504 replies to this topic

[Loomis]

A blast from the past (from when Craig was revealed - by The Sun, I think - as the new Bond some months ago, and various titles jumped on the "news" as though it was for real) - from http://film.guardian...1453600,00.html (I've underlined some bits I find interesting).

The thing to note, IMO, was that, when there was this phantom announcement of Craig, there wasn't (surprisingly?) any negative reaction - that I'm aware of, at least. No cries in the media of "But he's not even remotely as good-looking as Brosnan!". Anyway,

Live and let die

News today suggests that Daniel Craig is to be the next Bond. Xan Brooks ponders Britain's favourite double agent and his various incarnations

Wednesday April 6, 2005

On screen, James Bond is a brutal, no-nonsense go-getter, a prolific seducer of women and exterminator of men who leaves a trail of destruction in his wake as he rampages through ski resorts or picturesque peasant markets in hell-for-leather pursuit of evildoers.

Away from the cameras, Bond can be as coy as a dimpled debutante. For the past 18 months - at least - he has teased the world's press as to who he will show up as next. Will it be Clive Owen, Ewan McGregor, Jude Law, Ioan Gruffud, Eric Bana or Hugh Jackman? Today, we know the answer. James Bond will return in next year's Casino Royale (the 21st official film in the series) in the form of 37-year-old British actor Daniel Craig. Possibly.

And that's the other great paradox about 007. Like Dr Who, he is an icon simultaneously unchanging and eminently replaceable. Should his acting incarnation grow too bored (Sean Connery), too old (Roger Moore), too crap (George Lazenby) or even too greedy (Pierce Brosnan, allegedly), then no matter. There is always another square-jawed suave-looking performer ready to step in and fill his tux.

Having completed work on the last Bond outing, Die Another Day, Variety reported that Brosnan had "priced himself out of the market" by requesting a $42m paycheque for the next. The hunt for a replacement was on.

For better or worse, the actors who have played Bond stand as an index of their times. When casting about for a star, the producers of 1962's Dr No considered such debonair players as James Mason and David Niven, while author Ian Fleming was apparently dead-set on Cary Grant. In the event they went with Sean Connery, a relatively untried Scottish bruiser with an armful of tattoos and a background as a bodybuilder and merchant seaman. They couldn't have made a better choice. The likes of Niven, Grant or Mason would have harked back to a romantic pre-war past. Connery, by contrast, was an actor of his age, with a whiff of kitchen-sink realism about him and an up-front, no-frills sexuality that chimed with the emergent mood of the swinging 60s. His replacement, the Australian model George Lazenby, could only manage a pale imitation of Connery's magnetism and was doomed to failure.

There are those who maintain that the long-serving Bond Roger Moore was an abject disaster in the role. And yet Moore was actually just as emblematic of the 70s as Connery was of the decade before. For a start, Moore's air of wry, jaded disinterest conjured up a world of Martini commercials and suburban key-parties. More significantly, his increasingly self-mocking approach to the role suggested a shift in public mood, reflecting a new public mistrust of the government and intelligence services in the wake of Vietnam, Watergate and Jeremy Thorpe.

Then came Timothy Dalton - that diligent caretaker Bond who kept things ticking over in the age of perastroika, and who bowed out in 1989 as the Berlin Wall came tumbling down. Which brings us up to Brosnan. Credited with rejuvenating the series, Brosnan has always struck me as a computer-generated composite of both Connery and Moore. He was the post-modern clotheshorse for an era when James Bond films were, in essence, films about James Bond films - dazzling homages to keep the fan-base happy.

It is too early to speculate as to the direction Daniel Craig will take the franchise. But the omens are encouraging. Firstly, Craig looks the part of Fleming's hero in the way that some of the other mooted contenders (grinning Jackman, peevish Gruffud) did not. Perhaps more crucially, his career pedigree makes him ideally suited for the role. He is a strong actor with a proven track record (he was particularly good in Roger Michell's The Mother, and entirely respectable in Enduring Love). But he is not quite A-list. The likes of Jude Law or Ewan McGregor would have buried Bond beneath their own star baggage. Craig has room to grow into the role.

