Jump to content


This is a read only archive of the old forums
The new CBn forums are located at https://quarterdeck.commanderbond.net/

 
Photo

Daniel Craig Would Only Play James Bond Again “For the Money"


195 replies to this topic

#31 sharpshooter

sharpshooter

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 8996 posts

Posted 08 October 2015 - 08:58 AM

Haha. I'm with you though that it is tedious and annoying to a degree but after all, the man is human and the media are like hungry hounds chomping at the bit, every second of every day. After a two year long stressful event, I'm sure dealing with them and bugging him about his potential future replacements was the last thing he wanted to be forced into. lol

I share your sentiment. Craig has given us so much, therefore I'm not quick to judge him negatively. He always delivers the goods with his performances, and that's all that really should matter. 



#32 Orion

Orion

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1579 posts
  • Location:Great Britain (rule Britania)

Posted 08 October 2015 - 09:00 AM

 

Haha. I'm with you though that it is tedious and annoying to a degree but after all, the man is human and the media are like hungry hounds chomping at the bit, every second of every day. After a two year long stressful event, I'm sure dealing with them and bugging him about his potential future replacements was the last thing he wanted to be forced into. lol

I share your sentiment. Craig has given us so much, therefore I'm not quick to judge him negatively. He always delivers the goods with his performances, and that's all that really should matter. 

 

I raise a glass to that sir!



#33 Major Tallon

Major Tallon

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2107 posts
  • Location:Mid-USA

Posted 08 October 2015 - 09:54 AM

Better make that two.



#34 RMc2

RMc2

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 08 October 2015 - 10:30 AM

Craig's got a fairly sick sense of humour. You can tell from all the interviews he's ever given, even before Bond. In the heat of the moment, as part of a giant press round, he probably just didn't thoroughly think through how his comments would look on paper.

 

But yeah, I agree that it's not very professional of him - Cruise's conduct is a good comparison. I wonder how much his co-producer credit let him feel more free to express himself...

 

Either way, I don't mind. I'm encouraged that he put so much into Bond that he feels so exhausted. I'm sad that he may be positioning himself to leave the role before number 5. I'm disappointed he doesn't seem to appreciate the massive wealth and comfort provided to him as a major Hollywood star, even with his injuries and creative work. I'm surprised he does feel that way, given his expressions of gratitude in the past.

 

Still love him as Bond, can't wait for SPECTRE, hope to high Heaven he makes a fifth.



#35 Matt_13

Matt_13

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5969 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 08 October 2015 - 10:36 AM

Dave Bautista said in one of the press junket interviews something along the lines that Craig doesn't talk like a man who's done with the role. I think he's justifiably tired and probably, in the case of these interviews, annoyed by having to answer the same questions again and again.

#36 tdalton

tdalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 11680 posts

Posted 08 October 2015 - 10:39 AM

He may be annoyed by the questions, but that's part of the job. He's being paid a lot of money to play the part and he should act accordingly when he's on the clock. It's unprofessional, and someone working a regular job would probably be fired or, at the very least, reprimanded for making such comments while on the clock.

#37 Vauxhall

Vauxhall

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 10744 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 08 October 2015 - 11:04 AM

With my cynic's hat on: the producers and studio won't be too disappointed that the public think it could be Craig's last film. It just generates even more publicity for SPECTRE.

#38 SecretAgentFan

SecretAgentFan

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9055 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 08 October 2015 - 12:49 PM

I could even imagine it was a planned strategy.

#39 Gay Bond

Gay Bond

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 26 posts
  • Location:Cardiff, UK

Posted 08 October 2015 - 02:19 PM

But yeah, I agree that it's not very professional of him - Cruise's conduct is a good comparison. 

Interesting thing about Cruise - he exudes enthusiasm and positivity in media interviews (to the point of annoying, I find), but he has something of a reputation for being a bit of a spoiled prima donna behind the scenes. Whereas Craig may be a bit abrupt and unpolished in his publicity, but I find it hard to imagine him being an ar5ehole behind the scenes.



