•The Adventures of Tintin:
•Dream House
•Defiance
•The Golden Compass
•The Invasion
•Munich
•Lara Croft: Tomb Raider
All big budget entertainment all made for Big audiences. and all huge big hits. B-)
He guarantees Bums on seats, and lives up to the hype .........
"One of the greatest actors of his generation "
Behave! ... Was Craig actually billed as the headline for all of these? After all you can hardly say that DC's mere presence was supposed to be the key behind potential success for Lara Croft or Tintin can you?! I also thought that Munich was favourably received by critics?
Like David Schofield & Gala Brand have said, I think that DC is more at home with indie / arty type of movies and therefore won't reel in bucket loads of cash in the box office. Does this make him a bad actor though?
•The Adventures of Tintin:
•Dream House
•Defiance
•The Golden Compass
•The Invasion
•Munich
•Lara Croft: Tomb Raider
All big budget entertainment all made for Big audiences. and all huge big hits. B-)
He guarantees Bums on seats, and lives up to the hype .........
"One of the greatest actors of his generation "
He had secondary roles in Tintin, The Golden Compass and Lara Croft. Dream House, Defiance, The Invasion, and Munich were all relatively low budget (less than $70 million each). They were "Art House" thrillers like TGWTDT. Munich was hardly a typical Steven Spielberg movie, for example.
After further consideration, I decided I was right all along. )
•The Adventures of Tintin:
•Dream House
•Defiance
•The Golden Compass
•The Invasion
•Munich
•Lara Croft: Tomb Raider
All big budget entertainment all made for Big audiences. and all huge big hits. B-)
He guarantees Bums on seats, and lives up to the hype .........
"One of the greatest actors of his generation "
He had secondary roles in Tintin, The Golden Compass and Lara Croft. Dream House, Defiance, The Invasion, and Munich were all relatively low budget (less than $70 million each). They were "Art House" thrillers like TGWTDT. Munich was hardly a typical Steven Spielberg movie, for example.
After further consideration, I decided I was right all along. )
I think the point is that Craig would prefer art house/indie pictures, but realises his star co-efficient and living standards are only fulfilled by franchise and mainstream films whether in the lead or as a supporting banana.
Much of me thinks that he really did feel Bond was beneath him back in 2005 but was easily convinced by kind words from BB, the proposal of the "new direction" and some of the talent involved AND what it would do for his career star-powerwise and, as much as anything, his bank balance.
Daniel Craig Bond fans are just going to have to get used to the haters, they are not going away.
Craig fans will have to grow thicker skins, if they haven't already. Speaking as a Roger Moore Bond fan you wouldn't believe how many layers of skin I've grown over the years.
Oh, to be a Sean Connery Bond fan. I am really, it's just that I like Roger......Moore
It's the age of the internet. Everybody has their own bully pulpit.
Could you imagine the venom if the net existed back when Connery stepped down. George Lazenby would have been
skewered without mercy. Or the heated debates over Roger Moore...."Perfect for the role, should have been him not Connery" vs "Sissy pretty boy, can only act with one eyebrow" and on and on and on........
Or the comments by people who were really big fans of the books re the choice of Connery to play Bond would probably have been vicious: "Scottish Oaf"; "Unknown B movie actor"; "coffin poilsher with a 6th grade education"; plenty of big ear jokes and lots of "why couldn't they get David Niven, James Mason, or Cary Grant?".....and on and on.
Daniel Craig Bond fans are just going to have to get used to the haters, they are not going away.
Craig fans will have to grow thicker skins, if they haven't already.
My skin is gator-thick. In point of fact, I'm a Bond fan rather than a Craig fan, and I've found reason to praise all six of the actors who've played 007. What I object to about Craig-haters is the SAMENESS of their arguments: he's ugly, he's short, and every single one of his movies has been a massive flop--including, some will argue, his two Bond films (they can usually point to indecipherable numbers and cryptic insider knowledge if you doubt them). It's also hilarious that they tend to depict anyone who has something good to say about Craig as belonging to a brainwashed cult, when THEY are the ones who spout doctrinaire arguments about the evil that is Daniel Craig.