That's assuming that Bond isn't still trifling with our affections. Hot on the heels of today's breaking news came some more breaking news suggesting that the Craig leak might be nothing more than another elaborate tease, and that Pierce Brosnan was once again poised to embark on yet another do-or-die mission for queen and country. Oh Lord, will it ever end?

[Mister Asterix]

[mra]You know, to me, Craig looks much more like James Bond then Julian McMahon does. Craig may not be nearly the pretty boy, but he has just the right look of menace. McMahon is just more creepy, than menacing. For instance the only thing menacing about McMahon in Fantastic Four was that he was honing in on Richards

[Agent Provocateur]

I'll be the first to admit that Daniel Craig is a good actor... but his creepy looks will probably overshadow any great acting ability he might bring to the role of Bond. On the other hand, those qualities would make him an ideal Bond villain.

I'll have to cast a resounding vote of "NO!" for Craig to be Bond.

I seriously hope Michael Wilson doesn't give in to any pressure from his sis or any other "Craig for Bond" advocates.

Next!

[cvheady007]

I'll be the first to admit that Daniel Craig is a good actor... but his creepy looks will probably overshadow any great acting ability he might bring to the role of Bond.  On the other hand, those qualities would make him an ideal Bond villain.

I'll have to cast a resounding vote of "NO!" for Craig to be Bond.

I seriously hope Michael Wilson doesn't give in to any pressure from his sis or any other "Craig for Bond" advocates.

Next!

I don't think that I could have worded it better myself.

My sentiments EXACTLY.

[Spoon]

[quote]Yup, one of our sources. We literally got this information minutes before I recorded the podcast when I made some calls to find out if there was any breaking news I should include.

[Agent 76]

Sign him up, NOW!

[return of the saint]

I wonder if he has already be signed?

Could all this fuss about the 'final four' which sprung up since 'The Sun' outed the news of Craig's hiring be a case of hiding a leaf in a forest?
[the best place to hide a leaf is in a forest - the best place to hide the news of a successful Bond candidate is in a forest of false news about successful candidates]

'The Sun' did seem prety sure about their facts - they did a full page spread on the story - quite a bit more than they give their usual 'show-biz' tittle tattle and rumour mongering.
+
We have heard that Sony offered him the job - but Eon took it back again? Seems strange to me. Perhaps it was more like Sony & Eon gave him the job - but the news leaked out, so Eon gave him this story; to make it seem like the Sun might have just got it a ilttle bit wrong.
+
Now we get Mr.* stating that his source is saying 'Craig, Daniel Craig'?
+
He's presently the only contender that I'm excited about - so he must have got the job!

Sorted!

Edited by return of the saint, 02 September 2005 - 08:38 PM.

[hrabb04]

There's just one little problem....He's an ugly little !

[return of the saint]

try telling his mum that.

[Loomis]

[quote name='return of the saint' date='2 September 2005 - 20:33']I wonder if he has already be signed?

Could all this fuss about the 'final four' which sprung up since 'The Sun' outed the news of Craig's hiring be a case of hiding a leaf in a forest?
[the best place to hide a leaf is in a forest - the best place to hide the news of a successful Bond candidate is in a forest of false news about successful candidates]

'The Sun' did seem prety sure about their facts - they did a full page spread on the story - quite a bit more than they give their usual 'show-biz' tittle tattle and rumour mongering.
+
We have heard that Sony offered him the job - but Eon took it back again?

[return of the saint]

Your being right annoys me.

[Loomis]

Your being right annoys me.

LOL! Me too. I don't know who'll be Bond in CASINO ROYALE, but I know it won't be my two top choices, Owen or Craig. Owen because he'd never want the part in a million years (well.... he might have done a year or two ago, but those days are definitely over), and Craig because he'd never get the part, even if he came really, really close.

