219 replies to this topic

[Peter Franks]

REALLY?

Tomb Raider
The Road To Perdition
Five mins of Sylvia
Layer Cake
Elizabeth


You think he's gifted and diverse actor different in every movie? That line does not apply to actors like Daniel Craig. He's average at best compared to the best actors you can say that about. He was outshined in Layer Cake by Michael Gambon's WORST performance ever.

Edited by Peter Franks, 06 January 2006 - 09:36 PM.

[luciusgore]

REALLY?

Tomb Raider
The Road To Perdition
Five mins of Sylvia
Layer Cake
Elizabeth


You think he's gifted and diverse actor different in every movie? That line does not apply to actors like Daniel Craig. He's average at best compared to the best actors you can say that about. He was outshined in Layer Cake by Michael Gambon's WORST performance ever.

He was outshined in LAYER CAKE? He was great in LAYER CAKE. No one outshined him in that movie. He has tremendous charisma. He's going to make an excellent, excellent Bond.

[TheBritishEnd]

Having just seen Munich (terrific movie by the way) I'm still worried that audiences will have a hard time believing Craig as Bond.

He was great in Munich, but I feel the same way.

Ironically, my friends thought Eric Bana was the one who had been chosen!

Edited by TheBritishEnd, 07 January 2006 - 04:28 AM.

[Stephenson]

I find it odd that no one has mentioned Craig's performance in "The jacket" (although I'm not sure anyone actually saw that film ). Although not even remotely "Bondian" in the film, he definitely exudes a physical menance and plays a character that is nothing like anything I've seen him in before. Fine actor in my book.

[TheBritishEnd]

I find it odd that no one has mentioned Craig's performance in "The jacket" (although I'm not sure anyone actually saw that film  )

That's funny, because I did see The Jacket (in theatres, no less), but usually joke with friends that no one else did.

[Stax]

Thsi thread seems like yet another excuse for more Craig bashing under a different subject heading. God, it's getting old and boring.

As for Munich, Craig in the Dutch woman scene. That convinced me he's Bond.

And by the way, did anyone else notice his character "Steve" seemed something like Steve McQueen? He was the blond, blue-eyed rugged guy in the black turtleneck who drove the car, all very Bullitt-esque.

[crashdrive]

I hope it is clear that I didn't start this thread to bash Craig. I think he's a very courageous choice. But the thing is that in Munich he played a very Bond like character. The fact that his name in the film is Steve is definately not a coincidence. Steve McQueen is practically an American Bond. A gentleman, smooth with the ladies, but tough as nails. It's not that Craig wasn't believable in Munich. I think it's a great performance. And I also think he is the perfect choice for a rebooting of the series.

My main concern however, and it seems like Loomis and I are on the same page, is the fact that it doesn't seem like EON is willing to go the distance. Which is fine if you have an actor like Brosnan (or Jackman) who audience members are willing to follow even if the tone is a little absurd. But if you have someone like Craig, the only way to make him convincing as Bond is to take the series to another level. You have to make it gritty, hard and realistic. I know the comparison has been made to death but The Bourne Identity / Supremacy are perfect examples of how it should be done. And those films were made for $ 75 million ($10 million of which went to the films star Matt Damon). Casino Royale will cost at least $100 million (eventhough Craig isn't even a proven leading man yet). In order to make this transition a success, you have to lower the budget. That way you can make a Bourne style action thriller with exciting stunts and a terrific look starring a suitable leading man. A story like Fleming's Casino Royale deserves this sort of treatment.

I'm afraid that audience members will be confused with the tone of Casino Royale. On one hand we have a very unBond-like ending, a stunt free third act and an unconventional leading man and on the other we have the same old M, a budget of at least $100 million, an expensive A-list Bondgirl (it seems like EON is set on the idea of casting one if you read the papers), plenty of stunts and exotic locations and practically the same treatment the Brosnan Bond got. I think EON is taking a huge risk. An unneccesary one.

