177 replies to this topic

[Guy Haines]

Ah, that's the hard evidence! From the man in the street to the man on the 'net. Opinion polls are just snapshots at a point in time. And can be prone to manipulation. And I would imagine online polls on fan sites are particularly prone.

|Ah, the old 'I don't like the poll results therefore they must be be manipulated somehow line.

I challenge anybody to find me an online Poll that has Craig ahead of Brosnan in the popularity stakes.

I'm not interested in online poll results. I prefer hard evidence. If Craig was such a disaster as Bond then neither of his films would have had what I believe are called box office "legs", and he would have been well and truly taken apart by the critics. Neither happened. Winning an online popularity poll doesn't count as much with the film makers and the studio chiefs as raking in the filthy lucre and charming the critics circle, I should think.

As I said, I appreciate Brosnan and Craig as Bond, different though they are. I can't understand what you have against Craig, and why you seem so dogmatic about it.

[Simon]

Ah, the old 'I don't like the poll results therefore they must be be manipulated somehow' line.

I challenge anybody to find me an online Poll that has Craig ahead of Brosnan in the popularity stakes.

Polls - there's really nothing more trivial than a poll. Doesn't really tell you anything.

How about your basic worldwide box office take? Nothing like hard and fast numbers with dollar signs at the front to give the word Poll some solid meaning.

[Guy Haines]

Whatever his merits, I doubt many people would care that much if Craig didn't come back. He isn't 'James Bond' in the public's eye. Not in the way Connery and Moore were, anyway.

Polls certainly seem to reflect this. The James Bond wiki poll has Connery with 51%, Brosnan with 40% and Craig with 28% in terms of popularity.

1: 51 + 40 + 28 = 119, and there's not even the votes for Lazenby, Moore and Dalton in it. Ten out of one hundred people have no clue about percentage calculation. That's almost 17%.

2: A recent screenshot of theJamesbondwiki poll results page:

Well, I did say these polls can be manipulated!

[Matt_13]

Terrible idea for a thread.

Answer is no.

[WhiteKnight2000]

Well, I did say these polls can be manipulated!

You just provided a link to a couple of pages of archived results. The poll figures I gave you were current as of today.

[Goodnight]

This thread is beyond pointless.



Daniel Craig IS the man!!!

OK?

[stromberg]

Well, I did say these polls can be manipulated!

You just provided a link to a couple of pages of archived results. The poll figures I gave you were current as of today.

I wonder where you found those poll figures, as I can't find them anywhere on the site. The only poll figures are on the site I linked to.

Could you link to your poll figures, too?

[zencat]

Again...

This thread kinda feels like the last gasp (or an attempt to resuscitate) CraigNotBondism.

Aren't you people tired of this "argument"? It is settled. Over. Finished. History.

[jaguar007]

Polls certainly seem to reflect this. The James Bond wiki poll has Connery with 51%, Brosnan with 40% and Craig with 28% in terms of popularity.
[/quote]
Interesting, I just looked at that poll (if we are indeed looking at the same poll) and it has Connery at 46.4%, Craig at 24.2% and Brosnan at 11.8%.
http://www.jamesbond...ge/Poll Results


http://www.imdb.com/...ults/2006-11-24

A imdb poll from December 2006 ranking favorite Bond films
http://www.imdb.com/...ults/2006-12-11


Notice how the people who prefer Brosnan say the public prefer Brosnan and the people who prefer Criag say the public prefer Craig. Really as someone who has lived through the heights of Moore. Brosnan and Craig, I have noticed neither Brosnan or Craig have yet to reach the heights in popularity Moore rached during the 80s, even though he is low on current polls (and Moore never reached the popularity of the Connery films).

Much of it has to do with age groups of people you talk to . I would be willing to bet that Whiteknight is in his/her early to mid 20s (certainly under 30) and grew up on the GoldenEye video game and the Brosanan films. People in my age group (early 40s) that I have talked to tend to prefer Craig and Casino Royale. My mother (in her early 70s) is the one who got me into Bond and never really cared for any of the Bond films after Connery left...until Daniel Craig. She thinks he rivals Connery.


Honestly as far as public popularity, they are really pretty close

[Guy Haines]

I'll make one more post this evening before retiring because it's late, I'm tired, and there's so much left for me to do. First, I think the polling "evidence" we've seen shows that - typically - results can vary. That is the point I made earlier. They are a snapshot of opinion at one point.