They'll go for someone who'd be a considerably safer choice. Because they're not, after all, in the business of taking risks, going back to Fleming, making artistic masterworks, etc. They're in business, to quote MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE II, to make money, and regardless of whatever little bits of "grittiness" or "quality" they choose to throw into the mix every so often (acclaimed screenwriter Paul Haggis writing a nasty torture scene for CR, for instance) to show that they're not just total moneygrubbing hacks making brainless fare for audiences of morons, they'll always lean heavily towards fun-for-all-the-family Bond hokum starring an extremely handsome actor.

[WC]

Daniel Craig? Too Putin-esque. Should play a villain or Russian heavy, not Bond.

[tdalton]

I wonder if he has already be signed?

Could all this fuss about the 'final four' which sprung up since 'The Sun' outed the news of Craig's hiring be a case of hiding a leaf in a forest?
[the best place to hide a leaf is in a forest - the best place to hide the news of a successful Bond candidate is in a forest of false news about successful candidates]

'The Sun' did seem prety sure about their facts - they did a full page spread on the story - quite a bit more than they give their usual 'show-biz' tittle tattle and rumour mongering.
+
We have heard that Sony offered him the job - but Eon took it back again?  Seems strange to me.  Perhaps it was more like Sony & Eon gave him the job - but the news leaked out, so Eon gave him this story; to make it seem like the Sun might have just got it a ilttle bit wrong.
+
Now we get Mr.* stating that his source is saying 'Craig, Daniel Craig'?
+
He's presently the only contender that I'm excited about - so he must have got the job!

Sorted!

I think you may be right. Maybe the "re-boot" is in how the character is going to be portrayed on the screen and the kind of actor that will play Bond, not a complete and total re-boot like we've been speculating about. I'm hoping that Craig will in fact be James Bond, and if he is, then I think that EON will have set themselves up very well for the future of the franchise.

EON, if you're reading this, please cast DANIEL CRAIG!

[tdalton]

[quote name='Mister Asterix' date='2 September 2005 - 14:28'][mra]Yup, one of our sources. We literally got this information minutes before I recorded the podcast when I made some calls to find out if there was any breaking news I should include.

[MarJil]

People (including myself) comment a lot about Craig's looks, but I was just thinking about it and what occurred to me was that people aren't nearly as caught up in Clive's lack of Bond looks as they are with Craig. I think Craig is at worst Clive's equal in the looks department, and way ahead in the physique department (and definitely way ahead of any other Bond actor other than Connery in that same department), but not too many people complain about that. Somebody posted a picture of Craig next to a movie poster of Steve McQueen and Craig looked better than him. Craig isn't my first choice, but his looks are vastly underrated.

Edited by MarJil, 03 September 2005 - 02:10 AM.

[Frankie]

lookielikies?



Daniel Craig




Steve McQueen

Why is looking like Steve McQueen such a big deal. I loved McQueen, but wouldn't want him as JAMES BOND!!.... MUCH LESS, DANIEL CRAIG.

[Frankie]

Daniel Craig? Too Putin-esque. Should play a villain or Russian heavy, not Bond.

EXACTLY!!

[trumanlodge89]

Daniel Craig? Too Putin-esque. Should play a villain or Russian heavy, not Bond.

EXACTLY!!

exactly exactly

[Mister Asterix]

Would you happen to know when (or if) anymore details on this front may come forward, if I'm not out of line in asking.  This is the first rumor since Clive Owen's "I'm going to be busy" that has truly gotten me excited, and I'm just curious to know more.  I'll be anxiously waiting to find out more, and thanks for passing on the information that you were able to pass on to us.

[mra]I don

[Qwerty]

It would be a shame if they did, probably the worst of the so-called "big named candidates".  Blonde, ugly, and too obscure.  I'm sure he can pull of the toughness, but can he attract women?

Agreed with the above.

