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 IS JAMES BOND!


496 replies to this topic

#361 JimmyBond

JimmyBond

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 10559 posts
  • Location:Washington

Posted 20 August 2006 - 06:10 AM


i also hope that after they're done "returning to his roots" that the bond character in # 22 will be a little more familiar to those of us who have supported the franchise for decades.

That is my biggest concern. I want Bond to be the Bond I've always loved...I just don't know how I'd accept a completely different character.



This complaint is really much ado about nothing. The Bond of Casino Royale is still the Bond we know and love from the previous 20 films. Only this time he allows himself to fall in love and get hurt by a woman...and really, how is that different from each Brosnan film? Seemed like he fell in love in each of his films.

#362 DamnCoffee

DamnCoffee

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 24459 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 20 August 2006 - 03:30 PM

agreed, i noticed that Bond loved Elecktra quite a bit eg: when Xenia got killed in Goldeneye Bond didn't go up too her and stroke her hair out of her eyes like he did with eleckra when she was killed i think Bond felt genuine effection for her and was pretty cut up when he found out she killed her father

#363 bill007

bill007

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2072 posts
  • Location:I'm in my study, at the computer desk.

Posted 20 August 2006 - 07:41 PM

REBOOT! I love that term when used in reference to the much anticipated return of James Bond in Casino Royale.

Let's face it, Die Another Day had pretty much jumped-the-shark for the worn-out franchise. James Bond had become more Superman, than Super-spy. Utilizing Ian Flemings first novel to bring our hero back to reality is going to be a huge success for producers Broccoli & Wilson. Say good-bye to invisible cars and para-surfing to the tops of glaciers. Say hello (once again) to plot, character, and suspense. And of course, romance.

Enter Daniel Craig. Strong jaw-line with brutish characteristics, and exrtemely muscular. As for the blonde hair and steel-blue eyse? If the guys can enjoy the Bond babes, let the gals enjoy the main man. This guy is going to blow the socks off the nay-sayers, who will either see the light (pun), or be shown the door.

Edited by bill007, 20 August 2006 - 07:43 PM.


#364 Jackanaples

Jackanaples

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 992 posts
  • Location:Hollywood, CA

Posted 20 August 2006 - 08:00 PM

REBOOT! I love that term when used in reference to the much anticipated return of James Bond in Casino Royale.

Let's face it, Die Another Day had pretty much jumped-the-shark for the worn-out franchise. James Bond had become more Superman, than Super-spy. Utilizing Ian Flemings first novel to bring our hero back to reality is going to be a huge success for producers Broccoli & Wilson. Say good-bye to invisible cars and para-surfing to the tops of glaciers. Say hello (once again) to plot, character, and suspense. And of course, romance.

Enter Daniel Craig. Strong jaw-line with brutish characteristics, and exrtemely muscular. As for the blonde hair and steel-blue eyse? If the guys can enjoy the Bond babes, let the gals enjoy the main man. This guy is going to blow the socks off the nay-sayers, who will either see the light (pun), or be shown the door.

Agreed, bill, it's an exciting time to be a fan of James Bond.

Incidentally, I don't know if you follow comic books at all, but the entire CASINO ROYALE/Daniel Craig/Reboot 'controversy' reminds me of a couple years ago when Marvel Comics announced they were going to start a new bunch of reboots for some of their most popular characters called the Ultimate line.

It would give creators a chance to update characters and situations that in some cases had become mired down in something like forty-plus years of continuity, expectations, etc. and give new readers a chance to jump on at the beginning instead of shying away because they don't want to feel like they joined the party a few decades late.

Well, some very vocal fans had a cow. "You can't do this! It's wrong! Nick Fury can't be black!" Arguing that it was a betrayal to their years of loyalty, that no one would like it, etc. Sound familiar?

This very vocal annoyance lasted until the first books hit the shelves. The majority of fans have loved the books, and you never hear anyone saying the Ultimate line was a bad idea now because it so obviously worked.

Edited by Jackanaples, 26 August 2006 - 11:12 AM.


#365 bill007

bill007

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2072 posts
  • Location:I'm in my study, at the computer desk.