Secondly, how would Pierce Brosnan continuing as Bond have prevented the low estate the series is currently in? The Bond films slipping below the audience and media radar has absolutely nothing to do with the actor playing Bond. It is all about the MGM problem. When that is resolved, the films can resume.

Thirdly, the proponent of this debate has offered nothing beyond an internet poll or two, and some vague "feeling" for the views of the "man in the street", to say why Daniel Craig's tenure as Bond has somehow "sunk the series". Nor any hard evidence that Pierce Brosnan's continuing in the role would have made any difference post DAD. By contrast, there are the box office receipts for CR and QoS, and the critical acclaim Craig received for his performance as Bond. Which hardly indicate failure.

[Publius]

Not really. He was 51 as of 2004, the earliest his next Bond movie could have been released. Besides, what better opportunity to move in a new direction than after your epic 40th anniversary adventure?

Also, anybody who thinks Quantum of Solace has anything to do with the current fiasco has no idea what they're talking about. Tomorrow Never Dies made almost $20 million less than GoldenEye (meanwhile, the drop-off from Casino Royale was only $8 million), and was much more widely panned than Quantum of Solace has been. Yet The World is not Enough was made no problem.

[elizabeth]

As much as I love him, I kind of have to go against him here. I don't think the producers regret anything they did regarding him, including dropping him. I mean, even from my point of view, he looked old enough and almost like my dad in DAD.

[Messervy]

Well it's true. The blind can indeed lead the blind.

As in Dr No ?

1st man in street : Well that Craig fella is not as popular as Brosnan was
2nd man in street : Yes and all the people I know say so.
3rd man in street : That's %$!!!&*!!! Craig is the best Bond, but not as good at Connery

4th man on the street: Bond? Isn't that the Connery chap?

[David Schofield]

I feel that Craig's Bond has not become as popular as Brosnan was during his tenure. But it is just a feeling based on discussions I have seen on Internet and heard among friends.

True.

I think the "Brosnan as Bond" character was already established pre-1995 and stoked rather wonderfully by Brosnan throughout his tenure; knocking about L.A. in an Aston Martin, immaculate suits, Thomas Crown, etc. Craig - despite his penchant for expensive apartments, watches and designer fashion - does not play the "James Bond" game in the same way; recall the way he and Hugh Jackman interupted Oprah's Central Park gig; she did not recognise the little bloke with the dusty 'tache....

Whatever his merits, I doubt many people would care that much if Craig didn't come back. He isn't 'James Bond' in the public's eye. Not in the way Connery and Moore were, anyway.

Correct.

It's a pity Craig fanatics can't just be happy with the two excellent films he HAS made and appreciate them, just as we Dalton fans can appreciate the brilliance of his two. Both these actors had brief, brilliant tenures which always sparkled, unlike Connery and Moore...

I have noticed neither Brosnan or Craig have yet to reach the heights in popularity Moore rached during the 80s

I'd disagree here. As one who went through the 80s with you, I'd suggest Moore was more tolerated than hugely popular in the cinematic world of Indiana Jones, Rocky, Rambo and the rest. Most were eagerly awaiting his venerable James Bond stepping aside. The sympathetic re-appraisal of Moore is just that, recent re-assessment by younger fans who appreciate the humour of those films rather than the original Fleming concept.

Therefore, I would venture bothe Brosnan and Craig were more popular at the time of their tenure than Moore had been during his.

[freemo]

People I ask say that Casino Royale was the best Bond film in 30 years and Craig is the best Bond since Connery. But then, I only ask hypothetical people, whose answers always back up my viewpoint.

I call them "most people".

[SecretAgentFan]

A pointless discussion still going on, provoked by a shameless member who is obviously having the time of his/her life leading us into a perpetuum mobile-like posting trance.

What´s next - "Do you think Gerard Butler should be the next Bond?"