[Slaezenger]

So what does everyone think of Daniel Craig as Bond?  Yes he is not classically good looking but i've seen pictures of him while he was promoting Layer Cake where he looked suprisingly good, cool and tough.  Also a plus that he is not a baby bond.  I'd take him over Goran, Henry and even Alex in a heartbeat.  I have others who i'd pick before Craig BUT as we have all seen we can do a lot worse than he.

...By now you have read that Eon is looking for someone young enough to hook next generation moviegoers (who apparently feel that Bond movies belong to their parents) and their core audience of 25 yr old males. While maintaining this balancing act, they have to satisfy audience expectations, and not hire someone so well known that he wants too much money. Viewed in these contexts, Craig does not fit the bill.

If you were a major studio, you wouldn't gamble on too unknown or offbeat a choice. Of the lot, imo only Jude Law manages to touch all bases. He 's the safe bet who looks the part, someone attractive to younger and older viewers, who's still hungry enough to be affordable.

http://entimg.msn.co...Law_300x435.jpg

Slaezenger

[Alex Zamudio]

I hope this come true! He would make an excellent 007, a real dangerous SPY. He is a great actor, and a striking screen presence, a guy you know that can beat the hell out of you when he enters a room, but can charm his way out of any situation. And he looks great; Craig, Casino Royale and Paul Haggis, man! this has to be!!!


But probably won't...

Edited by Alex Zamudio, 03 September 2005 - 05:58 AM.

[Shrublands]

[quote name='Mister Asterix' date='2 September 2005 - 18:28'][quote name='Seannery' date='2 September 2005 - 11:52'][quote name='Spoon' date='2 September 2005 - 17:48']Don't like Craig... I don't think he is a "movie Bond" for the reason discussed above.

But more importantly...[quote]Cbn in it latest Podcast gives the exclusive tidbit that Daniel Craig could very well be back big time as a Bond contender.[/quote]What is the source for this information?

[/quote]



From what I gather one of Cbn's own sources BUT you should ask a Mod in the know to verify that.

[/quote]

[mra]Yup, one of our sources. We literally got this information minutes before I recorded the podcast when I made some calls to find out if there was any breaking news I should include.

[rdh007]

What strikes me as odd with this latest report from Hollywood Reporter is that they said Eric Bana wasn't good looking enough. Okay makes sense. But Craig is!!!??? What am I missing here? At least Bana isn't blonde, that alone gives him a leg up on Craig in the looks department. It makes me wonder about the accuracy of this report and/or the sanity of TPTB.

[return of the saint]

If you were a major studio, you wouldn't gamble on too unknown or offbeat a choice.

Yeah - I'll tell you this Sony would have NEVER picked some scrawny kid (who had only really done low-beat art-house dramas) to play an action hero in their biggest bid for franchise glory since the studio was founded. Oh no, hang on, that's exactly what they did. And, what d'y' know it worked. (I'm talking about SpiderMan and Tobey Maguire). [Same sort of thing can be said of Bale in Batman Begins, Gruffudd in F4, Brandon Routh in Superman Returns, Christopher Reeve in Superman, Eric Bana in Hulk, Hugh Jackman in X-Men, Matt Damon in the Bourne Identity as well as Connery, Lazemby, Dalton etc, etc.]

In fact this is exactly what studios are in the business of doing - finding the next great action hero. I think perhaps Eon (and Sony) reliase that they missed the boat with Owen, Bale and even Jackman. If they had dumpped Brosnan before DAD then perhaps one of these three, presently hotter than hot, actors would hve been 007 (and hotter than hot is not a term I would use to describe Brosnan's current status). Perhaps they can see that Craig is going to be big. And they don't want to miss the same boat four times.!?

I can also see why Craig would want the Bond part. There is not an infinite number of opportunities for Brits in Hollywood. Bale has done very well getting the role of America's best Comic Book hero, Ioan Gruffudd also did well to get Mr. Fantastic, McGregor could never have imaged how well he'd do, Jude Law, Clive Owen, Hugh Grant, Orlando Bloom and Jason Statham I'm sure are pleased with the way their careers are going. But Craig may be aware that these guys are essentially the exceptions - not every hot British actor can make it. Christopher Eccleston is going to be trying now I guess - but I don't really see it happening for him (he should've stuck at Dr. Who for longer - though I'm looking forward to David Tennant's interpretation), Robert Carlyle doesn't look like he'll do much now, Toby Stephens, Butler, Purefoy, Scott?