#40 Jim

Jim

    Commander RNVR

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 14266 posts
  • Location:Oxfordshire

Posted 08 October 2015 - 02:58 PM

I'd only do it for the money, too.

#41 Logie

Logie

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 81 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 08 October 2015 - 03:00 PM

Anyone remember Connery in 1965? "I'm fed up to here with the whole Bond bit" and "I've always hated that damned James Bond. I'd like to kill him".

 

Not sure how the internet would've coped back then.



#42 plankattack

plankattack

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1385 posts

Posted 08 October 2015 - 03:11 PM

IMHO, it's a wind-up. Look back over the years and DC has always exuded ambivalence, even back before 2006. It's just the way he is - very dry sense of humour in his interviews, as well as being free with the language, the former not always coming across in well in print. And if you're a journo, it's great copy. The article is trending all the web right now - there's no such things as bad publicity! 

 

And if it's not a wind-up, it is, like every Bond before him, an opportunity to see if he can squeeze a little bit more out of EON for playing the role. 



#43 SecretAgentFan

SecretAgentFan

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9055 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 08 October 2015 - 03:13 PM


But yeah, I agree that it's not very professional of him - Cruise's conduct is a good comparison.

Interesting thing about Cruise - he exudes enthusiasm and positivity in media interviews (to the point of annoying, I find), but he has something of a reputation for being a bit of a spoiled prima donna behind the scenes. Whereas Craig may be a bit abrupt and unpolished in his publicity, but I find it hard to imagine him being an ar5ehole behind the scenes.

Untrue about Cruise. He is adored by crews, taking care of them and helping them. But he is truly singular with his work ethic and enthusiasm.

#44 Harmsway

Harmsway

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 13293 posts

Posted 08 October 2015 - 03:28 PM

Cruise is regarded by all as a consummate professional.

Craig seems to give it his all when making a film, but he has a very short temper when it comes to journalists. He's already confirmed that he'll be back for the next Bond film in other interviews. It's not exactly behavior I admire, but he's been this way for a while now.

#45 dlb007

dlb007

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 108 posts
  • Location:Tallahassee, Fl

Posted 08 October 2015 - 03:38 PM

This particular interview was done a mere five days after shooting had finished . . . of course, he was in a piss poor mood. His more recent interviews, where he states he'd do Bond again, were after a little more time and reflection. There is a lot of pressure on everyone involved with "Spectre" to make it bigger and better than "Skyfall." Having to sit around for a few months waiting to see if you meet everyone's expectations, all the while being asked the same question time and time again has got to be maddening; especially, when said question mainly seems to be about your replacement.

 

Having said all that, Craig has never been known for his stellar PR work. If I recall correctly, this is how he answered questions about "Cowboys and Aliens" . . . . "it's about cowboys and f***ing aliens."



#46 plankattack

plankattack

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1385 posts

Posted 08 October 2015 - 03:41 PM

Craig seems to give it his all when making a film, but he has a very short temper when it comes to journalists. He's already confirmed that he'll be back for the next Bond film in other interviews. It's not exactly behavior I admire, but he's been this way for a while now.

 

Couldn't agree more. This is very much in tune with DC's "press demeanour." What I definitely don't sense, in anything read over the last couple of weeks, that he is out-of-step with the producers in any way. For that, as someone else said, wind back 50 years for SC versus Cubby/Harry. 65-67 was, by all accounts, tumultuous for relationship between star and producers.