Posted 20 August 2006 - 08:49 PM

Hi Jack. Nope, I'm not into comics, but am aware of their influence and devoted following. Of course, what we are talking about here with CR is much-ado about a real-life person portraying a fictional character. These are things which influence our lives to some degree, whether they be escapism, or our decisions in life.

Comics, novels, TV, and the big screen are all instruments which influence the general population. But when change is injected into the norm, chaos temporarily reigns. Thus, we have our current controversy over our hero. Some are more zealous and resistant to these changes, while others ponder and weigh the final outcome.

We are still watching and reading Sherlock Holmes over a century later. And as some may have been influenced by SH to become forensic scientists, I am certain the same is true for a few MI6 and CIA agents alive today who were similarly influenced by JB to choose their selected occupation. Two perfect examples of life imitating art, eh?

#366 SeanValen00V

SeanValen00V

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1518 posts

Posted 21 August 2006 - 04:36 PM

I still have nightmares about the press conference, when I saw Daniel Craig in the press conference, it all felt fake, as the Bond music came on, I felt the producers putting on their best face to cover the fact of "what have we done."


He's not Bond for me, I've tried my best, Casino is the first film of my Bond life that I'm dreading.



REBOOT! I love that term when used in reference to the much anticipated return of James Bond in Casino Royale.

Let's face it, Die Another Day had pretty much jumped-the-shark for the worn-out franchise. James Bond had become more Superman, than Super-spy. Utilizing Ian Flemings first novel to bring our hero back to reality is going to be a huge success for producers Broccoli & Wilson. Say good-bye to invisible cars and para-surfing to the tops of glaciers. Say hello (once again) to plot, character, and suspense. And of course, romance.

Enter Daniel Craig. Strong jaw-line with brutish characteristics, and exrtemely muscular. As for the blonde hair and steel-blue eyse? If the guys can enjoy the Bond babes, let the gals enjoy the main man. This guy is going to blow the socks off the nay-sayers, who will either see the light (pun), or be shown the door.




Just remember who ok'd those invisable cars and worn the fanchise out, the producers, they let it happen and approved it, and ruined what we now know was Brosnan's last film, it's damage they will live to regret I think, instead of admittnig their mistakes, they fired Pierce after failing him.

Had they given Pierce a decent script and good sending off last year, everyone would of been more pleased. But they now have extra damage to repair, which may never happen, if they don't at least admit they screwed Pierce. He should be filming Casino with Tarantino. Reboot idea is a joke.

#367 jaguar007

jaguar007

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5608 posts
  • Location:Portland OR

Posted 21 August 2006 - 04:37 PM

I still have nightmares about the press conference, when I saw Daniel Craig in the press conference, it all felt fake, as the Bond music came on, I felt the producers putting on their best face to cover the fact of "what have we done."


He's not Bond for me, I've tried my best, Casino is the first film of my Bond life that I'm dreading.


Hopefully when the movie comes out, you will be pleasantly suprised. There is always the possibility that Criag may not be as bad as you think. He sure looks good in the small amount of footage I have seen.

#368 Matt_13

Matt_13

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5969 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted 21 August 2006 - 04:38 PM

I'm sorry you feel that way, but in case you haven't noticed we are far beyond that press conference. DC looks very comfortable in the role, the producers are praising him, and Casino Royale looks pretty much perfect. I don't think you should be dreading this film, on the contrary, I think you should be lookung forward to it. Come Nov. 17 I'm pretty sure all of your worries will be gone.

#369 SeanValen00V

SeanValen00V

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1518 posts

Posted 21 August 2006 - 04:41 PM


I still have nightmares about the press conference, when I saw Daniel Craig in the press conference, it all felt fake, as the Bond music came on, I felt the producers putting on their best face to cover the fact of "what have we done."


He's not Bond for me, I've tried my best, Casino is the first film of my Bond life that I'm dreading.


Hopefully when the movie comes out, you will be pleasantly suprised. There is always the possibility that Criag may not be as bad as you think. He sure looks good in the small amount of footage I have seen.



When they announced Christian Bale as Batman a year before the film came out, I knew he would make a great Batman/Bruce Wayne, and he did for me. He could of been a good James Bond as well.