If he dosen't want to play second fiddle for his entire career (as comedy/cliche villain or Mentor - ala Sean Bean, Gary Oldman, Liam Neeson, Alan Rickman, etc), if he dosen't want to do Woody Allan films / London based Romcoms all his life, or if he desires to one day break away from BBC drama (i.e. If he wants to be the lead-actor in action movies - with room to do his own stuff as well) then his best bet might be to make a stab at being James Bond. Lets face it, Brosnan did get some good opportunities (he worked with Tim Burton, started his own production company, did the Tailor of Panama, etc) because of his being James Bond.

So, Eon want him because if he does make it in Hollywood - he will be one of the next generation of hot British actors, and they want Bond to be played by one of the next generation of hot British actors. Craig might want the role because it actually could help in establish himself an a market which is currently swampped (to the point of saturation) with hot British actors. What Eon don't want is a (dare I say 'another') tepid actor (or do they?)

Edited by return of the saint, 03 September 2005 - 03:37 PM.

[tdalton]

[quote name='Mister Asterix' date='3 September 2005 - 00:25'][quote name='tdalton' date='2 September 2005 - 20:41']Would you happen to know when (or if) anymore details on this front may come forward, if I'm not out of line in asking.

[Slaezenger]

If you were a major studio, you wouldn't gamble on too unknown or offbeat a choice.

Yeah - I'll tell you this Sony would have NEVER picked some scrawny kid (who had only really done low-beat art-house dramas) to play an action hero in their biggest bid for franchise glory since the studio was founded. Oh no, hang on, that's exactly what they did. And, what d'y' know it worked. (I'm talking about SpiderMan and Tobey Maguire). [Same sort of thing can be said of Bale in Batman Begins, Gruffudd in F4, Brandon Routh in Superman Returns, Christopher Reeve in Superman, Eric Bana in Hulk, Hugh Jackman in X-Men, Matt Damon in the Bourne Identity as well as Connery, Lazemby, Dalton etc, etc.]

In fact this is exactly what studios are in the business of doing - finding the next great action hero.

...Yeah, Eon's hot for an unknown. That's why they offered the part to award winning actor Clive Owen -- right? Look, Toby Maguire looks like Peter Parker. Bale looks like Batman. And Daniel Craig looks like anyone but James Bond. He belongs in a John le Carre thriller -- but not Fleming's fantasy adventures.

[bondphan]

"One source close to the movie reported that Broccoli liked "Layer Cake" star Daniel Craig, 37, but Wilson didn't"

Hollywood Reporter article wasn't real keen on Daniel Craig. Neither am I. Daniel Craig has exactly no appeal to me. Look at the last paragraph of that article. A Disney casting director likes Gerard Butler. So do I and a million fans on gerardbutler.net

With Craig as Bond, CR will be just another action movie, nothing more-nothing less. I would probably just wait for the DVD if I see it at all.

[return of the saint]

ok - lets see who looks like whom.


Peter Parker

Tobey McGuire
erm - ok?

Bale looks like Bruce Wayne?


Bruce Wayne


Bruce Wayne?

Don't see it myself.


howabout


Fleming's own commisioned picture of James Bond


Daniel Craig.

Craig looks as much like Fleming's James Bond as any other actor that has played him on the screen. And her certainly looks as much like the fictional character he would play as any other daring piece of movie casting in recent years has achieved.

I never said Eon were after a hot 'unknown' I said they were after a hot actor. Which goes along with why they appraoched Owen. As I said they missed the boat with Owen; Owen has already made it - Craig is just about to (if he is given access to the right material). I really think they should get this guy whilst his star is still rising.

Edited by return of the saint, 03 September 2005 - 05:12 PM.