Vox clamantis in deserto
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,993Quartermasters
I guess it doesn't take much to get the Craig haters going.
Tell me about it. Craig could save a basket full of puppies from a burning building and the usual mob would start screaming, "Yeah, but he looked like crap doing it! Somebody that short can't save puppies! This is the only time Craig has been appreciated by puppies--every other time he's around them they just pee on him!"
It's apparently easy to forget the morass of box office medocrity in which Sean Connery languished in the late Seventies and early Eighties...and Roger Moore's modest resume of non-Bond box office hits. What Craigger needs, clearly, is a Zardoz or a Cannonball Run to boost his credibility B-)
I've no thinness of skin as a Craig-Bond fan; it's all scar tissue after the Craig WarsTM of '06, and the tempestuousness of the QoS Revolt of '08. As Hardy says, there are things to enjoy and appreciate about all six actors; we all have our favourites and least-favourites. I'm hoping that SF, at the very least, provides a fresh dimension of objectionable material for Craig Detractors...and that they continue to be challenged as his tenure continues to #24 and hopefully beyond. But, like Claude Rains in Casablanca, I will take what comes :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
Daniel Craig Bond fans are just going to have to get used to the haters, they are not going away.
Craig fans will have to grow thicker skins, if they haven't already.
My skin is gator-thick. In point of fact, I'm a Bond fan rather than a Craig fan, and I've found reason to praise all six of the actors who've played 007. What I object to about Craig-haters is the SAMENESS of their arguments: he's ugly, he's short, and every single one of his movies has been a massive flop--including, some will argue, his two Bond films (they can usually point to indecipherable numbers and cryptic insider knowledge if you doubt them). It's also hilarious that they tend to depict anyone who has something good to say about Craig as belonging to a brainwashed cult, when THEY are the ones who spout doctrinaire arguments about the evil that is Daniel Craig.
I could say the same thing about the Roger Moore haters except I would replace ugly and short with old and arthritic. And just for the record I do like Daniel Craig as Bond. Would like to see him lighten up a bit in Skyfall. Not counting on it though.
Moore Not Less 4371 posts (2002 - 2007) Moore Than (2012 - 2016)
Daniel Craig Bond fans are just going to have to get used to the haters, they are not going away.
Craig fans will have to grow thicker skins, if they haven't already.
My skin is gator-thick. In point of fact, I'm a Bond fan rather than a Craig fan, and I've found reason to praise all six of the actors who've played 007. What I object to about Craig-haters is the SAMENESS of their arguments: he's ugly, he's short, and every single one of his movies has been a massive flop--including, some will argue, his two Bond films (they can usually point to indecipherable numbers and cryptic insider knowledge if you doubt them). It's also hilarious that they tend to depict anyone who has something good to say about Craig as belonging to a brainwashed cult, when THEY are the ones who spout doctrinaire arguments about the evil that is Daniel Craig.
I could say the same thing about the Roger Moore haters except I would replace ugly and short with old and arthritic. And just for the record I do like Daniel Craig as Bond. Would like to see him lighten up a bit in Skyfall. Not counting on it though.
Moore Than is quite right.
All the Bonds cause divergent opinions and all the criticisms repeated are always the same.
Perhaps criticism of the current Bond, whoever that might be, makes his admirers more sensitive?
Personally, I like Craig as Bond, but I can see why some have problems with him. And that is entirely their perogative.
What I've never understood is the criticism that the Craig films are "not James Bond films." There is no genre known as a "James Bond film". The films have varied greatly in tone and content over the years. Even the Connery films are highly variable. "From Russia with Love" was a conventional spy movie that could've been written by Eric Ambler and filmed by Alfred Hitchcock. "Diamonds Are Forever" is practically a spoof of the spy genre. A James Bond film is a film featuring James Bond, just as a Sherlock Holmes film is a film featuring Sherlock Holmes. Nothing more. Whether the movie is any good is a judgment to be made on the usual criteria: script, direction, acting, editing, etc. Not what the name of the main character is.
