75 replies to this topic

[Righty007]

I've read quite a few interviews with Daniel Craig and all of them have one thing in common: He's boring! He comes off as extremely dull in every interview. It's one thing to dodge questions regarding James Bond but he treats simple questions like "What's your favorite ice cream flavor?" with the same opaqueness. It's extremely annoying. He's a fine actor but he needs to get a personality especially if James Bond makes him a star. What do you all think?

[Quartermaster007]

Don't really give a about his interviews.

As long as he's good in Casino Royale.

[Andrew]

Why should he reply to stupid questions like what his ice cream flavor is? He responded anyway so it doesn't matter much.

I love his no approach to the press.

[dinovelvet]

Why should he reply to stupid questions like what his ice cream flavor is? He responded anyway so it doesn't matter much.

I love his no approach to the press.

Yep me too. I laughed when I read the ice cream interview, that's exactly how I would have reacted to those questions too.

[Athena007]

Agreed actually. I was watching a bio on Brosnan on the Biography channel last night and they showed a chunk of his 007 acceptance press conference and he was all into answering the questions and he had life! (I have no idea about this ice cream buisness, but...) I remember when I watched the Daniel Craig press conference not too long again and he really seemed, well... dead. He didn't seem like he wanted to be talking at all. Kinda a bummer to see "007" act that way.

Daniel Craig's acting though... I've been enjoying it in the movies I've seen him in so far.

[mccartney007]

You think he should try to at least sell himself as Bond in interviews. I mean, he's not making many people who are unfamiliar with his work excited for him to be taking on the role. He shouldn't be such a disinterested bore.

[Righty007]

Daniel Craig is treating James Bond like it's just another role.

[Turn]

Although I am supporting Craig in the role and hope he is a smash, some of these interviews remind me of some of Dalton's interviews all over again. I'm guessing maybe the guy is a bit tired from his schedule of Munich, this latest film and then Casino Royale. I hope he isn't burned out by January.

[Tarl_Cabot]

I don't think he's dull.I like that he doesn't give a damn about the press,celebrity or 'the biz' but I agree he seems a little too stand offish.oh well,all I care is how he comes off as Bond. Maybe he's just kinda shy or distrustful of the media-isn't that ok considering all the crap actors have to put up with?

[killkenny kid]

What Daniel needs to do ,is a sit down interview with someone he trust. And be engaging. He may be a great actor. But, so was Mr. Dalton. He has to be media savvy. And understand that tabloids drives enterainment these day. So, Daniel get them on your side. Their seems to be this view that he is dull, fair or not. The view is out there. Come on Danny boy put a stop to it.

[K1Bond007]

I don't think he's dull.I like that he doesn't give a damn about the press,celebrity or 'the biz' but I agree he seems a little too stand offish.oh well,all I care is how he comes off as Bond. Maybe he's just kinda shy or distrustful of the media-isn't that ok considering all the crap actors have to put up with?

For being a relative unknown, Craig has already put up with a lot (e.g. In the middle of the whole Sienna Miller/Jude Law thing) - which I'll remind everyone here was the FIRST [censored]ING QUESTION at his James Bond acceptance. Lets see Brosnan flow with that.. I believe it goes something like " you, you, you, you, you......"

Ice cream? Come on. That is a stupid question especially seeing as how this interview took place on set.

[Harmsway]

Daniel Craig is treating James Bond like it's just another role.

It IS just another role. Say what you will, but that's a very professional way to treat it.

[Qwerty]

I think he's handling the interviews fine at the moment; in regard to Bond / Casino Royale. I'd like to see some more interest (and quite simply) longer answers from him when that role really gets going for him.

[hrabb04]

Well, I am not on a first name basis with Daniel Craig, like some of you here, so I don't know him as well as some of you do. However, I do believe he needs to gain a personality. He might as well show some enthusiasm and get people to get excited about him playing the part he's playing. I mean, he's playing James fricking Bond, not Jimmy Smith.

[Arch Stanton]

tabloids drives enterainment these day.

Yeah, that seems to be true. And I respect any actor who says " you" to that. It may not get him popular, it may piss people off, but what really matters (to me at least) is that he does a good job.