I am trying to like Craig so I don't sound negative in the forums, but I believe the producers chose wrong, and I don't blame Craig, it's a few million pounds, he's got money, so what if the press hounds him a bit, and the fans who disaprove, it's a small price for what those millions will do for him. I would of gone for the money as well if I needed it. Difference was, Pierce was in the public mind as Bond ages ago, Craig came out of nowhere and it shows, they must of had very few offers for the bond role, and those who might of done it, were too costly.


We should all have a copy of Brosnan's 5th Bond film on dvd, it should of been out last year, where is it? I waited 3 years for it.....the producers cannot repair that damage. Had they had the class to cap his era off with a decent film not worrying about box office, we could all be looking forward to the new Bond in 2007, the 007 year, the timing would be right.

They've wasted 4 years.

#370 jaguar007

jaguar007

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5608 posts
  • Location:Portland OR

Posted 21 August 2006 - 04:50 PM

Just remember who ok'd those invisable cars and worn the fanchise out, the producers, they let it happen and approved it, and ruined what we now know was Brosnan's last film, it's damage they will live to regret I think, instead of admittnig their mistakes, they fired Pierce after failing him.

Had they given Pierce a decent script and good sending off last year, everyone would of been more pleased. But they now have extra damage to repair, which may never happen, if they don't at least admit they screwed Pierce. He should be filming Casino with Tarantino. Reboot idea is a joke.


As much as I enjoyed Pierce in the role, I never felt he was the best of the Bonds for a somewhat faithful take on CR. I always wanted to see Dalton make that movie (even over my favorite, Connery). I now feel that Craig may be even better than Dalton in the role - having his intensity while showing a bit of the cocky macho swagger that Connery had (that Brosnan was certainly lacking).



I still have nightmares about the press conference, when I saw Daniel Craig in the press conference, it all felt fake, as the Bond music came on, I felt the producers putting on their best face to cover the fact of "what have we done."


He's not Bond for me, I've tried my best, Casino is the first film of my Bond life that I'm dreading.


Hopefully when the movie comes out, you will be pleasantly suprised. There is always the possibility that Criag may not be as bad as you think. He sure looks good in the small amount of footage I have seen.



When they announced Christian Bale as Batman a year before the film came out, I knew he would make a great Batman/Bruce Wayne, and he did for me. He could of been a good James Bond as well.


I am trying to like Craig so I don't sound negative in the forums, but I believe the producers chose wrong, and I don't blame Craig, it's a few million pounds, he's got money, so what if the press hounds him a bit, and the fans who disaprove, it's a small price for what those millions will do for him. I would of gone for the money as well if I needed it. Difference was, Pierce was in the public mind as Bond ages ago, Craig came out of nowhere and it shows, they must of had very few offers for the bond role, and those who might of done it, were too costly.


We should all have a copy of Brosnan's 5th Bond film on dvd, it should of been out last year, where is it? I waited 3 years for it.....the producers cannot repair that damage. Had they had the class to cap his era off with a decent film not worrying about box office, we could all be looking forward to the new Bond in 2007, the 007 year, the timing would be right.

They've wasted 4 years.


we can always say "we should have". I would have rather had a 3rd Dalton than a 5th Brosnan. But just like a 5th Brosnan - it was never meant to be.

#371 SeanValen00V

SeanValen00V

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1518 posts

Posted 21 August 2006 - 04:58 PM

I'm sorry you feel that way, but in case you haven't noticed we are far beyond that press conference. DC looks very comfortable in the role, the producers are praising him, and Casino Royale looks pretty much perfect. I don't think you should be dreading this film, on the contrary, I think you should be lookung forward to it. Come Nov. 17 I'm pretty sure all of your worries will be gone.


No worries, you enjoy the film, I cannot feel the same way about it, because I have very strong views about the decisions made by the producers.

For me, the Bond producers have acted recklessly with the fanchise since Cubby died, , her daughter lacks the class of the man, I'm sure Cubby would of allowed Brosnan to explore his Bond better, and not box him into a corner with Jinx, invisable cars, and you know the rest. If they had done their job better, one actor's era would of had closure. Yet they start a new one without correcting old problems, they never issues a statement regarding Brosnan's departure.