What I've never understood is the criticism that the Craig films are "not James Bond films." There is no genre known as a "James Bond film". The films have varied greatly in tone and content over the years. Even the Connery films are highly variable. "From Russia with Love" was a conventional spy movie that could've been written by Eric Ambler and filmed by Alfred Hitchcock. "Diamonds Are Forever" is practically a spoof of the spy genre. A James Bond film is a film featuring James Bond, just as a Sherlock Holmes film is a film featuring Sherlock Holmes. Nothing more. Whether the movie is any good is a judgment to be made on the usual criteria: script, direction, acting, editing, etc. Not what the name of the main character is.
Bravo, Gala. Like I wrote in another thread, where some were hoping that Bond will return to "the good old days" once Craig leaves, there is no one standard James Bond Film or one set way they should be made. I believe in taking the films as they come and for what they are.
I guess it doesn't take much to get the Craig haters going.
Tell me about it. Craig could save a basket full of puppies from a burning building and the usual mob would start screaming, "Yeah, but he looked like crap doing it! Somebody that short can't save puppies! This is the only time Craig has been appreciated by puppies--every other time he's around them they just pee on him!"
It's apparently easy to forget the morass of box office medocrity in which Sean Connery languished in the late Seventies and early Eighties...and Roger Moore's modest resume of non-Bond box office hits. What Craigger needs, clearly, is a Zardoz or a Cannonball Run to boost his credibility B-)
I've no thinness of skin as a Craig-Bond fan; it's all scar tissue after the Craig WarsTM of '06, and the tempestuousness of the QoS Revolt of '08. As Hardy says, there are things to enjoy and appreciate about all six actors; we all have our favourites and least-favourites. I'm hoping that SF, at the very least, provides a fresh dimension of objectionable material for Craig Detractors...and that they continue to be challenged as his tenure continues to #24 and hopefully beyond. But, like Claude Rains in Casablanca, I will take what comes :007)
Hey, Loeff!
Even int he 60s, Connery struggled -- ever watch "A Fine Madness" or "Another Place, Another Time"? Connery didn't really hit his stride after the Bond films until "The Untouchables" more or less resurrected his languishing career.
None of the Bond actors have ever had much success outside the series. All of them have had films open on the back of them being Bond, but few have been hits. Without Bond, would any of the actors have opened a major movie?
Skills wise and popularity-wise, with the profile of Bond and his own desire to be an A-lister, I'd suggest Craig is in the best position to rectify that shortcoming.
Whether he does or not, or whether his chances have already come and gone, remains to be seen.
i honestly think that dalton would have had a big break even without being a bond.
a quick squiz at imdb reveals;
brosnan has done quite a few films post bond, mama mia, the ghost and laws of attraction being the more well known.
dalton has kept his hand in the acting pot, but tends to do more tv and voice work rather than films.
moore does more charity work than acting i think, and appears to do similar work to dalton
lazenby surprisingly has done more tv work than the previously two mentioned
connery hasn't done much, but there are a few big names, indiana jones, hunt for red october, the avengers, the rock, entrapment to name a few.
i think craig breaks the mould somewhat, being that he's done and doing other big name films at the same time, before, during, and i hope, after bond.
i think craig was, and would continue to be a good high earning actor without being bond. but the difference with him is that he's not allowed being james bond to stop him being able to do other things, which i think must be down to his skills in acting rather than the high profile of the james bond role. i mean, what producer would want to make a film with a bond actor so that everyone sits in the cinema watching it thinking 'this james bond actor guy is pretty good', especially if it was a crime genre, like say the girl with the dragon tramp stamp.
The end of the line. Scenes were filmed earlier this week in the Duzici district of Turkey close to some waterfalls. Here are two photo's of the set. Skyfall is now moving into post production.