[Col. Sun]

I know from working on License To Kill, that Barbara tends to like her men to be real men; a bit rougher around the edges. I think, in terms of her personal taste, Brosnan was too metro-sexual, (in fact she was very keen on Sean Bean for Bond in GE - and Bean's certainly less polished than Brosnan) and Craig has that Connery edge and exudes attitude in the role. Babs was determined to land Craig for Bond even when he was hesitant about accepting the role, and the studio wanted a saver bet like Hugh Jackman. The woman knew what she wanted and she went after it and got it. She ain't about to let him go. She very publicly announced that "he's the best Bond ever!" And I never ever heard her say that about Brosnan. She supported Brosnan, but never made such strong statements about him as she has about Craig.

[Zorin Industries]

Whatever his merits, I doubt many people would care that much if Craig didn't come back. He isn't 'James Bond' in the public's eye. Not in the way Connery and Moore were, anyway.

Who is this mythic "public" folk bandy about when making blanket assumptions about how popular something is. There is no such thing as the general public and I doubt very much if people have questioned every cinemagoer in the last five years what they think. The box office does the only talking here that is remotely useful.

[David Schofield]

I know from working on License To Kill, that Barbara tends to like her men to be real men; a bit rougher around the edges. I think, in terms of her personal taste, Brosnan was too metro-sexual, (in fact she was very keen on Sean Bean for Bond in GE - and Bean's certainly less polished than Brosnan) and Craig has that Connery edge and exudes attitude in the role. Babs was determined to land Craig for Bond even when he was hesitant about accepting the role, and the studio wanted a saver bet like Hugh Jackman. The woman knew what she wanted and she went after it and got it. She ain't about to let him go. She very publicly announced that "he's the best Bond ever!" And I never ever heard her say that about Brosnan. She supported Brosnan, but never made such strong statements about him as she has about Craig.

You worked on LTK? And Babs revealeed to you she liked her men to be "real men"?

That must have been a fascinating conversation - if not rather shallow if the term "real men" was actually used; but how do you really start a conversation with Barbara Broccoli that leads her to talk about her liking a bit of rough???

While it seems undeniably true (James Martin is a real brute, isn't he, UK cookery fans?), I do wonder if - ultimately - she'd have the clout to persevere with Craig if the delay becomes too protracted and the suits decided it was time fot a change just because she fancied him rotten?

[Zorin Industries]

Whatever his merits, I doubt many people would care that much if Craig didn't come back. He isn't 'James Bond' in the public's eye. Not in the way Connery and Moore were, anyway.

Polls certainly seem to reflect this. The James Bond wiki poll has Connery with 51%, Brosnan with 40% and Craig with 28% in terms of popularity.

I hate to say it but what polls on Wikipedia say mean nothing.

Ah, that's the hard evidence! From the man in the street to the man on the 'net. Opinion polls are just snapshots at a point in time. And can be prone to manipulation. And I would imagine online polls on fan sites are particularly prone.

|Ah, the old 'I don't like the poll results therefore they must be be manipulated somehow line.

I challenge anybody to find me an online Poll that has Craig ahead of Brosnan in the popularity stakes.

Well your claims to an argument are instantly diminished when you demand that "online polls" have any validity. They don't. And I do wonder who creates and answers them to be honest.

[SecretAgentFan]

Polls certainly seem to reflect this. The James Bond wiki poll has Connery with 51%, Brosnan with 40% and Craig with 28% in terms of popularity.

And as Michael Scott said: On Wikipedia you get the best information since everybody can contribute to it.

[Loomis]

I know from working on License To Kill, that Barbara tends to like her men to be real men; a bit rougher around the edges. I think, in terms of her personal taste, Brosnan was too metro-sexual, (in fact she was very keen on Sean Bean for Bond in GE - and Bean's certainly less polished than Brosnan) and Craig has that Connery edge and exudes attitude in the role. Babs was determined to land Craig for Bond even when he was hesitant about accepting the role, and the studio wanted a saver bet like Hugh Jackman. The woman knew what she wanted and she went after it and got it. She ain't about to let him go. She very publicly announced that "he's the best Bond ever!" And I never ever heard her say that about Brosnan. She supported Brosnan, but never made such strong statements about him as she has about Craig.

You worked on LTK? And Babs revealeed to you she liked her men to be "real men"?

That must have been a fascinating conversation - if not rather shallow if the term "real men" was actually used; but how do you really start a conversation with Barbara Broccoli that leads her to talk about her liking a bit of rough???

