504 replies to this topic

[Agent 76]

There's a difference between young and unseasoned. Craig can't play young but he could do an "early" or unseasoned Bond who finally comes into his own. Most veteran special forces guys who become the elite are in their late 30s. Ever see group photos of Delta, Seals or SAS guys? They all look like fortyish and like they should be shopping at Home Depot. They're not the 23-year-old cover boys Hollywood would have you believe a government is entrusting their most sensitive missions with.

After reading your post, I must say: It makes a LOT of sense to me.

Cheers to a post like that!

[Felix_Leiter]

I think Craig can pass as late 20's - early 30's.

[Xenia_Onatopp]

I think Craig can pass as late 20's - early 30's.

I think not. He looks 45 or older, more than his 37. They'd have to put pancake makeup on him or do lots of editing touch ups to make him look younger. But then again, technology can do wondrous things on film these days.

[Stax]

His age will ultimately prove a moot issue. No character is going to say, "So, Mr. Bond, how does it feel to be turning 34?" Again, the idea is of a Bond starting out early in his career as a 00 not starting out early in his life. There is a difference.

[Moore Not Less]

There's a difference between young and unseasoned. Craig can't play young but he could do an "early" or unseasoned Bond who finally comes into his own. Most veteran special forces guys who become the elite are in their late 30s. Ever see group photos of Delta, Seals or SAS guys? They all look like fortyish and like they should be shopping at Home Depot. They're not the 23-year-old cover boys Hollywood would have you believe a government is entrusting their most sensitive missions with.

Makes sense. There is no way that Daniel Craig could convincingly pull of a 28-32 year old "rookie" Bond. Indeed, he will have a hard enough task convincing many fans (including myself) that he could successfully portray an "early" or unseasoned Bond.

Edited by Moore Not Less, 12 October 2005 - 06:20 PM.

[Roger More]

I'm new to this forum and have watched your posts with interest.......

..... I have a simple question (perhaps someone can answer it for me)

If Pierce is definately out of CR - where is the customary "We would like to thank Pierce for his contribution to the role and wish him well for the future etc. etc" quote from EON Productions ? This seems to be the stock comment they provide when an actor's grip on the role has passed ?

.... Perhaps he is still in with a chance. Craig seems to have too many detractors (and I'm neutral) for EON to risk losing a sizeable chunk of the 007 cinema-going audience to pick him. Perhaps they tested the water through press rumours and it has caused them to stop signing him up and the hunt is now back on for a replacement. Until EON or Sony issue such a press release - who knows we may yet be seeing PB in his 5th 007 adventure ?

Edited by Roger More, 12 October 2005 - 06:22 PM.

[Felix_Leiter]

I think not. He looks 45 or older, more than his 37. They'd have to put pancake makeup on him or do lots of editing touch ups to make him look younger. But then again, technology can do wondrous things on film these days.

That's ridiculous! Have you seen 'Enduring Love' or 'Layer Cake'? He could easily pull off 30.

who knows we may yet be seeing PB in his 5th 007 adventure

No chance. The story dynamics alone prevent this from happening. If people think Craig is too old to play Bond, there's no way a 52 year old Brosnan could do it.

[Roger More]

If you are right Felix_Leiter, where's the EON press release saying "goodbye and good luck" to PB ?

"The story dynamics alone prevent this from happening. If people think Craig is too old to play Bond, there's no way a 52 year old Brosnan could do it."

Tomorrow Never Dies was re-written whilst it was filmed. I'm sure I remember reading in one of the 'making of' books that not only did that severely cheese off PB, apparently Judi Dench was so upset with the constant changes, her friend Geoffrey Palmer was brought in as the Navy Admiral in order to provide a friendly-face whilst filming. CR could be rewritten between now and Jan/Feb starting date....

Edited by Roger More, 12 October 2005 - 06:49 PM.

[The Dove]

Hey EON and Sony, the Bond fans are getting impatient!! *clap, clap, clap "We want a Bond!! We want a Bond!! " * lol...

[TITAN]

well personally Craig is cool with me. he was the only person who could actually act in that Tombrader movie! hes got the range, i can see him totally being smooth enough to do it, and he can be pretty action packed too(look @ tombraider). hes a funny photo guy, cause he can look handsome and debonaire, and rough and rugged, and he can also look pretty pasty and wimpish in alot photos, but ive seen enough of him that im not worried at all if they do choose him!!

[Roger More]

Imagine how off Craig must be right now if he's already been told he's not getting the gig ?

Edited by Mister Asterix, 13 October 2005 - 10:34 PM.

