger Moore Bond fan, I am beginning to feel very lonely.
Obviously, it would be very nice from my point of view if Roger was more popular than he is, but that's the way it is. I certainly feel very comfortable with my position and very good about my views.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,990Quartermasters
This is why Bond is the pre-eminent long-term franchise in the history of film: Nowhere else can you get such diversity and variety---not just variations in style and tone, but also in lead actors---and this from a series which has survived, arguably, on the predictability of its formula!
What a paradox. What a character...
: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
Your opinion is just as valid as anyone else's......except mine. :v
You're right. This is what I should have said; 'I don't know if it's just my opinion but it (minority opinion or otherwise) is just as valid as any other opinion out there except for that of MNL.'
As a Roger Moore Bond fan, I am beginning to feel very lonely.
Obviously, it would be very nice from my point of view if Roger was more popular than he is, but that's the way it is. I certainly feel very comfortable with my position and very good about my views.
Me too. It's just that even Sir Roger himself realises that with the release of a new Bond film, he is a great target for the critics.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Well, I don't know if it's just my opinion but it (minority opinion or otherwise) is just as valid as any other opinion out there.
In your opinion, it's valid.:)
Actually more so. I remember talking to someone about organised religion, and they were saying that there's nothing wrong with them thinking that their religion was superior to other religions as long as they acknowledged that others felt the same way about their religion. Well, I consider my opinion to be more valid than anyone else's which isn't bad because everyone else probably feels the same. -{
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
This is why Bond is the pre-eminent long-term franchise in the history of film: Nowhere else can you get such diversity and variety---not just variations in style and tone, but also in lead actors---and this from a series which has survived, arguably, on the predictability of its formula!
What a paradox. What a character...
:007)
Absolutely true. If someone doesn't like Moore, that's alright, there's always the Connery/Lazenby/Dalton/Craig films, and if someone doesn't like Craig/Dalton, there's always the other films. (I wonder whom I could be describing in this example? ) It's a huge universe. It's also why I believe that I'll always be a huge Bond fan; even though my tastes have changed and will change yet again (I used to love TMWTGG and dislike FRWL and now it's the reverse) I'm confident that there'll be always be Bond films suiting my taste. -{
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
This is why Bond is the pre-eminent long-term franchise in the history of film: Nowhere else can you get such diversity and variety---not just variations in style and tone, but also in lead actors---and this from a series which has survived, arguably, on the predictability of its formula!
What a paradox. What a character...
:007)
Excellent, Loeffelholz. Keep spreading the word. We are talking about a series that will outlast all of us, mark my words on that. (Can any other franchise even come close?)
Cubby was asked in the 70's about how long the series will last. His response? "Until doomsday."
And you are spot-on, L., part of the Bond appeal is "the variations of tone and style". The diversity of the series (within a specific narrow framework) is becoming more impressive wth each passing film. "What a paradox" iindeed!
And as for Bond as a Villian, has anyone pointed out that we have already had at least two Bond villians who are the mirror image of 007. I speak of course of Scaramanga and Sanchez.
If one wants to see what Bond would be as a bad-guy take a very close look at these two gentlemen.
BTW, I find it fascinating that Robert Davi played Bond during the screen-tests of LTK and, according to John Glen, was impressive as 007. (Talk about mirror image!)
Does the fact that you are referring to all of these film reviewers and the majority of Bond fans (who like Craig) mean that you aren't fully comfortable with your positive opinion of him? :v
Ohhhh, you bugger you!!
I just meant that times have changed. I always felt that a year ago I was in the minority with my positive opinion on Craig, yet now everything has reversed.
Comments
True. He was suave there. But he still had his `rough round the edges' moments too - which I didn't mind, I'd like to add.
But I think the suaveness will gently creep in more with Bond 22.
It's neither wrong nor right. It's an opinion. As far as I'm concerned, Craig isn't suave. I also don't agree that he's a 'damn good actor' as you say. In fact I think he's a very overrated actor.
Perhaps, which is why I think the reboot is a terrible idea.
If you truly believe that (and I doubt that
Maybe. I can't tell you what to think. All I can say is that while you may find it shallow, I think it's as shallow as all of the characteristics that you may think are important; that is, not shallow. So, you can continue thinking I'm shallow but I'll go on thinking you're not, as your essential Bondian characteristics are IMO as (un)shallow as my essential Bondian characteristics such as suaveness. -{
For those of us whose bedrock expectations of Bond's character are rooted in the novels, the pervasive 'suaveness' of the cinematic version---which occasionally veered into 'smarminess' over the course of 40 years, IMRO---has been over-emphasized more often than not.
Thankfully, the thunderous success of CR shows that there is a market for an alternate (read: less dandified) take on the character.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
True, just your opinion Dan. However, by what we have learned from most film reviewers across the planet, and from most fans on the Bond forum community, you are in the minority with your opinion.
I don't need to have the support of being one of the majority to feel good about my views. It's like with Moore; apparently he's no longer all that popular, which doesn't worry me even though he is still my third favourite Bond (behind Connery and Brosnan.) Does the fact that you are referring to all of these film reviewers and the majority of Bond fans (who like Craig) mean that you aren't fully comfortable with your positive opinion of him? :v
Your opinion is just as valid as anyone else's......except mine. :v
As a Roger Moore Bond fan, I am beginning to feel very lonely.
Obviously, it would be very nice from my point of view if Roger was more popular than he is, but that's the way it is. I certainly feel very comfortable with my position and very good about my views.
What a paradox. What a character...
:007)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Me too.
Excellent, Loeffelholz. Keep spreading the word. We are talking about a series that will outlast all of us, mark my words on that. (Can any other franchise even come close?)
Cubby was asked in the 70's about how long the series will last. His response? "Until doomsday."
And you are spot-on, L., part of the Bond appeal is "the variations of tone and style". The diversity of the series (within a specific narrow framework) is becoming more impressive wth each passing film. "What a paradox" iindeed!
And as for Bond as a Villian, has anyone pointed out that we have already had at least two Bond villians who are the mirror image of 007. I speak of course of Scaramanga and Sanchez.
If one wants to see what Bond would be as a bad-guy take a very close look at these two gentlemen.
BTW, I find it fascinating that Robert Davi played Bond during the screen-tests of LTK and, according to John Glen, was impressive as 007. (Talk about mirror image!)
"World domination...same old dream."
Ohhhh, you bugger you!!
I just meant that times have changed. I always felt that a year ago I was in the minority with my positive opinion on Craig, yet now everything has reversed.
Not that any of this really matters anyway.....