15 replies to this topic

[DANIEL CRAIG THE COOL BOND]

Hey folks, Just joined in....Better late than never. Just wanna say that its a real pleasure being a member of this site and interacting with you all in the near future. Read some of your posts and looks like im not the only Bond aficionados out there and its a relief...

When Casino Royale came out, i went to purchase every magazine concern with the 21st installment in the series. I rooted for Craig at the very beginning and he is the True James Bond according to me. So to cut short, was reading THe British Edition Of GQ which had the November issue dedicated to the New Bond movie-Casino Royale and on the cover was Daniel Craig and the caption read 'CAN DANIEL CRAIG SAVE 007'? Well, i think that they have their answer about now... The piece written on Craig left me a bit perplexed in a good way...The guy said tha Craig is reinventing the Bond saga/formula a little and that as oppose to Sean Connery's Bond, this new one is not your squared O Daddy Bond...The other actors having played Bond were to 'neat' in their depiction of Fleming's beast...Craig's 007 is politically incorrect and should be like that...And he has the right balance of beliviability stamped on his forehead..The guy can be tough,rough,macho,charming,classy and very debonnaire and much more... So, guys do you think that Daniel reinveinted the series formula in a way by playing a Bond who is not the conventional 007 which we have been fed for 44years?

[quiller]

tell me is connery in frwl the conventional bond? or moore in mr? dalton in ltk?
nice to have you aboard btw? have fun.

Edited by quiller, 12 May 2007 - 09:18 AM.

[napier007]

All actors have their interpretation of the character, so all in a sense re-invent Bond. I think with the utter rubbish(IMO) Bond had sunk into with DAD, a reinvention was needed, not just in terms of the actor, but also what makes a Bond movie. For me, a plot driven, more believable, less gimmicky Bond is my choice, which is why I was very pleased with both the choice of Craig as Bond, and the movie. Other people will have different views on what makes a Bond movie. For me, they're on the right path with Casino Royale.

[Bucky]

He re-invented the cinematic 007 in my opinion brining it closer then ever to the literary Bond however this was a joint effort that cannot solely be credited to Craig as the producers knew they had gone too far with Die Another Day.

[iexpectu2die]

He re-invented the cinematic 007 in my opinion brining it closer then ever to the literary Bond however this was a joint effort that cannot solely be credited to Craig as the producers knew they had gone too far with Die Another Day.

Agree with you there - it was a team-effort, and a brilliant one.

[Blofeld's Cat]

To be brutally honest, Craig cannot be credited with "re-inventing" Bond at all. Others in the production team did that (the producers for deciding to go in that direction, then the writers for putting all the ideas on paper), and he merely presented it to the world on the screen.

[mrsbonds_ppk]

I agree with Blofeld's Cat. I don't think Craig Re-Invented James Bond totally , no. Most of the writing in CR was very good and brought Bond back "down-to-earth" after Die Another Day. But, every actor portrayed Bond in there own way like Napier007 said and it was a different interpretation each time they changed actors.

[Brent]

Bond has been reinvented several times in varying degrees. Between YOLT and OHMSS, OHMSS and DAF, Moonraker AND FYEO, AVTAK and TLD, and now between DAD and CR. Like in 1980 after Moonraker, the producers saw there was a clear need to change course after DAD. I am sure after time has passed the same will happen again.

Lazenby was a blank slate that Peter Hunt drew his characterization on. Moore was not as comfortable with the changes in FYEO and by AVTAK the series had returned to the bloated excesses of Moonraker. Dalton was clear in his desire for change and Brosnan, instead of returning to the Moore model, emulated the Dalton model on at least in Goldeneye, as well as a little in TND and TWINE. DAD started out in the same vein, using elements from the book Moonraker but then took a left turn into Fantasyland. Craig is now goinhg back to the early Connery, Dalton model but how long the producers will stay the course is anyones guess. History repeats itself, especially concerning the Bond franchise.

[00Twelve]

As Blofeld's Cat said, it can't be credited to Craig himself, past the point that he's a very fine actor, unafraid to completely disappear into his roles, and obviously did his homework on Bond before taking on the mantle. He presented the material written for him (though personally helped to edit his lines to preserve Bond's credibility and eliminate cheekiness), and that's what any good actor should do. But I agree that I've never seen anyone come so close to Fleming's character, so I'm glad that he had the talent to make clear and competent choices in his presentation.

[jaws_dentist]

craig was full on , but roger moore would kick his a'ss in a hypothetical fight.

animalistic brawn versus easy charm !

easy charm wins by a canter.

[dodge]

Beware of the word 'merely'. Blofeld's Cat made a telling and very welcome point in directing our attention to the Dream Team behind CR. A team of which Craig was a brilliant part. Not 'only' or 'merely' a part. For my money, there no only's or merely's involved in CR. It was a creative collaboration of the highest caliber. With an actor less gifted than Craig, they'd have had a house of cards instead of a palace of art. Think of CR, exactly as it is except for one small thing: Keanu Reeves in the lead. So I'm with BC all the way...up to the word merely.

[blueman]

Agree. Craig may be getting more credit than deserved as he's the "face" of the team, but he's a lot more than a cog IMO. Hey, Brosnan "saved" the series, why can't Craig "re-invent" Bond, lol?

Hard not to credit his very accomplished acting skills, especially in light of recent lighter (IMO) interpretations.

Edited by blueman, 17 May 2007 - 07:53 AM.

[LadySylvia]

I came across this interesting blog from someone named Ideasmith. It's called "Missing Mr. Imperfect"

[blueman]

Pretty interesting read, LS. Thanks!

[chris-o]

I think Daniel Craig did a more realistic Bond movie. It's more like the "original" 007 who Ian Fleming created.

Like many others here, I also think that DAD was too much science-fiction-like, ok it was the 40th anniversary, but the story didn't make sense to me.

I say yes Daniel Craig re-invent 007 after the "perfect" Action-Bond-movies with Brosnan.

[Emma]

'CAN DANIEL CRAIG SAVE 007'? Well, i think that they have their answer about now... The piece written on Craig left me a bit perplexed in a good way...The guy said tha Craig is reinventing the Bond saga/formula a little and that as oppose to Sean Connery's Bond, this new one is not your squared O Daddy Bond...The other actors having played Bond were to 'neat' in their depiction of Fleming's beast...Craig's 007 is politically incorrect and should be like that...And he has the right balance of beliviability stamped on his forehead..The guy can be tough,rough,macho,charming,classy and very debonnaire and much more... So, guys do you think that Daniel reinveinted the series formula in a way by playing a Bond who is not the conventional 007 which we have been fed for 44years?

This is good and quite accurate.

I loved Casino Royale. It's my favourite Bond film. But I always smile when I hear that this is a new or reinvented Bond. When it's quite obvious that the makers simply took Christopher Nolan's ideas for Batman and pasted it on to Bond. Right down to the fact that all 3 Craig Bond films are to be a trilogy along the lines of Batman begins.

If they had made another Bond film with Brosnan, much along the lines of DAD it would have still cleaned up at the box office.

As for the reference to the Craig being more alongside the Bond of the book. Still don't get the corelation. Though I have never been able to finish Fleming's books. The Book Bond always seemed as a dandy. Daniel Craig (even though he cleans up well) is anything but. I can see why Fleming wanted Cary Grant or David Niven to play the role.

Edited by Emma, 20 May 2007 - 06:12 PM.