69 replies to this topic

[DamnCoffee]

Please Lock if necessary Mods

How do you feel about Daniel Craig now, as he is filming his second outing as James Bond? Plus... How do you feel QoS is shaping up?

Edited by Righty007, 24 March 2008 - 07:33 PM.

[Loomis]

How do you feel about Daniel Craig now, as he is filming his second outing as James Bond?

The greatest Bond ever. If he doesn't turn out to be the single best thing about the film (as was the case with CASINO ROYALE, which was full of excellent elements, but the Craigmeister was the daddy of 'em all), I'll be very surprised.

Still rather wish he'd dye his hair black, though, but, well, no biggie, I suppose.

How do you feel QoS is shaping up?

Okay. Just okay. I very much doubt that it'll be as good a film as CR, largely because there's no rich-in-possibilities Fleming story this time round, and no motivating sense of an ailing franchise being pulled back from the brink by a long-overdue injection of artistic adrenaline (although I do appreciate that CR's setting of the bar so high will provide another source of motivation). I'm also not all that sold on Forster, although I say that without having seen any of the man's films. I'd feel in safer hands with Campbell. Is Forster right for Bond? We'll soon find out, but at this moment I won't wholeheartedly endorse him.

And I know it's very shallow and fannish of me, but I'm wary of the out-and-out actionfest that QoS seems to be shaping up as. Too much "thrills" and not enough "story" - still, those fears have been addressed many times here on CBn in recent weeks, notably by - I think - Harmsway and Zorin Industries. We shall see. Right now, though, it does cross my mind that QoS will be a rich man's TND or TWINE - a film that feels more like a Brosnan era outing, albeit a superior one, than a worthy successor to CR.

We know very little about QoS' storyline. In an era when most of tomorrow's blockbusters' scripts seem to leak like nobody's business all over the net, this seems unusual, and reminds me of MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III, which managed to stay remarkably unspoilered right up to opening day. Of course, in MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III's case, it turned out that, far from having a script full of juicy twists and turns that were being carefully guarded, it didn't actually have any particularly interesting plot points to be leaked. And so the day before opening's thoughts of "Wow, I wonder what exactly Cruise and co. have got up their sleeves?" were replaced by the question of "Just how small was the napkin on which they scribbled the plot?". Hopefully, this won't be the case with QoS. Again, however (he writes fence-sittingly), I do appreciate that we don't go to Bond films for their stunning twist endings, or even for especially good stories.

Still, it would be nice to think that QoS has a more interesting and meaty screenplay than many of us fans are currently assuming is the case.

It's probably telling that I'm looking forward to DEVIL MAY CARE far more than I am to QoS.

Okay, then, so sue me. You asked, I told.

[Mr. Blofeld]

How do you feel about Daniel Craig now, as he is filming his second outing as James Bond?

I feel he's a supremely talented actor, and may well be the finest Bond since George Lazenby.

How do you feel QoS is shaping up?

I feel it's shaping up for a grand thriller, but I certainly hope it's better that TND...

[HH007]

I think he is one terrific James Bond. He showed that in CR and I think he'll solidify it in QoS. His interpretation of the character is my favorite by far.

[tdalton]

How do you feel about Daniel Craig now, as he is filming his second outing as James Bond? Plus... How do you feel QoS is shaping up?

Daniel Craig is, to me, the second best Bond in the franchise, behind Timothy Dalton. He may be able to overtake Dalton in my rankings if he continues to play Bond at a high level, but I doubt that he will.

As far as QUANTUM OF SOLACE, it should be a good indicator of how I feel about how it is turning out when I consider DEVIL MAY CARE to be the Bond event of the year. QoS is shaping up to be another TOMORROW NEVER DIES, a film filled to the brim with nothing but action. That's not my kind of film, and no matter how much "serious" talent they involve in a film like that, it won't matter one bit if all the film turns out to be is one long, 2 hour action scene.