Craig will alienate a lot of fans. The announcement has already put a lot of fans off. Which is ok if EON is planning to take the series to another level. But if EON is really serious about this, go the distance and do not make the same mistake they did when they made The World is Not Enough by making it brooding, dark and down to earth, yet at the same time cast Denise Richards as a nuclear scientist. You can't please both parties (on one hand the average moviegoers who just want girls, stunts and laughs, on the other serious Bond fans who want to see some integrity). The casting of Craig has already alienated many of the average moviegoers, so go the distance and make Casino Royale a Bond film people will take serious.

[Andrew]

...when they made The World is Not Enough by making it brooding, dark and down to earth...

Were we watching the same film?

[Niwram]

an expensive A-list Bondgirl (it seems like EON is set on the idea of casting one if you read the papers

All the reliable newspapers like The Sun, The mirror.......

I think EON will do something very different with this movie. I don't think Daniel Craig would accept the part if they were doing the same thing as in the Brosnan movies.

[TheBritishEnd]

I like that Steve McQueen comparison.

Anyway, Munich proves Craig can be a cold-blooded assassin. I also think he can play a Bond close to Fleming's. But the topic is whether or not mainstream audiences will see him as Bond, and I don't think they will.

I asked my friends why they just assumed Bana was the next Bond, and they instantly said, "The other guy looks nothing like James Bond." When I pointed out how great Craig was as an assassin, they merely shrugged and said, "Anyone can play a role like that."

Bond is also not the most complex character to play. Craig brings a lot of great qualities (especially for the physical aspects) to the role, but I don't think any of them are exclusive to him as an actor.

The image of Bond is no longer found within the pages of Casino Royale. It's been built into the public's awareness over a span of four decades. Four years is not a long enough interim to expect to re-invent that image.

Edited by TheBritishEnd, 07 January 2006 - 06:22 PM.

[Stax]

How's about this. We wait until we see actual footage of Craig's actual performance as 007 before we start uttering official declarations of how he will be, how the film will be and how the public will react. Because right now there is NOTHING to go on. Munich isn't Bond anymore than Layer Cake was. They are indicators but all very different roles and films. Patience and open-mindedness, guys, please.

Edited by Stax, 07 January 2006 - 10:40 PM.

[Gabriel]

I agree that the crap puns need to be ditched. The best way to handle humour in Bonds is to keep him stony-faced and ruthless. The humour and humanity should come from the people around him. His lack of humour, bizarrely, would be humourous!!

I think DC will be fine. As has been said before, it's down to whether Haggis has managed to tidy up Purvis and Wade's script and whether the producers really want to go all the way with the revamp.

Hiring Campbell is the last thing I'd have thought they'd do. Then again, he directed the wonderfully paranoid Edge of Darkness . . . maybe they should have hired someone like Troy Kennedy Martin to write Casino!

Edited by Gabriel, 08 January 2006 - 12:00 AM.

[spynovelfan]

I agree that the crap puns need to be ditched. The best way to handle humour in Bonds is to keep him stony-faced and ruthless. The humour and humanity should come from the people around him. His lack of humour, bizarrely, would be humourous!!

I agree that the crap puns need to go, and that the level of humour needs to be toned down. But you need some of it. Dry laconic humour is a key part of the character, and has been in the films since DR NO:

'Sergeant, make sure he doesn't get away.'

It's in Fleming, too. For example, after Goldfinger has had Oddjob break a bannister and part of a mantelpiece and is enumerating the many ways in which Oddjob trains, Bond remarks that it must be hell on the furniture. There are examples of this in every Bond film and in most of the Fleming novels: humour is a major part of the character, and a major part of its success. Bond isn't always stony-faced and ruthless.

[Flash1087]

I agree that the crap puns need to go, and that the level of humour needs to be toned down. But you need some of it. Dry laconic humour is a key part of the character, and has been in the films since DR NO:

'Sergeant, make sure he doesn't get away.'

It's in Fleming, too. For example, after Goldfinger has had Oddjob break a bannister and part of a mantelpiece and is enumerating the many ways in which Oddjob trains, Bond remarks that it must be hell on the furniture. There are examples of this in every Bond film and in most of the Fleming novels: humour is a major part of the character, and a major part of its success. Bond isn't always stony-faced and ruthless.