 

As for Cruise and the MI franchise, there is one major difference. MI is very much Cruise's, whereas for Bond, DC, Brozza, Sir Rog, whoever, are employees of the franchise, not a producer (please correct me if I'm wrong on this, I'm too lazy to go to IMDB right now and check  :)   )



#47 Mr_Wint

Mr_Wint

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2406 posts
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 08 October 2015 - 03:51 PM



#48 Agent 76

Agent 76

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7080 posts
  • Location:Portugal

Posted 08 October 2015 - 04:05 PM

I think he's just trolling the interviewer. The guy just finished a new Bond movie, it's natural he's tired and wants to take a break from filming. If he does one more good, if not, that's good anyway. His departure will happen at some point, and maybe sooner than we think, and I guess Eon has the casting machine in motion to find the next 007.

 

 

 

cheers



#49 Shrublands

Shrublands

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4012 posts
  • Location:Conveniently Near the NATO Base

Posted 08 October 2015 - 04:56 PM

 It's unprofessional, and someone working a regular job would probably be fired or, at the very least, reprimanded for making such comments while on the clock.

 

So if a builder, a doctor, a fireman, a draftsman, an IT consultant or an accountant said that they stay in their job for the money, they'd be sacked or reprimanded.

You know, I don't think so.



#50 Gay Bond

Gay Bond

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 26 posts
  • Location:Cardiff, UK

Posted 08 October 2015 - 06:05 PM

 

 

But yeah, I agree that it's not very professional of him - Cruise's conduct is a good comparison.

Interesting thing about Cruise - he exudes enthusiasm and positivity in media interviews (to the point of annoying, I find), but he has something of a reputation for being a bit of a spoiled prima donna behind the scenes. Whereas Craig may be a bit abrupt and unpolished in his publicity, but I find it hard to imagine him being an ar5ehole behind the scenes.

Untrue about Cruise. He is adored by crews, taking care of them and helping them. But he is truly singular with his work ethic and enthusiasm.

 

Ah right, apologies to Mr Cruise - I must have been relying on tittle tattle.

 

Either way, I imagine Craig has a thoroughly dedicated work ethic on set. Ultimately that's what counts for us punters and for Babs and co. 

 

His TimeOut comments are getting quite a bit of traction today - they seem to have made headlines on the BBC, the Guardian, the Mail etc. I'm sure he'll be asked to elaborate on them in an upcoming press piece.



#51 Baccarat

Baccarat

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 84 posts
  • Location:Nassau

Posted 08 October 2015 - 09:09 PM

Big fan. Happy to give him the benefit of the doubt. But would rather he talk about how cool it is to be paid millions to play Bond, even if it is exhausting work, he's tired, a bit jaded right now, etc. It is, after all, a choice.


Edited by Baccarat, 08 October 2015 - 09:09 PM.


#52 Hockey Mask

Hockey Mask

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1027 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 09 October 2015 - 12:54 AM

I'd only do it for the money, too.

me too. I wonder how much I would have to pay them.

#53 tdalton

tdalton

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 11680 posts

Posted 09 October 2015 - 01:29 AM

It's unprofessional, and someone working a regular job would probably be fired or, at the very least, reprimanded for making such comments while on the clock.

 
So if a builder, a doctor, a fireman, a draftsman, an IT consultant or an accountant said that they stay in their job for the money, they'd be sacked or reprimanded.
You know, I don't think so.



If they were to get up in a public setting, perhaps a conference or TV interview or other such public forum, and speak about their job in the way that Craig has in the past (such as saying he has wanted out since the beginning, only doing it for the money, etc.) while also representing the company on their time (which Craig is doing in these interviews), then yes, I'd say it's fair to say that they'd at least get some kind of talking-to or reprimand.

There have also been plenty of people fired from their jobs for posting negative things about their bosses or their jobs on social media sites, which isn't a particularly far cry from what is being discussed here.

#54 casinoroyale75

casinoroyale75

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 47 posts

Posted 09 October 2015 - 01:41 AM

I am a huge Craig fan. I always liked Bond films, but he took them to the top of the heap for me. Daniel Craig as James Bond is the best movie entertainment I've seen in my lifetime. I wish he hadn't said the comments, especially right before the film, but DC does seem to fall into one of the following categories:

 

1) love/hate relationship with the role. Loves playing it, but hates how much time it takes from his personal life.