While it seems undeniably true (James Martin is a real brute, isn't he, UK cookery fans?), I do wonder if - ultimately - she'd have the clout to persevere with Craig if the delay becomes too protracted and the suits decided it was time fot a change just because she fancied him rotten?

I think the answer to that question is yes. After all, she ultimately had the clout to persevere with Craig before CASINO ROYALE and QUANTUM OF SOLACE, and so now that she has two blockbusters to show for it I don't see why her clout would be diminished.

In any case, I don't see why "the suits" would wish to be rid of Craig at this point. I know that franchises seem to get rebooted every five minutes these days (ten years from now, I imagine that several franchises will be on their second reboot, i.e. there'll be the announcement of a new "reimagining" of HALLOWEEN), but it's still only four years since CASINO ROYALE.

Also, Craig would seem to be rather more successful outside Bond than Dalton was at the time of LICENCE TO KILL. He appears to be a fairly big name in his own right, starring in an upcoming David Fincher film and co-starring with Harrison Ford in this COWBOYS AND ALIENS thing. Unless there is an extremely long delay for BOND 23 (i.e. more than two or three more years), or unless the shine is somehow dramatically taken off Craig's career, I don't see why "the suits" would oppose his return as Bond.

[Messervy]

Whatever his merits, I doubt many people would care that much if Craig didn't come back. He isn't 'James Bond' in the public's eye. Not in the way Connery and Moore were, anyway.

Who is this mythic "public" folk bandy about when making blanket assumptions about how popular something is. There is no such thing as the general public and I doubt very much if people have questioned every cinemagoer in the last five years what they think. The box office does the only talking here that is remotely useful.

http://homme-moderne.org/societe/socio/bourdieu/questions/opinionpub.html
okay, it's in French, but it's one of the milestones in the sociology on public opinion.
simply put: there is no such thing as "public opinion".

[Col. Sun]

I know from working on License To Kill, that Barbara tends to like her men to be real men; a bit rougher around the edges. I think, in terms of her personal taste, Brosnan was too metro-sexual, (in fact she was very keen on Sean Bean for Bond in GE - and Bean's certainly less polished than Brosnan) and Craig has that Connery edge and exudes attitude in the role. Babs was determined to land Craig for Bond even when he was hesitant about accepting the role, and the studio wanted a saver bet like Hugh Jackman. The woman knew what she wanted and she went after it and got it. She ain't about to let him go. She very publicly announced that "he's the best Bond ever!" And I never ever heard her say that about Brosnan. She supported Brosnan, but never made such strong statements about him as she has about Craig.

You worked on LTK? And Babs revealeed to you she liked her men to be "real men"?

That must have been a fascinating conversation - if not rather shallow if the term "real men" was actually used; but how do you really start a conversation with Barbara Broccoli that leads her to talk about her liking a bit of rough???

While it seems undeniably true (James Martin is a real brute, isn't he, UK cookery fans?), I do wonder if - ultimately - she'd have the clout to persevere with Craig if the delay becomes too protracted and the suits decided it was time fot a change just because she fancied him rotten?

Well, when u work on a film for many, many months, you inevitably get to know the people you are working with; the filmmaking process is very intense for the crew, actors, director and producers etc. and you can often become like a family. You get to know your colleagues strengths, weaknesses, their humour, their likes and dislikes etc. etc. Barbara is very professional but, certainly on LTK, also very charming and very open and easy to work with - she's got a great sense of fun about her. She is a chip off "Cubby's" block. For the role of Bond, it seemed she liked someone with a rougher edge - (she liked the idea of Sean Bean as Bond, hence why he ended up in GE as 006) and she is the one who saw Bond in Craig when most others didn't. I imagine she's very pleased at how well he's turned out and his success in the role has vindicated her determination to cast him as Bond. I do think Brosnan was probably not quite edgy and raw enough for her personal tastes, but that does not mean she didn't like him or respect him in the role, she understands - like "Cubby", Harry S., MGW, the various Bond writers and directors - that there are many ways to play Bond, as there is nay character; so I'm talking about her professional casting choices, I'm not speculating on her personal life or tastes outside her work.

And do not think she hasn't the clout to keep Craig, not that she needs it. She fought hard for him in the role and got him - His 2 films have been box office hits, and CR the most critically acclaimed Bond film, well, probably of the lot so far. No financier, studio execs, distribution company in their right mind is going to try and push Craig out - he's the key to why the re-boot worked.

