Hello everyone,
The thread title is not meant to shock. It is just my honest opinion as to why I cannot wait till the Craig era is done. I shall try to explain my reasons below.
First let me start by saying I am a DC fan. I liked Layer Cake and had no doubt as to his capability of portraying 007. I loved CR, and enjoyed his performances in Defiance and GWTDT. Going by his success on the stage, he seems like a great stage actor as well. However....
Ever since his performance in CR, I've grown numb to his take on Bond. I could possibly be the only one that sees this, but he just seems to be going through the motions now, for lack of a better way to describe it. That is not to say his professionalism is in question (especially in the action scenes), or that he's reached a Connery YOLT level of performance, but I get the feeling that he's just doing it for the paycheck. Like he doesn't really believe in the character or material. It's strange. I could be very wrong of course, but has Craig ever really talked about his Bond character with enthusiasm? Like, where he would like to take him and what legacy he wants to leave behind. I look and search through articles and interviews and there is really nothing, except promoting the latest film or when it does come to the character, it all appears rather shallow. Now Bond isn't Shakespeare, but considering the more serious direction the films have taken, and all the hullabaloo about going back to Fleming, it doesn't really look like Craig even cares for Fleming. Logan does mention that he's read Fleming, but I'm assuming every writer on the Bond movies has done that. The main issue is whether and how it transferred on screen. I feel with each passing movie since CR, we are getting further and further away.
I cannot fault his performance in CR, it was by far one of the top 3 Bond performances so far. I felt he was directed well by Campbell. I hated QoS so I'll skip that. Skyfall was just....meh. And what I mean by 'meh' was that it all felt forced. It is a good movie technically speaking, but I find so many things wrong with it, things that go beyond plot holes. For example, his interaction with Silva when first meeting him was a damp squid. No wit, delivery was dry and the whole scene just looked pointless. I don't think Bardem and Craig really bought into what they were saying and it all felt as if they were reading their lines on cue. Bardem at least tried to come across interesting but the dialogue lacked power and conviction. Compare to when Bond met Dr. No, or the dialogue with Red Grant after being knocked out, or Bond and Mr. Big, Goldfinger at the golf course etc.. All those scenes heightened the tension, and the dialogue was sharp. Craig, with the exception of Le Chiffre to a small extent, doesn't seem to be able to build a good chemistry with the villains. However, i will admit that I am not sure whether that is the fault of the delivery or script.
Craig also doesn't embody, at least physically, what Bond is. A tall refined cat/panther like human cold blooded killer, with a knowing smirk and a little rough around the edges. Craig is just a short rough battering ram, though he did get Bond's fighting style spot on. However I'd love to see the brawler style that Craig has pretty much perfected on a cat/panther like Bond. I believe such a juxtaposition would make Bond a more interesting character. Also I dislike his running style. Lazenby ran like a man, Connery did, and Craig did in CR (Madagascar). However in some running scenes, Craig runs like he's in a marching band, SF being the culprit that brought this to light for me.
Overall, I don't find his Bond interesting, and i feel I am backed up by the evidence of giving supporting characters more screen time. If people haven't already noticed, but the Bond movies are slowly becoming MI6 movies or Spooks movies. There is no need for M, Moneypenny, Q to all have 'time in the field'. The actors playing those roles should be thankful that they have pretty much been immortalized in the film world by appearing in a Bond movie as those characters. Craig was pretty much playing second fiddle to Dench in SF. I recently watched SF again, and my favorite bit lasted from when Bond met M and Mallory, till the point where Bond returned Silva to MI6. It was like a mini classic Bond movie with a Craig twist and it worked. Bond flirted with Moneypenny, got his briefing, met Q, bedded the girl, killed the henchman, and captured the baddie. All this with no Judi Dench or MI6 in his ear. Though Moneypenny seemed to be shoehorned in while in Macau.
Unless Bond 24 focuses on just Bond, the villain and a great plot, coupled with great dialogue and the effort in making Bond interesting again, I think I'll be counting down the clock till the next Bond is hired. Craig has yet to top his performance in CR, and I find myself wondering if he ever will. Forster had no idea about the character, and Mendes just copied Nolan. Message to Eon, the lack of Bond theme is annoying, and please put the bloody gun barrel at the beginning or just not use it at all. If you really want to wink at the audience, introduce the John Barry's heroic 007 theme, let us see Bond sleep with a gun under his pillow and actually use it, let us see his snobbishness with food and drink and clothes. Get creative. Let us give Bond another definitive car, confine the DB9 to the 20th Century, Give Craig authority through his dialogue, not just the action scenes and scowls. Get creative, creative creative. The Bond universe is the most uninhibited one in all of cinema, it should really be paving roads. I never bought into how restrictive most directors say it is, and for that matter, Peter Morgan. Just focus on the character, villain, throw in an interesting Bond girl, a great plot and dialogue, and great action and viola! No formula, play around with that.
Ok, i guess Mendes wouldn't be coming back if he didn't think he could top SF. Yes the paycheck must have been tempting, but creatively he must think there things he could do better. Fingers crossed