[DamnCoffee]

Daniel Craig is an extremely versatile actor, I think he has brought alot to the role of Bond which was not present since 1989's Licence to Kill. He is my favorite James Bond and I think Quantum of Solace will be an extremely good movie. Craig gave us his word that it will impress, and I have no evidence to not believe him. Yes, QoS has twice the action of Casino Royale but you gotta think, the Bond franchise is very dependant on Action, which was missing in The Man with the Golden Gun, thats probably why its not very popular with fans. Aslong as Quantum of Solace has room for character development... i'm sure it will probably be one of the best movies in the franchise.

[Mr. Blofeld]

That's not my kind of film, and no matter how much "serious" talent they involve in a film like that, it won't matter one bit if all the film turns out to be is one long, 2 hour action scene.

Even if it has, as rumoured,

Spoiler

a YOLT-style ending?

[HH007]

How do you feel about Daniel Craig now, as he is filming his second outing as James Bond? Plus... How do you feel QoS is shaping up?

Daniel Craig is, to me, the second best Bond in the franchise, behind Timothy Dalton. He may be able to overtake Dalton in my rankings if he continues to play Bond at a high level, but I doubt that he will.

As far as QUANTUM OF SOLACE, it should be a good indicator of how I feel about how it is turning out when I consider DEVIL MAY CARE to be the Bond event of the year. QoS is shaping up to be another TOMORROW NEVER DIES, a film filled to the brim with nothing but action. That's not my kind of film, and no matter how much "serious" talent they involve in a film like that, it won't matter one bit if all the film turns out to be is one long, 2 hour action scene.

I can't understand why everyone is getting this impression. Craig himself said they were doing a "From Russia With Love"-style Bond film. The filmmakers saw very clearly how well CR worked, and why it worked, so I have know doubt the films with Craig will be kept in that vain.

[tdalton]

That's not my kind of film, and no matter how much "serious" talent they involve in a film like that, it won't matter one bit if all the film turns out to be is one long, 2 hour action scene.

Even if it has, as rumoured,

Spoiler

a YOLT-style ending?

Spoiler

If the film turned out to be a 2 hour action scene, and they then tacked that onto the film, it would make it all the more disappointing that they wasted that on an over-the-top action film rather than a serious spy thriller that such material should be attached to.

[SPOTTER]

I think that Craig is at least 50% responsible for the success of Casino Royale and i'm looking forward to Quantum Of Solace very much. Daniel Craig is a great actor and for me is the finest James Bond since Sean Connery (Dr. No - Thunderball anyway) QOS is shaping up very well. I like the fact that they've got a director that has never really done action before. This is telling me that this next installment in the Bond franchise like Casino Royale is going to be a lot more than an action flick. Can't wait!!

[MarcAngeDraco]

Daniel had an excellent debut as Bond in CR. How much of that was strictly his doing, and how much was the culmination of the greater team effort is difficult for me to decifer with any precision. But, with an equally great performance in QoS, he could convince me that he belongs near the top of those who have portrayed Bond.

Will he end up being my favorite Bond?... I will only be able to tell that when I can evaluate his entire career as Bond against the others.

As for my current thoughts on QoS. Very middle-of-the-road at this point. There are things that sound terrific and others that... well we'll just have to wait and see.

I'm not as worried about the quantity of action as some have stated they are. I can't believe that they brought in someone like Forster to direct a two hour action extravangaza. Even if there is a lot of action, I think (hope?) that there will be sufficent character development to balance it out.

[HH007]

But, with an equally great performance in QoS, I'm not as worried about the quantity of action as some have stated they are.

I think the people who are fretting are being a little silly anyway.

[Jackanaples]

I think Daniel Craig had the best debut film as Bond of any actor to have played the character --including Connery. The whole QOS production seems dedicated to making an even better film this time round than CR was. Personally, I believe they'll succeed in this.

[Mr. Blofeld]

But, with an equally great performance in QoS, I'm not as worried about the quantity of action as some have stated they are.

I think the people who are fretting are being a little silly anyway.

Like a certain Mr. tdalton, for instance?

[Skudor]

My views of Daniel Craig haven't changed much. Broadly speaking I approve. To sum it up: He's the best actor to portray James Bond so far. But, he doesn't have the effortless charisma or the looks of Sean Connery. Craig's weakness is that, as good an actor as he is and as physically fit as he may be, he will never be the aspirational James Bond that Connery always has been for me. This is may well be purely an age thing (My age, not his. Or perhaps my age relative to his. Probably the former).