[Royal Dalton]

Whatever his merits, I doubt many people would care that much if Craig didn't come back. He isn't 'James Bond' in the public's eye. Not in the way Connery and Moore were, anyway.

Who is this mythic "public" folk bandy about when making blanket assumptions about how popular something is. There is no such thing as the general public and I doubt very much if people have questioned every cinemagoer in the last five years what they think. The box office does the only talking here that is remotely useful.

I have to concede that I haven't taken a worldwide census on the subject lately. However, I suspect that most people on the planet think of either the actor Sean Connery or the actor Roger Moore when they hear the name "James Bond". My personal opinion is that the vast majority of people on this planet would not suffer from sleepless nights if the character of James Bond was not played by the Cheshire-born actor Daniel Craig in the next film. I have no statistical data to support this opinion, however, and am fully prepared to accept that the vast majority of people on the planet may indeed endure sleepless nights if such an unlikely event were to occur.

[Zorin Industries]

Neither actor has played the role for at least twenty-five years. That may have been the case back then but not now. There are many generations whose first and only Bond is Pierce Brosnan. There are now some who can say the same for Daniel Craig. It is only fans of a certain age who would harp back to the Connery Vs Moore debate as if there is no other.

And I don't know of many people who would have a sleepless night over who played a character in a film. Sorry.

[Turn]

Also, Craig would seem to be rather more successful outside Bond than Dalton was at the time of LICENCE TO KILL. He appears to be a fairly big name in his own right, starring in an upcoming David Fincher film and co-starring with Harrison Ford in this COWBOYS AND ALIENS thing. Unless there is an extremely long delay for BOND 23 (i.e. more than two or three more years), or unless the shine is somehow dramatically taken off Craig's career, I don't see why "the suits" would oppose his return as Bond.

Craig certainly seems to have the most interesting career of a Bond actor who mixes roles in popular films along with more personal projects and even stage work during his stint as Bond. The fact he has the lead in the films based on the Stieg Larsson novels says, excuse the terminology, volumes.

It also very much breaks the Bond typecasting. Why would they not want somebody in demand for Bond if possible?

[Messervy]

And I don't know of many people who would have a sleepless night over who played a character in a film. Sorry.

Oh yes, I would. Who'll play Bond 7? I can't sleep; I have to know. Pray tell me...

[jaguar007]

I have noticed neither Brosnan or Craig have yet to reach the heights in popularity Moore rached during the 80s

I'd disagree here. As one who went through the 80s with you, I'd suggest Moore was more tolerated than hugely popular in the cinematic world of Indiana Jones, Rocky, Rambo and the rest. Most were eagerly awaiting his venerable James Bond stepping aside. The sympathetic re-appraisal of Moore is just that, recent re-assessment by younger fans who appreciate the humour of those films rather than the original Fleming concept.

Therefore, I would venture bothe Brosnan and Craig were more popular at the time of their tenure than Moore had been during his.

Oops, a type on my part. I meant to say during the 70s, not 80s.

[David Schofield]

I have noticed neither Brosnan or Craig have yet to reach the heights in popularity Moore rached during the 80s

I'd disagree here. As one who went through the 80s with you, I'd suggest Moore was more tolerated than hugely popular in the cinematic world of Indiana Jones, Rocky, Rambo and the rest. Most were eagerly awaiting his venerable James Bond stepping aside. The sympathetic re-appraisal of Moore is just that, recent re-assessment by younger fans who appreciate the humour of those films rather than the original Fleming concept.

Therefore, I would venture bothe Brosnan and Craig were more popular at the time of their tenure than Moore had been during his.

Oops, a type on my part. I meant to say during the 70s, not 80s.

Okay.

Though I might mendaciously suggest that even after the huge success of Spy, Roger was no more than "that bloke playing Bond 'cos Connery won't do it any more" than popular in his own right as Brosnan and Craig were/are.

Of course, neither Brosnan nor Craig had the sigma of being considered a mere substitute for someone infinately more popular when their turns came.

However, as I said in my above post, I am of the opinion Moore's popularity is a case of revisionist re-consideration by fans of his style over the Fleming character than anything close to the contemporary view of the 70s and 80s....