Another photo has emerged from the set in the Duzici district of Turkey. Looks like they were filming some pretty special overhead shots of the waterfalls. Were they also filming something at the bottom?
Moore Not Less 4371 posts (2002 - 2007) Moore Than (2012 - 2016)
A new photo of Bond (Daniel Craig) in Istanbul was released today marking the launch of Omega's Seamaster Planet Ocean 600M "Skyfall" Limited Edition watch.
Moore Not Less 4371 posts (2002 - 2007) Moore Than (2012 - 2016)
There is a feature on Skyfall in this month's Total Film magazine. Here is a photo of Daniel Craig which I am assuming (as I have not got the magazine) was taken at the National Gallery in London.
Moore Not Less 4371 posts (2002 - 2007) Moore Than (2012 - 2016)
There is a feature on Skyfall in this month's Total Film magazine. Here is a photo of Daniel Craig which I am assuming (as I have not got the magazine) was taken at the National Gallery in London.
A new photo of Bond (Daniel Craig) in Istanbul was released today marking the launch of Omega's Seamaster Planet Ocean 600M "Skyfall" Limited Edition watch.
I don't know If this is genuine or a Fake But It has some of the storyboards from Skyfall so if true
it will contain some MAJOR SPOILERS , so you have been warned, look if you Dare.
I don't know If this is genuine or a Fake But It has some of the storyboards from Skyfall so if true
it will contain some MAJOR SPOILERS , so you have been warned, look if you Dare.
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
Had a quick look and saw they were spoilers on the opening scene, although I know where it was shot and what is used etc I don't know what actually happens or what it's really about. I think to spoil the opening scene would be too much - I think I will miss this one!! Great leak mind! -{
Edit [Predator]: please note the 007.com T&Cs (http://www.007.com/terms-of-use/): "Using any Material on any other web site or networked computer environment is prohibited unless specifically authorised by Eon Productions"
Comments
Behave!
Like David Schofield & Gala Brand have said, I think that DC is more at home with indie / arty type of movies and therefore won't reel in bucket loads of cash in the box office. Does this make him a bad actor though?
Yes, Yes it does.
(Now dressed in recently acquired pantomine gear)
Oh no it doesn't ...
( Storms off stage, exits left )
He had secondary roles in Tintin, The Golden Compass and Lara Croft. Dream House, Defiance, The Invasion, and Munich were all relatively low budget (less than $70 million each). They were "Art House" thrillers like TGWTDT. Munich was hardly a typical Steven Spielberg movie, for example.
After further consideration, I decided I was right all along.
I think the point is that Craig would prefer art house/indie pictures, but realises his star co-efficient and living standards are only fulfilled by franchise and mainstream films whether in the lead or as a supporting banana.
Much of me thinks that he really did feel Bond was beneath him back in 2005 but was easily convinced by kind words from BB, the proposal of the "new direction" and some of the talent involved AND what it would do for his career star-powerwise and, as much as anything, his bank balance.
Not much wrong there at all, then.
It's the age of the internet. Everybody has their own bully pulpit.
Could you imagine the venom if the net existed back when Connery stepped down. George Lazenby would have been
skewered without mercy. Or the heated debates over Roger Moore...."Perfect for the role, should have been him not Connery" vs "Sissy pretty boy, can only act with one eyebrow" and on and on and on........
Or the comments by people who were really big fans of the books re the choice of Connery to play Bond would probably have been vicious: "Scottish Oaf"; "Unknown B movie actor"; "coffin poilsher with a 6th grade education"; plenty of big ear jokes and lots of "why couldn't they get David Niven, James Mason, or Cary Grant?".....and on and on.
My skin is gator-thick. In point of fact, I'm a Bond fan rather than a Craig fan, and I've found reason to praise all six of the actors who've played 007. What I object to about Craig-haters is the SAMENESS of their arguments: he's ugly, he's short, and every single one of his movies has been a massive flop--including, some will argue, his two Bond films (they can usually point to indecipherable numbers and cryptic insider knowledge if you doubt them). It's also hilarious that they tend to depict anyone who has something good to say about Craig as belonging to a brainwashed cult, when THEY are the ones who spout doctrinaire arguments about the evil that is Daniel Craig.