I know my casting, if I saw Connery, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan walking down the street, they are Bond, if I see Craig walking down the street, I see a Bond villian, he's always looked like a villian and carried himself as one, I do not see the conviction of the man who believes he's Bond, all I see is Barabara Brocolli exercising her control over the fanchise with whatever she pleases.



Just remember who ok'd those invisable cars and worn the fanchise out, the producers, they let it happen and approved it, and ruined what we now know was Brosnan's last film, it's damage they will live to regret I think, instead of admittnig their mistakes, they fired Pierce after failing him.

Had they given Pierce a decent script and good sending off last year, everyone would of been more pleased. But they now have extra damage to repair, which may never happen, if they don't at least admit they screwed Pierce. He should be filming Casino with Tarantino. Reboot idea is a joke.


As much as I enjoyed Pierce in the role, I never felt he was the best of the Bonds for a somewhat faithful take on CR. I always wanted to see Dalton make that movie (even over my favorite, Connery). I now feel that Craig may be even better than Dalton in the role - having his intensity while showing a bit of the cocky macho swagger that Connery had (that Brosnan was certainly lacking).



I still have nightmares about the press conference, when I saw Daniel Craig in the press conference, it all felt fake, as the Bond music came on, I felt the producers putting on their best face to cover the fact of "what have we done."


He's not Bond for me, I've tried my best, Casino is the first film of my Bond life that I'm dreading.


Hopefully when the movie comes out, you will be pleasantly suprised. There is always the possibility that Criag may not be as bad as you think. He sure looks good in the small amount of footage I have seen.



When they announced Christian Bale as Batman a year before the film came out, I knew he would make a great Batman/Bruce Wayne, and he did for me. He could of been a good James Bond as well.


I am trying to like Craig so I don't sound negative in the forums, but I believe the producers chose wrong, and I don't blame Craig, it's a few million pounds, he's got money, so what if the press hounds him a bit, and the fans who disaprove, it's a small price for what those millions will do for him. I would of gone for the money as well if I needed it. Difference was, Pierce was in the public mind as Bond ages ago, Craig came out of nowhere and it shows, they must of had very few offers for the bond role, and those who might of done it, were too costly.


We should all have a copy of Brosnan's 5th Bond film on dvd, it should of been out last year, where is it? I waited 3 years for it.....the producers cannot repair that damage. Had they had the class to cap his era off with a decent film not worrying about box office, we could all be looking forward to the new Bond in 2007, the 007 year, the timing would be right.

They've wasted 4 years.


we can always say "we should have". I would have rather had a 3rd Dalton than a 5th Brosnan. But just like a 5th Brosnan - it was never meant to be.



I would like to have both, but the manner and reasoning behind Brosnan's departure to the creative reasoning the producers talk of, were doing a younger Bond blah blah, never made sense, if the producers admit we messed up on Die Another Day and failed Pierce's last Bond film, then I could feel some closure, but in firing him, it's like they are blaming him for the direction and cgi cars, it lacks class, because they were so quiet on the matter, and never admit faults, then you can't help but feel ashamed of it.


The producers need a wake up call, if Casino fails, it might be the best thing for the fanchise, just to make the producers see the sense of the EGO and what it has done.

#372 jaguar007

jaguar007

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5608 posts
  • Location:Portland OR

Posted 21 August 2006 - 05:07 PM


I'm sorry you feel that way, but in case you haven't noticed we are far beyond that press conference. DC looks very comfortable in the role, the producers are praising him, and Casino Royale looks pretty much perfect. I don't think you should be dreading this film, on the contrary, I think you should be lookung forward to it. Come Nov. 17 I'm pretty sure all of your worries will be gone.


No worries, you enjoy the film, I cannot feel the same way about it, because I have very strong views about the decisions made by the producers.

For me, the Bond producers have acted recklessly with the fanchise since Cubby died, , her daughter lacks the class of the man, I'm sure Cubby would of allowed Brosnan to explore his Bond better, and not box him into a corner with Jinx, invisable cars, and you know the rest. If they had done their job better, one actor's era would of had closure. Yet they start a new one without correcting old problems, they never issues a statement regarding Brosnan's departure.