I've always thought this way. Everyone talks about Bond being 'cold and ruthless' in the novels, but think about all his droll one-liners, and there's at least one time he mentions never killing anyone in cold blood (during a scene in Istanbul during FRWL). Connery and Dalton (at least during TLD) embody that for me; yes, Bond is a dangerous man, but with a very dry wit. As much as I love them, the over-the-top humor of the Moore and Brosnan movies were a bit out of place, but really, so is Dalton's sheer ruthlessness in LTK. A balance is needed, and I'm hoping Craig can get back to that.

[TheBritishEnd]

How's about this. We wait until we see actual footage of Craig's actual performance as 007 before we start uttering official declarations of how he will be, how the film will be and how the public will react.

Well, that would pretty much rule out most threads on Casino Royale for the better part of the year. The ones that predict Craig will be good as Bond, just the same as the ones that assume he will not.

There's nothing wrong with idle speculation, it's what the board is here for. No one is bashing Craig or predicting a death knell for the series. (Yes, I realize there have been many other threads here that have done that, but even so, everyone is still entitled to their own opinion.)

I don't assume I speak for everyone, only from my own experience. To me, that is something to go on, as I've yet to meet anyone who is in favor of Daniel Craig as Bond. When people continually tell me they won't be going to see it, it's a good indicator to me that he may not prove to be a popular Bond with casual fans.

I am still willing to keep an open mind, but that also means being open to the possibility that Craig may not work out.

Edited by TheBritishEnd, 08 January 2006 - 05:25 AM.

[SteveKingCool]

Re: thinking the novels are very serious.

The director of Casino Royale Martin Campbell thinks From Russia With Love is a serious gritty thriller. I counted at least two sexist tongue in cheek jokes in each scene.

Re: Daniel Craig

He can't be compared to Marlon Brando at all. Nobody says so. But please fellows don't compare him to my God ---Steve McQueen the King of Cool--- just because he wore a turtleneck in a movie. Daniel Craig is scared of riding on a boat from all said. Steve McQueen would 'Ride the boat himself faster than anyone!'!

[Leon]

That doesn't make him a better actor, or able to play cool better on screen.

I'd say if anyone could duplicate a McQueen performance and look convincingly it's Daniel Craig, only classier with an English accent

I am yet to see Munich, but to be honest I am much more looking foreward to it than The Matador which sounds a bit of a yawn frankly.

[SteveKingCool]

Well the Matador has better reviews than nearly anything with Daniel Craig. It's early to judge Craig. No he will never be a Steve McQueen. He really doesn't have that thing the legends have if you remember Craig has been in famous movies for ten years now and still is considered nothing special by most.

[Leon]

That's because Daniel Craig is a different kind of actor, big stars play off their largeer than life personas and you think of them therefore as "oh there's so and so playing character X".

Daniel Craig is the kind of complex and talented actor who can slip into all kinds of roles like a chameleon and pull off a really good performance with an enormous range and without having any type cast image.

He can do Bond as well IMO, and do it very well but in a new style which will bring out much more of Fleming's original character than we have seen in the cinematic 007.

I made a Layer Cake collage of fairly Bond-esque pictures IMHO:

Edited by Leon, 08 January 2006 - 08:55 PM.

[Harmsway]

I saw MUNICH last night. Definitely my favorite film I've seen this year. It's gripping, powerful, intense, and complex to a degree which Spielberg hadn't grasped until this point.

And on Daniel Craig - he floored me. True, his role isn't really that dramatic and is sort of one-note. But that one-note role spoke volumes. He was just jaw-droppingly cool in every scene, and oozed charisma. His Bond will most certainly be incredibly unique, but I have no fears as to his suitability. He'll be amazing.

[Harmsway]

I saw Craig in MUNICH last night. He blew me away - the man just oozes coolness. The comparison to Steve McQueen is most definitely justified. Craig is easily the coolest man in the role since Connery, and easily the most charismatic. He pops off the screen. He was deadly, intense, dark, and funny. I have complete faith in him for CASINO ROYALE.