Having said all that, I don't think trying to beat or copy Connery is a viable or attractive strategy for the producers. Much better to do something new, to be a bit inventive, which they did very successfully in casting Daniel Craig as James Bond.

[bond 16.05.72]

I can't see this being 2 hr action fest and yes quite few people are making some big assumptions from production docs and various rumours some are already piecing the film together when they haven't got a clue.

The best thing to do is wait till Oct 31st (uk) and we'll find out wheteher we wise to be cautious or all this nit picking was in vain.

For the record I still think SC in FRWL is the ultimate Bond but I've a got a sneaking suspicion Craig may well overtake him during QOS or in Bond 23.

[HH007]

But, with an equally great performance in QoS, I'm not as worried about the quantity of action as some have stated they are.

I think the people who are fretting are being a little silly anyway.

Like a certain Mr. tdalton, for instance?

Not gonna point fingers or name names. I'll let my statement speak for itself.

[jaguar007]

My views of Daniel Craig haven't changed much. Broadly speaking I approve. To sum it up: He's the best actor to portray James Bond so far. But, he doesn't have the effortless charisma or the looks of Sean Connery. Craig's weakness is that, as good an actor as he is and as physically fit as he may be, he will never be the aspirational James Bond that Connery always has been for me. This is may well be purely an age thing (My age, not his. Or perhaps my age relative to his. Probably the former).

Having said all that, I don't think trying to beat or copy Connery is a viable or attractive strategy for the producers. Much better to do something new, to be a bit inventive, which they did very successfully in casting Daniel Craig as James Bond.

I agree with much of what Skudor said. I think Connery will always be the most iconic image of James Bond and the actor that everyone will always measure any Bond by. I also agree that Criag is the best actor to play James Bond (even better than Dalton) and Craig is the most charismatic actor to play Bond since Connery (although Roger Moore, while his interpetation of Bond is not my favorite, has loads of charisma as well).

[broadshoulder]

How do you feel about Daniel Craig now, as he is filming his second outing as James Bond?

Okay. Just okay. I very much doubt that it'll be as good a film as CR, largely because there's no rich-in-possibilities Fleming story this time round, and no motivating sense of an ailing franchise being pulled back from the brink by a long-overdue injection of artistic adrenaline (although I do appreciate that CR's setting of the bar so high will provide another source of motivation). I'm also not all that sold on Forster, although I say that without having seen any of the man's films. I'd feel in safer hands with Campbell. Is Forster right for Bond? We'll soon find out, but at this moment I won't wholeheartedly endorse him.

And I know it's very shallow and fannish of me, but I'm wary of the out-and-out actionfest that QoS seems to be shaping up as. Too much "thrills" and not enough "story" - still, those fears have been addressed many times here on CBn in recent weeks, notably by - I think - Harmsway and Zorin Industries. We shall see. Right now, though, it does cross my mind that QoS will be a rich man's TND or TWINE - a film that feels more like a Brosnan era outing, albeit a superior one, than a worthy successor to CR.

I've been thinking that as well. Particularly as Micky G Wilson said there will be double the action in this one. CR was three hours long but sped by because you got involved in the characters - this one is the prerequisite two hours. I like everyone else worries that character development will be forgotten in the rush for big bangs as was the Brosnan era. 007 flicks always got the balance right ie FYEO and OHMSS.

But then I remembered who was also at the helm.

Paul Haggis.

To me, just as important as Daniel Craig and Ian Fleming in CR was Haggis. His dialogue was supreme and conveyed character development for Bond and Vesper. He said his interest in CR was the way "Bond becomes an agent" and this impressed me. I knew Haggis on board we'd do well. Purvis and Wade come up with ideas for chases but it is Haggis who really put the polish on CR.

[tdalton]

It's probably telling that I'm looking forward to DEVIL MAY CARE far more than I am to QoS.

For some reason I missed your post when I first posted in this thread, but I have to come back and say that I wholeheartedly agree with just about everything you said (although I'm only quoting this one small bit of your post, which I think completely sums up my position on the issue more clearly than I think I could ever have made it). I will most certainly be there on the first day that DEVIL MAY CARE is available in book stores, and it may take me a few days or even weeks to catch QUANTUM OF SOLACE whenever they plan on releasing it (as it seems to change once every couple of months).