I know my casting, if I saw Connery, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan walking down the street, they are Bond, if I see Craig walking down the street, I see a Bond villian, he's always looked like a villian and carried himself as one, I do not see the conviction of the man who believes he's Bond, all I see is Barabara Brocolli exercising her control over the fanchise with whatever she pleases.



Just remember who ok'd those invisable cars and worn the fanchise out, the producers, they let it happen and approved it, and ruined what we now know was Brosnan's last film, it's damage they will live to regret I think, instead of admittnig their mistakes, they fired Pierce after failing him.

Had they given Pierce a decent script and good sending off last year, everyone would of been more pleased. But they now have extra damage to repair, which may never happen, if they don't at least admit they screwed Pierce. He should be filming Casino with Tarantino. Reboot idea is a joke.


As much as I enjoyed Pierce in the role, I never felt he was the best of the Bonds for a somewhat faithful take on CR. I always wanted to see Dalton make that movie (even over my favorite, Connery). I now feel that Craig may be even better than Dalton in the role - having his intensity while showing a bit of the cocky macho swagger that Connery had (that Brosnan was certainly lacking).



I still have nightmares about the press conference, when I saw Daniel Craig in the press conference, it all felt fake, as the Bond music came on, I felt the producers putting on their best face to cover the fact of "what have we done."


He's not Bond for me, I've tried my best, Casino is the first film of my Bond life that I'm dreading.


Hopefully when the movie comes out, you will be pleasantly suprised. There is always the possibility that Criag may not be as bad as you think. He sure looks good in the small amount of footage I have seen.



When they announced Christian Bale as Batman a year before the film came out, I knew he would make a great Batman/Bruce Wayne, and he did for me. He could of been a good James Bond as well.


I am trying to like Craig so I don't sound negative in the forums, but I believe the producers chose wrong, and I don't blame Craig, it's a few million pounds, he's got money, so what if the press hounds him a bit, and the fans who disaprove, it's a small price for what those millions will do for him. I would of gone for the money as well if I needed it. Difference was, Pierce was in the public mind as Bond ages ago, Craig came out of nowhere and it shows, they must of had very few offers for the bond role, and those who might of done it, were too costly.


We should all have a copy of Brosnan's 5th Bond film on dvd, it should of been out last year, where is it? I waited 3 years for it.....the producers cannot repair that damage. Had they had the class to cap his era off with a decent film not worrying about box office, we could all be looking forward to the new Bond in 2007, the 007 year, the timing would be right.

They've wasted 4 years.


we can always say "we should have". I would have rather had a 3rd Dalton than a 5th Brosnan. But just like a 5th Brosnan - it was never meant to be.



I would like to have both, but the manner and reasoning behind Brosnan's departure to the creative reasoning the producers talk of, were doing a younger Bond blah blah, never made sense, if the producers admit we messed up on Die Another Day and failed Pierce's last Bond film, then I could feel some closure, but in firing him, it's like they are blaming him for the direction and cgi cars, it lacks class, because they were so quiet on the matter, and never admit faults, then you can't help but feel ashamed of it.


The producers need a wake up call, if Casino fails, it might be the best thing for the fanchise, just to make the producers see the sense of the EGO and what it has done.


I think (hope) that the producers have already had thier wake up call which is why they are making CR the way they are making it. I will be honest that I was very reluctant to the reboot idea and I still have some problems with it. However the direction they are taking the movie are just was the Bond series needs to give it a shot in the arm.

They may have learned with Roger Moore that no matter how popular an actor is in the Bond role, when he just gets too old, the audience will notice it. Moore was too old in OP and AVTAK and Pierce is too old for CR.

#373 JCS007

JCS007

    Recruit

  • Crew
  • 3 posts

Posted 22 August 2006 - 11:19 PM

I think Craig is gonna be better than people think. I had issues with his casting before, because I didn't like that the studio was going with a younger version, but every character has an origin story, and this is Bond's.

#374 reesieg

reesieg

    Recruit

  • Crew
  • 1 posts

Posted 25 August 2006 - 03:25 AM

I can't think of anything better than a blond with icy blue eyes & a British or Aussie accent. Sean Bean would've been good in his day, but after seeing Daniel Craig carry Layer Cake & play such a stud in Munich, I'm thrilled that Craig is playing Bond. Who isn't captivated by someone with Siberian husky eyes & a strong jaw like he has - particularly when he can act? (My brother, husband & I were all mesmerized by Layer Cake. Probably for different reasons.)