[Stax]

Does Eon even need to issue a statement when PB has taken it upon himself a few times in the past to announce he's no longer Bond?

They might acknowledge him when they announce Craig but more than likely it will just be something like "Daniel will help Eon and Sony begin this exciting new chapter in the continuing adventures of James Bond, blah blah blah."

Edited by Stax, 12 October 2005 - 07:21 PM.

[British Chap]

http://img.photobuck...CraigasBond.jpg

This is the best I can do. I guess he could be Bond. He wont be the conventional Bond, but he'll be Bond. I guess we'll have to give them the benefit of the doubt. Theyve seen the guy in action, in person. If they think he's Bond, then he is.

[Felix_Leiter]

'CR' *could* be re-written to incorporate Brosnan but i just don't see that happening at this time. I think the press release thanking him will come when they announce the next bond either this/next week or whenever.

[TITAN]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v224/BritishChap007/CraigasBond.jpg

This is the best I can do. I guess he could be Bond. He wont be the conventional Bond, but he'll be Bond. I guess we'll have to give them the benefit of the doubt. Theyve seen the guy in action, in person. If they think he's Bond, then he is.

nice!!

heres my attempt at throwing together something!!

http://ssxtitan.250f...com/newbond.jpg

[Qwerty]

[Mods Note: Keep copyrighted images, as in the 007 logo, out of IMG tags please.]

[lorna99]

I have enclosed a joke that Jay Leno made Daniel Craig:


Jay Leno:

[kovit123]

Daniel Craig is fine for me to play James Bond #6 at the even number, but most Bond actors in the past who were successful are at the odd number, because both Lazenby and Dalton are the even like Craig. Craig might star as James Bond for two films only, because he looks like he's older than 37 like he's 40 or older. I'm glad Clive Owen don't get the part, because his face looks too old fast, and he's older than Craig. The curse of James Bond actors at the even number continues. Craig will be the shortest actor to play James Bond so far at 6 feet tall only. Craig play at Bond #6, then Hugh Jackman will play James Bond as the #7, and it was a good thing. Jackman is the same age as Craig at 37, he's looks more younger, an Aussie who born with his British parents, and he's taller than Craig by 3 inches at 6 feet 3 inches. Playing James Bond at the odd number will be a successful part for Hugh Jackman, but he will soon take over the role and you don't know when.

[Emma]

I'm new to this forum and have watched your posts with interest.......

..... I have a simple question (perhaps someone can answer it for me)

If Pierce is definately out of CR - where is the customary "We would like to thank Pierce for his contribution to the role and wish him well for the future etc. etc" quote from EON Productions ? This seems to be the stock comment they provide when an actor's grip on the role has passed ?

.... Perhaps he is still in with a chance. Craig seems to have too many detractors (and I'm neutral) for EON to risk losing a sizeable chunk of the 007 cinema-going audience to pick him. Perhaps they tested the water through press rumours and it has caused them to stop signing him up and the hunt is now back on for a replacement. Until EON or Sony issue such a press release - who knows we may yet be seeing PB in his 5th 007 adventure ?

Hello Roger welcome!

Logic and common sense would say you are right. But Eon doesn't seem to be going with common sense. If they did then PB wouldn't have been so embarassingly fired in the first place, when he a) made so much money and is so popular with the fans and the majority of the public.

If TPTB want to switch directions and go for a more grittier film then they should go with a better actor than Daniel Craig. From all accounts it seems as if someone wants to make an "art film" and that's not what Bond fans want (well apart from a few Flemming devotees).

Unlike everyone else I refuse to accept information originating from a gossip rag as gospel. I am hopping that Eon/Sony are smart and practical people and will go with someone who is really suited to play James Bond.

[Cosmicblu]

OMG!!! What were they thinking!!!! I'm so upset at the choice for the new Bond. I'm speechless, totally speechless.

[Pussfeller]

I can't wait.

[killkenny kid]

Just imagine if Craig does get the part. Ho, brother! We will have a full year of this.

If? Zen, one of the mods let something slip in a post today.

[zencat]

Is Daniel Craig Close to Becoming 007?

A wave of recent reports stir hopes, speculation, and debate

In reading back over this article one thing I found interesting was the fact that people associated with the production in the Bahamas where saying it was Craig (in mid Sept). I wonder if this was pretty much a forgone conclusion, even before the final meetings in London, that Craig was going to be the one?

[SecretAgentFan]

And maybe he already was cast in the spring when MGM told him...

[Stax]

In the NY Times piece, Wilson said they decided on Craig in April but then Pascal insisted they try to find someone younger. Thus, the extra four months of testing.