I do disagree with you on one aspect, though, and that is Forster. I've seen a couple of his films (STRANGER THAN FICTION, FINDING NEVERLAND), and he is one very talented director, and EON is extremely lucky to have someone like him directing one of their films. With that said, it will be interesting to see how he adjusts to making an action film when his other films have had decidedly less action than what most people are expecting from QUANTUM OF SOLACE. I completely agree with you on the comment of QUANTUM OF SOLACE being a rich man's TOMORROW NEVER DIES or THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH. With all of the reports of action scenes and the significantly smaller window in which all of these must fit in comparison to the running time of CASINO ROYALE, it's possible that we could be looking at just such a situation.

[Marquis]

I approve. He's got a fair way to go until he usurps Connery as my favourite Bond but I am looking forward to seeing what he brings to the table in QoS.

[dodge]

Two predictions from Dodge City:

1) Craig will rock and have at least a few scenes that leave us jumping in our seats. QoS will pretty cement his reputation as the best Bond since Connery...but not the best of all. Why because of #2:
2) Far from being an actionfest, QoS is far more likely to be jinxed by Forster's precious side. I maintain, as I have from the start: not only does he not have any solid action experience (everyone has to start somewhere), he has no real interest in it. A cerebral film is due our way...not the approach I prefer.

I expect to enjoy it enough to see it a couple of times. But not twenty times as I did CR.

[Loomis]

It's probably telling that I'm looking forward to DEVIL MAY CARE far more than I am to QoS.

For some reason I missed your post when I first posted in this thread, but I have to come back and say that I wholeheartedly agree with just about everything you said (although I'm only quoting this one small bit of your post, which I think completely sums up my position on the issue more clearly than I think I could ever have made it). I will most certainly be there on the first day that DEVIL MAY CARE is available in book stores, and it may take me a few days or even weeks to catch QUANTUM OF SOLACE whenever they plan on releasing it (as it seems to change once every couple of months).

I do disagree with you on one aspect, though, and that is Forster. I've seen a couple of his films (STRANGER THAN FICTION, FINDING NEVERLAND), and he is one very talented director, and EON is extremely lucky to have someone like him directing one of their films. With that said, it will be interesting to see how he adjusts to making an action film when his other films have had decidedly less action than what most people are expecting from QUANTUM OF SOLACE. I completely agree with you on the comment of QUANTUM OF SOLACE being a rich man's TOMORROW NEVER DIES or THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH. With all of the reports of action scenes and the significantly smaller window in which all of these must fit in comparison to the running time of CASINO ROYALE, it's possible that we could be looking at just such a situation.

Thanks for the kind words, tdalton. Re: Forster, a friend of mine is crazy about FINDING NEVERLAND, so I'll definitely check that one out. THE KITE RUNNER also springs to mind as something that I'm sure is worth watching. For some odd reason, though, I'm wary of seeing anything by Forster until I've seen QUANTUM OF SOLACE. Not sure if there's actually any sense to this approach, but, well, there you are. I guess I don't want to go into QoS judging it against Forster's other (very critically acclaimed) flicks and finding it wanting. I want to first judge it as a film in its own right, and then to judge it as a Bond film - what I don't want to do first is ponder where it fits into the Forster oeuvre.

Re: DEVIL MAY CARE, I can't tell you how much I can't wait (have you read any Faulks, BTW? He's awesome), but I have a feeling that plot leaks are just around the corner. Will have to start being careful about what I read on sites like this one, because I really want to go into DMC - which I view as the first true successor to the Fleming novels - spoiler-free. By contrast, I don't really care what I know in advance about QoS.

A cerebral film is due our way

I doubt it. I mean, if we do get a genuinely cerebral film, then great. However, I think that at most we'll get a piece of fluff with a cerebral sheen, like BLADE RUNNER.