2)  He knows something we don't? They are giving the role to someone else after Bond 24 (unlikely, based on what Broc has said).

3) He is really ready to retire. He's worn out from 10 years of playing the role. Extreme burn out.

4) He is just messing with reporters, but he is/could be alienating some fans in the process.

 

That being said, I support him 100% in the role, and wouldn't want to see anyone else playing 007. Could simply be a case of bad judgment (comments), and venting.



#55 Logie

Logie

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 81 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 09 October 2015 - 01:57 AM

It's my belief that Craig's just being a bit of a scamp and this is his way of keeping himself amused during his nth boring interview of the day. But even if he was being super-deadly serious when he said that stuff, what's the worst that can happen? He'll never be out of work. SPECTRE will still make shedloads of cash. What he said doesn't actually affect anything at all.



#56 Syndicate

Syndicate

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 639 posts
  • Location:San Francisco, California

Posted 09 October 2015 - 04:22 AM

From the sound of it, what all of you are saying is Daniel Craig needs time off from doing a Bond movie. He needs to recharge and do other movies that has nothing to do with Bond at all. Before he gets back into the role. For him maybe the next one will have to come out in either 2019 or 2020 at the earliest. That way he'll be able to recharge and do other movies. IF he wants to, but not sure If he was ask to do a close to the real spy movie would he do it. Those like Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, The Siege, The Russia House, The Assignment and The Hunt For Red October. Hope Craig is just  really being asked the question doing the next Bond at the wrong time. That he will go on doing at least three or four more.


Another thing as I see it, it getting harder and harder for Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli to find the next right actor to play James Bond
 


Edited by Syndicate, 09 October 2015 - 04:18 PM.


#57 coco1997

coco1997

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2821 posts
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 09 October 2015 - 04:40 AM

This is something I don't understand: Craig is under contract for one more film, correct? Wouldn't that mean there must be some sort of opt-out clause in the contract which would allow him to step away from the role after SPECTRE? I'm not sure what the point of even having a contract is if you're not going to fulfill it. 



#58 Pierceuhhh

Pierceuhhh

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 109 posts

Posted 09 October 2015 - 07:29 AM

I'd rather have him do a 5th movie so I can compare it to other 5th movies, i.e. YOLT & FYEO, while making my OCD nerd ranking lists. To me, I want to see Craig do 5 movies for historical/context reasons, not because I think he's especially good in this role.

The next Bond actor could be better and funnier. Happy for Craig to go away and let the new guy take over if he's that miserable. However, I'd like to look back on a nice long "Craig era", and eras take a long time to pan out nowadays. Between actors getting fired or throwing theirs toys out of the cot, and the Broccolis taking forever to fart out these movies, getting a good continuous run is a rare thing.

#59 Orion

Orion

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1579 posts
  • Location:Great Britain (rule Britania)

Posted 09 October 2015 - 08:09 AM

I love how all the people quoting Craig saying this skip the interviewer asking about going straight into the next one and the rest of what Craig says. This sentence is taken out of context to create a headline as what Craig is ACTUALLY talking about in the full interview is how he felt like he really needed a break as Bond movies are incredibly exhausting to make.



#60 RMc2

RMc2

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 09 October 2015 - 09:30 AM

This is something I don't understand: Craig is under contract for one more film, correct? Wouldn't that mean there must be some sort of opt-out clause in the contract which would allow him to step away from the role after SPECTRE? I'm not sure what the point of even having a contract is if you're not going to fulfill it. 

 

He does seem to renegotiate his contract every time he makes a film... Once (obvs) before CR, then again before QoS, then again for SF, then again before SP.

 

Wouldn't be surprised if he has an opt-out. At the very least, there'll be some clause that allows him to be released without punitive compensation, in case the studio or producers ever wanted rid of him.