It's apparently easy to forget the morass of box office medocrity in which Sean Connery languished in the late Seventies and early Eighties...and Roger Moore's modest resume of non-Bond box office hits. What Craigger needs, clearly, is a Zardoz or a Cannonball Run to boost his credibility B-)
I've no thinness of skin as a Craig-Bond fan; it's all scar tissue after the Craig WarsTM of '06, and the tempestuousness of the QoS Revolt of '08. As Hardy says, there are things to enjoy and appreciate about all six actors; we all have our favourites and least-favourites. I'm hoping that SF, at the very least, provides a fresh dimension of objectionable material for Craig Detractors...and that they continue to be challenged as his tenure continues to #24 and hopefully beyond. But, like Claude Rains in Casablanca, I will take what comes :007)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I could say the same thing about the Roger Moore haters except I would replace ugly and short with old and arthritic. And just for the record I do like Daniel Craig as Bond. Would like to see him lighten up a bit in Skyfall. Not counting on it though.
Moore Than is quite right.
All the Bonds cause divergent opinions and all the criticisms repeated are always the same.
Perhaps criticism of the current Bond, whoever that might be, makes his admirers more sensitive?
Personally, I like Craig as Bond, but I can see why some have problems with him. And that is entirely their perogative.
Bravo, Gala. Like I wrote in another thread, where some were hoping that Bond will return to "the good old days" once Craig leaves, there is no one standard James Bond Film or one set way they should be made. I believe in taking the films as they come and for what they are.
Even int he 60s, Connery struggled -- ever watch "A Fine Madness" or "Another Place, Another Time"? Connery didn't really hit his stride after the Bond films until "The Untouchables" more or less resurrected his languishing career.
Skills wise and popularity-wise, with the profile of Bond and his own desire to be an A-lister, I'd suggest Craig is in the best position to rectify that shortcoming.
Whether he does or not, or whether his chances have already come and gone, remains to be seen.
a quick squiz at imdb reveals;
brosnan has done quite a few films post bond, mama mia, the ghost and laws of attraction being the more well known.
dalton has kept his hand in the acting pot, but tends to do more tv and voice work rather than films.
moore does more charity work than acting i think, and appears to do similar work to dalton
lazenby surprisingly has done more tv work than the previously two mentioned
connery hasn't done much, but there are a few big names, indiana jones, hunt for red october, the avengers, the rock, entrapment to name a few.
i think craig breaks the mould somewhat, being that he's done and doing other big name films at the same time, before, during, and i hope, after bond.
i think craig was, and would continue to be a good high earning actor without being bond. but the difference with him is that he's not allowed being james bond to stop him being able to do other things, which i think must be down to his skills in acting rather than the high profile of the james bond role. i mean, what producer would want to make a film with a bond actor so that everyone sits in the cinema watching it thinking 'this james bond actor guy is pretty good', especially if it was a crime genre, like say the girl with the dragon tramp stamp.
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
Another photo has emerged from the set in the Duzici district of Turkey. Looks like they were filming some pretty special overhead shots of the waterfalls. Were they also filming something at the bottom?
god he's got some ears on him !
Suggesting this is Bond's watch at the beginning of the film.
it will contain some MAJOR SPOILERS , so you have been warned, look if you Dare.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/nailbiter111/news/?a=62649
Nice find. Thank you, sir! :007)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
http://www.007.com/007-gets-his-quartermaster/
Edit [Predator]: please note the 007.com T&Cs (http://www.007.com/terms-of-use/): "Using any Material on any other web site or networked computer environment is prohibited unless specifically authorised by Eon Productions"
yep, that just about confirms what i was hoping wouldn't be.
young Q just looks wrong IMO.
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org