It's just occurred to me that Forster may mentally be doing a Faulks N' Fleming type of MARC FORSTER DIRECTING AS JAMES CAMERON CIRCA TRUE LIES thing as he works on QoS. Using the Bond franchise to, well, to pretend to be a very different kind of director, more or less just to see whether he can do it. A sneaky little cerebral exercise from our sophisticated chrome-domed egghead Euro aesthete friend. (What with the current trend of A-list and/or highly respected directors working on franchise fare, one wonders whether, if they were alive and in their prime today, Bergman would be doing BOURNE 4 and Fellini would be in negotiations to helm the next Jack Ryan outing.)

Or maybe he's just doing it for the whopping paycheque and doesn't give a flying one. A coupla mil and he's anyone's. Heck, he's got bills like everyone else, and is quite happy to be a Lee Tamahori or a recent poor-form John Woo if the price is right. (Just kidding - I'm sure Forster's gonna do Bond proud. )

[Mr. Blofeld]

Or maybe he's just doing it for the whopping paycheque and doesn't give a flying one. A coupla mil and he's anyone's. Heck, he's got bills like everyone else, and is quite happy to be a Lee Tamahori or a recent poor-form John Woo if the price is right.

Change "Lee Tamahori" to "Adam West" and "John Woo" to "Richard Burton", and you've got a perfect description of Sean Connery's M.O. for doing Diamonds Are Forever.

[tdalton]

A cerebral film is due our way

I doubt it. I mean, if we do get a genuinely cerebral film, then great. However, I think that at most we'll get a piece of fluff with a cerebral sheen, like BLADE RUNNER.

I doubt it as well, but it would be absolutely great if EON delivered us a Bond film like that.

[Mr. Blofeld]

A cerebral film is due our way

I doubt it. I mean, if we do get a genuinely cerebral film, then great. However, I think that at most we'll get a piece of fluff with a cerebral sheen, like BLADE RUNNER.

I doubt it as well, but it would be absolutely great if EON delivered us a Bond film like that.

I agree; for once, we deserve a Bond movie that can make us think.

[HH007]

A cerebral film is due our way

I doubt it. I mean, if we do get a genuinely cerebral film, then great. However, I think that at most we'll get a piece of fluff with a cerebral sheen, like BLADE RUNNER.

I doubt it as well, but it would be absolutely great if EON delivered us a Bond film like that.

I agree; for once, we deserve a Bond movie that can make us think.

Sorry guys, but I think CR, FRWL, and OHMSS are the closest we'll ever get to "genuinely cerebral." Unless a Bond film is ever directed by the likes of David Cronenberg, Darren Aronofsky, or the Coen Brothers, it ain't gonna happen. These are action movies at the end of the day, and as long as there's some thought put into them, or as long as they don't go bugnuts with it like DAD, I'll be happy. I really don't want a Bond movie to turn out like Syriana, where I would have to watch it several times just to make sense of it.

[tdalton]

A cerebral film is due our way

I doubt it. I mean, if we do get a genuinely cerebral film, then great. However, I think that at most we'll get a piece of fluff with a cerebral sheen, like BLADE RUNNER.

I doubt it as well, but it would be absolutely great if EON delivered us a Bond film like that.

I agree; for once, we deserve a Bond movie that can make us think.

Sorry guys, but I think CR, FRWL, and OHMSS are the closest we'll ever get to "genuinely cerebral." Unless a Bond film is ever directed by the likes of David Cronenberg, Darren Aronofsky, or the Coen Brothers, it ain't gonna happen. These are action movies at the end of the day, and as long as there's some thought put into them, or as long as they don't go bugnuts with it like DAD, I'll be happy. I really don't want a Bond movie to turn out like Syriana, where I would have to watch it several times just to make sense of it.

Agreed. I think that those films are the closest that we'll ever get to such a film, but it would be great if sometime down the road they went in that direction, even if just for one film, just to try something new.

[stamper]

If the Coen brothers did a Bond, there would be no climax.

[HH007]

If the Coen brothers did a Bond, there would be no climax.

Yes, it would end with the villain walking away, and Bond sitting at a table prattling on about some dream he had about his father. Bond would also be a quiet, introspective character who ponders the decay of society and how he is powerless to stop it... and he would only be on screen for roughly one third of the film... and it would be the most critically praised Bond film ever.