Edited by Arch Stanton, 15 November 2005 - 06:28 AM.

[SecretAgentFan]

Is Daniel Craig boring? Are threads that constantly question Craig

[Dalton's Wendy]

What Daniel needs to do ,is a sit down interview with someone he trust. And be engaging. He may be a great actor. But, so was Mr. Dalton. He has to be media savvy. And understand that tabloids drives enterainment these day. So, Daniel get them on your side. Their seems to be this view that he is dull, fair or not. The view is out there. Come on Danny boy put a stop to it. 

As usual, yours is the most valid answer here, kilkenny kid. We 5,237 present members of CBn may all love Daniel Craig, but there is a large public out there waiting to be satisfied, as well.

The press lives on interviews. A star, an actor, who doesn't feed them, is not going to retain his popularity with them for too long a period of time.

If Daniel Craig is not popular, this will not reflect well on Bond, or the future of the franchise. As Killkenny Kid said: "[Daniel Craig] may be a great actor. But so was Mr. Dalton."

And you know what the press said: "So what?"

[Blofeld's Cat]

Daniel Craig is treating James Bond like it's just another role.

Well, he's just an employee given the job to be Janes Bond isn't he? Something I think Brosnan forgot.

[Streetworker]

Daniel Craig is treating James Bond like it's just another role.

Well, he's just an employee given the job to be Janes Bond isn't he? Something I think Brosnan forgot.

Well, I'm not sure that anyone who brings rather more to his/her employment than the attitude that it's "just another job" is to be disparaged. On the contrary, I think Mr. Brosnan is to be congratulated for seemingly wanting to be more than just the hired help.

But to return to the topic... Is Daniel Craig boring? No, he's not. Do some members of the press and public think he's boring? Sadly, yes.

Eon have got to square that circle somehow in the next 12 months. However, I believe Daniel Craig will play his part in so doing. He is, it seems, a friend of Barbara Broccoli and it's quite clear (if it wasn't before his annoucement, it is now) that Eon have gone out on a limb a bit in casting him. He will be aware of that and, from what one reads about his integrity, I'm confident he will repay their confidence in him. And so, for that reason, I don't think he'll regard it as "just another job", either.

[SecretAgentFan]

I

[Blue07]

I think he's handling the interviews fine at the moment; in regard to Bond / Casino Royale. I'd like to see some more interest (and quite simply) longer answers from him when that role really gets going for him.

His DVD commentary on CR will be worth a listen!

[Blue07]

Daniel Craig is treating James Bond like it's just another role.

It IS just another role. Say what you will, but that's a very professional way to treat it.

Is it really just another role? It's the biggest male role in cinema. Fair enough if he's looking at it that way to stop being overawed by the whole prospect but by taking the role of Bond he has to accept the media interest is goning to be enourmous and he HAS to give a bit back. It's part of the deal. He doesn't need to be like Rog or Bros but he has to be a bit more giving - it isn't any other role it is THE role. He can't have it both ways - you take Bond you deal with the huge attention that comes with it. Let's hope once filming begins he will be a bit more chatty.

[Lounge Lizard]

So glad that Daniel is into pistacho, and not just vanilla- makes him sound exotic and adventurous. 007 should not be a vanilla guy. James is no cream-puff. Vanilla is 'less interesting', as Miss Kouric would have said. Some nerve.

It was a crap interview, folks; and we have to remember that Craig still hasn't had a really in-depth interview with a serious magazine or newspaper yet, since he landed the role of Bond, almost a month ago. He has promised us that he'll talk Bond as soon as he has finished The Visiting, and that's what he's telling the press. Visit the fansite www.bluematia.com and you'll find out that Craig is quite capable of giving a decent interview. He's not a witty raconteur like Ustinov, but he's a passionate guy, passionate about his craft and the people and material he works with. I've warmed to Craig's honest, professional, no-nonsense approach (he's giving The Visiting his all now, and he will be giving CR his all come January*), but I think we'll have to cope with the fact that he wouldn't want to talk Bond in between the three films of his Eon contract. In 2007, he may be playing Napoleon, or a down-and-out male stripper, or Dostojevski's Idiot, and I don't think he'll be discussing Bond when he is diving into other roles. It's part of the deal I guess: we get a terrific actor as Bond, and the actor (no doubt worried about typecasting) chooses to play Bond, not live him. I have no problem respecting that decision, though I guess the audience at large will remain ambivalent to Craig if he sees 007 as a non-topic during his off-Bond years- and yes, I have to agree, that's the scary part.