So when I saw Craig on the cover of the new Entertainment Weekly, I grabbed it -- & laughed when I read that there are actually people who started a website trashing Craig & demanding that Bond be a brunet. You people have had that for decades. Allow some new ideas to enter your life - it makes it worth living. Some of us think that it's about time the franchise realized that a blond James with a hot brunette Bond girl will be the epitome of sexiness. (We were also quite taken with Eva Green in many scenes from Kingdom of Heaven - featuring an award-worthy performance by Orlando Bloom, too - but I digress.) Too bad that in real life Craig seems to like flaky blonde girls. But that's his business...Kudos to Barbara Broccoli for seeing in him what I saw

Edited by reesieg, 25 August 2006 - 03:29 AM.


#375 Qwerty

Qwerty

    Commander RNVR

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 85605 posts
  • Location:New York / Pennsylvania

Posted 25 August 2006 - 03:26 AM

Welcome to the CommanderBond.net Forums, reesieg! :)

#376 bill007

bill007

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2072 posts
  • Location:I'm in my study, at the computer desk.

Posted 27 August 2006 - 06:31 AM

hi reesieg. Like you, I am new to this forum, but have had a load of fun reading what people have to say about the new JB.

Like some, I was initially sceptical, but finally found my way around to accepting the blonder bond after much consideration of DC's acting ability, and oh-so-cool blue eyes.

Yes, I am male. And, no, I am not gay. But his last glimpse in the trailer just oozes, " Bond, James Bond" ala Sean Connery.

Speaking of Sean lads, yeas Bean would have done well. I really enjoyed him in that 2nd Jack Ryan adaptation.

Yes, I grabbed this weeks EW, and read it with child-like enthusiasm. I particularly enjoyed the additional JB covers as they were introduced on the mag's front pages.

And I'll bet my last poker chip that Danny Boy will no longer be dating flakey blondes.

the bill007

#377 bernsmartin007

bernsmartin007

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 407 posts

Posted 29 August 2006 - 04:55 PM

It has been revealed in newly unearthed documents that Ian Fleming originally stated that "Both Dehn [a Hollywood screenwriter] and I think that Richard Burton would be by far the best James Bond!"

He originally wanted Hitchcock to direct also. This would have given a darker, more hard boiled thriller. I think Fleming would have loved the choice of Daniel Craig.

Posted Image

#378 archer1949

archer1949

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 171 posts

Posted 29 August 2006 - 11:11 PM

It has been revealed in newly unearthed documents that Ian Fleming originally stated that "Both Dehn [a Hollywood screenwriter] and I think that Richard Burton would be by far the best James Bond!"

He originally wanted Hitchcock to direct also. This would have given a darker, more hard boiled thriller. I think Fleming would have loved the choice of Daniel Craig.

Posted Image


Interesting. Thanks.

#379 Qwerty

Qwerty

    Commander RNVR

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 85605 posts
  • Location:New York / Pennsylvania

Posted 29 August 2006 - 11:50 PM

He originally wanted Hitchcock to direct also.


Would have made for an interesting Bond film.

#380 DaveBond21

DaveBond21

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 18026 posts
  • Location:Sydney, Australia (but from the UK)

Posted 11 September 2006 - 06:50 AM

Daniel Craig IS James Bond, and the new trailer proves this!!!


:)

#381 CM007

CM007

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 298 posts

Posted 12 September 2006 - 07:40 PM

agreed, i noticed that Bond loved Elecktra quite a bit eg: when Xenia got killed in Goldeneye Bond didn't go up too her and stroke her hair out of her eyes like he did with eleckra when she was killed i think Bond felt genuine effection for her and was pretty cut up when he found out she killed her father


I disagree.I don

#382 JimmyBond

JimmyBond

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 10559 posts
  • Location:Washington

Posted 13 September 2006 - 07:13 AM

[quote name='CM007' post='605880' date='12 September 2006 - 14:40']


I disagree....New trailer proves nothing but how Craig can run away from Chasing Bullets....[/quote]

You single out what isnt even a 30 second clip from the trailer?