I have no qualms about his suitability for the role, and I believe that regardless of how much EON "gritties" up CASINO ROYALE, Craig is still going to make quite an impression. He's going to give us something quite different, and that's a great thing.

[fatima]

That's because Daniel Craig is a different kind of actor, big stars play off their largeer than life personas and you think of them therefore as "oh there's so and so playing character X".

Daniel Craig is the kind of complex and talented actor who can slip into all kinds of roles like a chameleon and pull off a really good performance with an enormous range and without having any type cast image.

I think they call that a character actor.

[Andrew]

I just saw it and I thought it was a good film but Craig really shined in it. He definatly is what we need for Casino Royale, an over zealous agent who wants blood but doesn't realize the consequences. He also gives off an aura of cool and I completely agree with Harmsway when he says he will be the coolest guy to have played Bond since Connery.

I took my father to see this film and he didn't like the choice of Craig. After seeing it he changed his mind.

[Bon-san]

That's because Daniel Craig is a different kind of actor, big stars play off their largeer than life personas and you think of them therefore as "oh there's so and so playing character X".

Daniel Craig is the kind of complex and talented actor who can slip into all kinds of roles like a chameleon and pull off a really good performance with an enormous range and without having any type cast image.

I think they call that a character actor.

Gave me a good laugh!

[007_Stef]

I WANT TO SEE MUNICH SO BAD NOW.....i have a feeling it will be my favourite movie of the year....until after Casino Royale (hopefully)

but when does it come out in Europe`???? i really cant wait(munich that is)

Edited by 007_Stef, 15 January 2006 - 08:51 PM.

[Harmsway]

I WANT TO SEE MUNICH SO BAD NOW.....i have a feeling it will be my favourite movie of the year....until after Casino Royale (hopefully)

but when does it come out in Europe`???? i really cant wait(munich that is)

I very much doubt CASINO ROYALE would be a superior film to MUNICH, which is something much more brilliant and dark than Bond could ever be.

But I'm hoping CASINO ROYALE will be a solid film that outshines the entries of the Brosnan era and reclaims something of what made Bond great to begin with.

[007_Stef]

I WANT TO SEE MUNICH SO BAD NOW.....i have a feeling it will be my favourite movie of the year....until after Casino Royale (hopefully)

but when does it come out in Europe`???? i really cant wait(munich that is)

I very much doubt CASINO ROYALE would be a superior film to MUNICH, which is something much more brilliant and dark than Bond could ever be.

But I'm hoping CASINO ROYALE will be a solid film that outshines the entries of the Brosnan era and reclaims something of what made Bond great to begin with.

actually you are right. I mean bond has never really been a true contender for a major oscar award, and munich is for me a major contender (even not having seen it), so i agree with you saying in a way that munich is more brilliant than royale. bond has basically always been seen as only entertainment and has no major award recognition.

[Andrew]

There's one scene in the film where someone is trying to break into his hotel room and as soon as he hears them approaching he props up from his matress, gun already in hand. Little things like this strike me as so Bond-ian.

[Harmsway]

There's one scene in the film where someone is trying to break into his hotel room and as soon as he hears them approaching he props up from his matress, gun already in hand. Little things like this strike me as so Bond-ian.

Oh yeah, there was a lot of that Bondian vibe in a lot of what he had to do in MUNICH. I love when he shoots the streetlight out with the silenced handgun. What's nice about his character, too, is that he displayed a little bit of humor here and there.

He's a perfect fit for James Bond.

[Pal]

I recently had the chance to see Munich. While it wasn't what I was expecting, I still liked the movie very much so. I'm a big fan of Eric Bana and it was also a chance to see Craig on-screen. I was very impressed with Craig and Steve was a great character. As mentioned above, when those men try to enter their room and he sits up with the gun, he did seem very Bondian. I especially liked the "tally-hoe" line he whispers to Bana as they get up. I also particularly liked the small scene where he was singing in the car as he was waiting for another assassination to happen. I'm thinking that Craig will be a great Bond, but I'm still not too keen on his looks however.