* From a pragmatic point of view, how can a man play James Bond and still remind himself constantly that he is playing a 20th Century icon, a role made famous by Connery, a role with millions of fans, a role played by five actors, etc. How can an actor stay relaxed if he's always conscious of that? It's almost impossible to cope with the task that way. Craig approaches Bond at the most basic level, as a performance- the only level that matters when he's on the job. I think that's the mistake Brosnan made, he was so overly conscious of the Bond Legacy that he felt intimidated during most of his scenes (and he has admitted to feeling tense very often). And believe me, Craig's 'silence' indicates that he is well aware of the impact of Bond on his life and career.

Edited by Lounge Lizard, 15 November 2005 - 03:46 PM.

[Loomis]

Thing is, there's absolutely nothing right now for Craig to discuss when it comes to Bond. Let's judge him on how well he's able to "be Bond in the public mind" after CASINO ROYALE hits screens (actually, it would be fairer to judge him on this after BOND 22 appears).

[Harmsway]

Daniel Craig is treating James Bond like it's just another role.

It IS just another role. Say what you will, but that's a very professional way to treat it.

Is it really just another role? It's the biggest male role in cinema. Fair enough if he's looking at it that way to stop being overawed by the whole prospect but by taking the role of Bond he has to accept the media interest is goning to be enourmous and he HAS to give a bit back. It's part of the deal. He doesn't need to be like Rog or Bros but he has to be a bit more giving - it isn't any other role it is THE role. He can't have it both ways - you take Bond you deal with the huge attention that comes with it. Let's hope once filming begins he will be a bit more chatty.

I think this a bit of Bondian propaganda. Bond was THE role a while ago, but no longer in our day and age. It's just another role in a vast sea of movies.

[spynovelfan]

It was a crap interview, folks; and we have to remember that Craig still hasn't had a really in-depth interview with a serious magazine or newspaper yet, since he landed the role of Bond, almost a month ago.

Yes - and bear in mind that most major magazines have lead-in times of three months or longer, so even if he'd done an in-depth interview with Playboy or Vanity Fair on the day he was announced, we'd still not see it on newsstands for a couple of months yet.

He talked plenty about Bond in his interview in the September issue of GQ, as did Brosnan. They had remarkably similar views, remarkably similar attitudes, remarkably similar swear words and were both far from dull.

[Loomis]

Daniel Craig is treating James Bond like it's just another role.

It IS just another role. Say what you will, but that's a very professional way to treat it.

Is it really just another role? It's the biggest male role in cinema. Fair enough if he's looking at it that way to stop being overawed by the whole prospect but by taking the role of Bond he has to accept the media interest is goning to be enourmous and he HAS to give a bit back. It's part of the deal. He doesn't need to be like Rog or Bros but he has to be a bit more giving - it isn't any other role it is THE role. He can't have it both ways - you take Bond you deal with the huge attention that comes with it. Let's hope once filming begins he will be a bit more chatty.

I think this a bit of Bondian propaganda. Bond was THE role a while ago, but no longer in our day and age. It's just another role in a vast sea of movies.

Well, it is and it isn't. There's still a lot of excitement and interest in the matter of a new Bond, as can be seen from the extraordinary media frenzy of the past 18 months. When people who are not in any meaningful sense "Bond fans" show interest (even minor interest) in the question of who's going to be the next 007, we're clearly talking about something much more than "just another role in a vast sea of movies".

Of course, there's a lot of history and nostalgia wrapped up in all this. Only five people have played Bond (not counting Peter Sellers, etc.), and they're all still with us, and I think there's the popular sense of a sort of dynasty of Bond actors that's been a unique and permanent part of cinema for decades and looks likely to remain so. I don't believe this is just "Bondian propaganda" - it's just the way it is.