[quote]
the real test will be how he conducts himself away from the action[/quote]

The trailer gives us a glimpse, and it's a rather good one.

[quote]
...Believe it or not to many people the biggest part of Bond is the Image[/quote]

Not sure why you feel the need to come off as so condescending here.

[quote]
....and hoestly IMO Craig ain

#383 Jackanaples

Jackanaples

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 992 posts
  • Location:Hollywood, CA

Posted 13 September 2006 - 01:36 PM

[quote name='JimmyBond' post='606193' date='13 September 2006 - 00:13']
[quote name='CM007' post='605880' date='12 September 2006 - 14:40']


I disagree....New trailer proves nothing but how Craig can run away from Chasing Bullets....[/quote]

You single out what isnt even a 30 second clip from the trailer?


[quote]
the real test will be how he conducts himself away from the action[/quote]

The trailer gives us a glimpse, and it's a rather good one.

[quote]
...Believe it or not to many people the biggest part of Bond is the Image[/quote]

Not sure why you feel the need to come off as so condescending here.

[quote]
....and hoestly IMO Craig ain

#384 BJMDDS

BJMDDS

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 59 posts

Posted 14 September 2006 - 08:00 PM

[quote name='CM007' post='605880' date='12 September 2006 - 15:40']
[quote name='mharkin' post='590777' date='20 August 2006 - 15:30']
agreed, i noticed that Bond loved Elecktra quite a bit eg: when Xenia got killed in Goldeneye Bond didn't go up too her and stroke her hair out of her eyes like he did with eleckra when she was killed i think Bond felt genuine effection for her and was pretty cut up when he found out she killed her father
[/quote]

I disagree.I don

#385 Dr. Noah

Dr. Noah

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1405 posts

Posted 15 September 2006 - 03:22 AM

Welcome cm007...glad to see you still know your Bond onions. If Tommy Lee and Supernova could pick Lukas Rossi as their lead singer last night, and people still experience such euphoria over an action trailer of under 2 minutes for CR, they may both be surprised when the ever important tickets go on sale. Craig does not have the Bond charisma of Connery, Moore, nor Brosnan, all who were quite successful in the role. DC more mimics Dalton, in charisma. Once DC is shown at the casino tables, in a love scene, being lectured by M, the movie might drag as Craig is exposed as incapable of carrying such a lead role. Tic Toc........November 17 is just around the corner.........


Why go? Why torture yourself?

#386 JimmyBond

JimmyBond

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 10559 posts
  • Location:Washington

Posted 16 September 2006 - 01:01 AM

Maybe he's a masochist?

#387 Unktomi1

Unktomi1

    Recruit

  • Crew
  • 1 posts

Posted 16 September 2006 - 05:42 AM

Listen up...Daniel Craig IS James Bond. Looking at the trailers and the outtakes, this guy gets it. He's going to be the Bond Fleming wrote about in the books. I am so geeked and ready for the rewlease of this movie. Bond is not back...he's (finally) here!

#388 Qwerty

Qwerty

    Commander RNVR

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 85605 posts
  • Location:New York / Pennsylvania

Posted 16 September 2006 - 05:48 AM

Welcome to the CommanderBond.net Forums, Unktomi1. :)

#389 jake speed

jake speed

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 189 posts

Posted 16 September 2006 - 10:14 PM

Listen up...Daniel Craig IS James Bond. Looking at the trailers and the outtakes, this guy gets it. He's going to be the Bond Fleming wrote about in the books. I am so geeked and ready for the rewlease of this movie. Bond is not back...he's (finally) here!


I don't think there are enough drugs in the world to make me think that Craig is the Bond Fleming described, but each to their own.

#390 Dr. Noah

Dr. Noah

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1405 posts

Posted 17 September 2006 - 05:42 AM


Listen up...Daniel Craig IS James Bond. Looking at the trailers and the outtakes, this guy gets it. He's going to be the Bond Fleming wrote about in the books. I am so geeked and ready for the rewlease of this movie. Bond is not back...he's (finally) here!


I don't think there are enough drugs in the world to make me think that Craig is the Bond Fleming described, but each to their own.


Wow. That's really big of you.