All of which said, I don't subscribe to the view that Craig must go around "being Bond" all the time (especially now), or that he must be some kind of 24/7 performing seal catering to the wishes to Bond fans. For him, yes, it should be "just another role" - except for when he actually has a Bond flick to promote, at least.

[Harmsway]

Daniel Craig is treating James Bond like it's just another role.

It IS just another role. Say what you will, but that's a very professional way to treat it.

Is it really just another role? It's the biggest male role in cinema. Fair enough if he's looking at it that way to stop being overawed by the whole prospect but by taking the role of Bond he has to accept the media interest is goning to be enourmous and he HAS to give a bit back. It's part of the deal. He doesn't need to be like Rog or Bros but he has to be a bit more giving - it isn't any other role it is THE role. He can't have it both ways - you take Bond you deal with the huge attention that comes with it. Let's hope once filming begins he will be a bit more chatty.

I think this a bit of Bondian propaganda. Bond was THE role a while ago, but no longer in our day and age. It's just another role in a vast sea of movies.

Well, it is and it isn't. There's still a lot of excitement and interest in the matter of a new Bond, as can be seen from the extraordinary media frenzy of the past 18 months. When people who are not in any meaningful sense "Bond fans" show interest (even minor interest) in the question of who's going to be the next 007, we're clearly talking about something much more than "just another role in a vast sea of movies".

Of course, there's a lot of history and nostalgia wrapped up in all this. Only five people have played Bond (not counting Peter Sellers, etc.), and they're all still with us, and I think there's the popular sense of a sort of dynasty of Bond actors that's been a unique and permanent part of cinema for decades and looks likely to remain so. I don't believe this is just "Bondian propaganda" - it's just the way it is.

All of which said, I don't subscribe to the view that Craig must go around "being Bond" all the time (especially now), or that he must be some kind of 24/7 performing seal catering to the wishes to Bond fans. For him, yes, it should be "just another role" - except for when he actually has a Bond flick to promote, at least.

Okay, fair enough.

[smartz]

Hi to everyone;

Its great to see some more sophisticed conversation on this board. I think those who are not in the Uk have misse dout on the rubbish that has been printed about him and his private life. He has already suffered and lost one long term partner through an intrusive British press. There have been some excellent points raised in so much as what is there to talk about at this stage and also the simple truth that he has other works in production prior to CR and he must be fiar to these projects.

At a recent London party Clive Owen was overheard saying how he admires the tact that Daniel is taking and that to remain on top of things you have to keep a barrier going otherwise they will keep on digging at you till they know which direction you wipe your .

Connery would I think behave in the same way now being savvy to the media, and if anything Craig was more welcoming than Tim when he made his initial press conference, I mean dalton looked like he was going to cry or well beat the ***T out of someone.

I think in many way Bond is lucky to have Craig and that his current projects will further enhance him in the role. I know one simple thing this will be the kind of Bond I have wanted for a long time and when i watch the like of TWINE and LTK I know a balance can exist!

[Moore Not Less]

Well, Daniel Craig has not got off to the best possible start in public relations terms, but there is no need to over-react or press the panic button just yet. Hopefully, when Sony and Eon get hold of him we will begin to see a more relaxed media friendly Craig who is pro-active regarding all things to do with Bond. Make no mistake, Sony and Eon have got to do some real hard sell regarding Craig and Casino Royale.

Trailers and teasers will certainly play a significant role in this, but Craig's own personal role in the hard sell cannot be underestimated. He has to play his part in convincing the vast majority of the potential Bond audience out there that Casino Royale is well worth seeing. Many of that vast majority will know little or nothing about him. Their first chance to get to know him will be through tv talk shows, newspaper interviews, etc. So, if he were continually to come across as a "charisma free zone" and less than committed regarding all things Bond, then that potential Bond audience would be more inclined to say things like, "And they replaced Pierce Brosnan with that!" "Well, if he's not all that interested in Bond then why should I be interested?"

Craig's own personal role is important. He knew when he signed on the dotted line that the PR game and dealing with the media was a huge part of the deal, so he needs to get his act together as soon as possible. If he can win over the media and the potential audience with his personality and his attitude regarding Bond, then he will have gone a long way towards getting more bums on seats when Casino Royale is released.

Edited by Moore Not Less, 15 November 2005 - 09:05 PM.