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

Craig Turned Down Bond


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
125 replies to this topic

Poll: To restore good order to this vital discussion, who should get the boot? (72 member(s) have cast votes)

Which of these anonymous usernames doing futile enraged impotent typing on the internet should go?

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.

People should moderate their own behaviour rather than feebly demand others do it for them; it's always someone else's responsibility, isn't it?

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Vote

#61 Germanlady

Germanlady

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1381 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 09 August 2011 - 08:59 PM

I don't care which of you lot likes or dislikes Daniel Craig or how much you dislike each other, but do you have to bring it to every thread? Can't you at least entertain yourselves with insulting PMs instead? It gets a bit boring to read all the time.


Exactly WHEN was the last time, I spoke to this "genleman"? Its been ages...I hardly post here or read (for obvious reasons) but I did dare to post a few links recently to vids, that might interest people here. I hope, that is ok with you though.

Since I have NO interest whatsoever in him as a person, pm's would be a bad deal - its his posts or rather the content that get - VERY rarely actually - a response from me and since I then try to point out, where he is just going overboard again, pm's wouldn't make much sense, won't they?

Edited by Germanlady, 09 August 2011 - 09:31 PM.


#62 Germanlady

Germanlady

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1381 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 09 August 2011 - 09:10 PM


I don't care which of you lot likes or dislikes Daniel Craig or how much you dislike each other, but do you have to bring it to every thread? Can't you at least entertain yourselves with insulting PMs instead? It gets a bit boring to read all the time.


I agree 100%. The moderators should sanction GermanLady for going personal and launching an unprovoked attack against a poster who hadn't said anything about her (directly or indirectly). I mean, it's not an opinion; it's an indisputable fact (just like the sinking of the RMS Titanic in 1915). I think when the moderators start to get tough with these rogue posters you'll see the level of animosity drop like the U.S. stock market and we'll all be able to get back to discussing James Bond 100% of the time.


I can see, how much my few posts hurt the forums quality, but maybe this forum would be more active, if more people would tell off those, who are clearly haters. Tell them to come back, when the Craig tenure is over and THAT might help to drop the level of animosity, you were talking about. You know - just because HE is a guy and most of YOU are guys doesn't mean, he is in the right.

Gravity: 2358 (1.17 per day) 28-January 06

Germanlady 868 (0.56 per day) 04-May 07

#63 Chief of SIS

Chief of SIS

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 921 posts

Posted 09 August 2011 - 09:30 PM

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! Both of you! Everyone! Just SHHHHHHHH!

Now back ON TOPIC to Dustin's nice little reply half-way up the page...


Thankfully, they didn't. For all that we really are is fans, not actors - at least not professional ones. Instead of bemoaning the insolence that EON didn't give US our chance - instead of that ulgly duckling - we ought to be grateful we're not the redundant hams we'd rightfully deserve to be. Craig, being a professional, doubtlessly had more to consider than the things discussed here.


I used to do a lot of theater and teetered on doing professional stage work (glad I didn't). But during that time, every professional actor on the stage that I talked to (I assume the same applied to film) was concerned with diversifying their roles. I remember someone saying that in a lot of movies/plays you think to yourself 'Oh! That's that actor playing that character' but what happens when you have a juggernaut like Bond that's so big and has more history than the actor, it becomes 'Oh! That character is that actor.' A scary thought for an actor if you think about it.

#64 elizabeth

elizabeth

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2285 posts
  • Location:SDSU - Go Aztecs!!!

Posted 09 August 2011 - 09:40 PM

Where have I 'foul-mouthed' Daniel Craig? Saying that he was always going to take the role of Bond is now somehow an insult? Nobody turns down Bond. Nobody.

You answered your own question. I thought I'd be dead before this happened.

#65 Dustin

Dustin

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5786 posts

Posted 09 August 2011 - 10:00 PM

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! Both of you! Everyone! Just SHHHHHHHH!

Now back ON TOPIC to Dustin's nice little reply half-way up the page...



Thankfully, they didn't. For all that we really are is fans, not actors - at least not professional ones. Instead of bemoaning the insolence that EON didn't give US our chance - instead of that ulgly duckling - we ought to be grateful we're not the redundant hams we'd rightfully deserve to be. Craig, being a professional, doubtlessly had more to consider than the things discussed here.


I used to do a lot of theater and teetered on doing professional stage work (glad I didn't). But during that time, every professional actor on the stage that I talked to (I assume the same applied to film) was concerned with diversifying their roles. I remember someone saying that in a lot of movies/plays you think to yourself 'Oh! That's that actor playing that character' but what happens when you have a juggernaut like Bond that's so big and has more history than the actor, it becomes 'Oh! That character is that actor.' A scary thought for an actor if you think about it.


Indeed it is. Acting today for most professionals - surely more than seventy percent - means prolonged periods with either no job at all, or only irregular and unattractive jobs.
The first and most natural way to avoid that fate is to have a variable profile and avoid roles that really don't fit you. The danger of being typecast is by far not the worst that can happen to an actor. Far worse is a character one can't depict convincingly. It undermines the entire performance and artistic craftsmanship and can easily cost an actor much more than the cheque he gets for the gig. Of course Bond is turned down, probably more often than some of us can count without their fingers, and with good reason. James Bond isn't every male actor's heaven, and should not be so.

#66 Santa

Santa

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6445 posts
  • Location:Valencia

Posted 10 August 2011 - 06:47 AM

Yeah, but here's the thing: when you do post, it's almost always in response to something that I've said...or you've at least done it enough times to give even Santa that impression.

I don't think that's quite what I said...

#67 David Schofield

David Schofield

    Commander

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3026 posts

Posted 10 August 2011 - 07:33 AM

Of course Bond is turned down, probably more often than some of us can count without their fingers, and with good reason. James Bond isn't every male actor's heaven, and should not be so.


I am sure Bond has very occassionally been turned down but certainly not on the scale you're suggesting.

And what constitutes "turning the role of James Bond down"?

Was Patrick McGoohan really offered the part in 1962 or were the waters just tested with him and he said he wouldn't be interested due to religious reasons? Was he REALLY offered it again for OHMSS?

Was Richard Johnson presented with a contract for DR NO, or was it again a case of just being interviewed for the part and asked if he'd be prepared to commit to a multi-film contract?

Some claim Cary Grant declined DR NO, others that he was not offered it because United Artists could not afford his fee and to make the movie?

Was Clint Eastwood ever seriously offered the role in 1969? Burt Reynolds in 1971? Tim Dalton SERIOUSLY before he signed his 1986 contract?

So how many - and who - have actually heard EON say, "We'd like you to do James Bond and are instructing our legal people to prepare the papers" before replying, "No, thanks. Having time to consider, James Bond's not for me."

James Bond might not be "evert male actor's heaven". But I suspect for 9/10 of those ever likely to be offered it, it certainly is.

#68 Dustin

Dustin

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5786 posts

Posted 10 August 2011 - 09:03 AM


Of course Bond is turned down, probably more often than some of us can count without their fingers, and with good reason. James Bond isn't every male actor's heaven, and should not be so.


I am sure Bond has very occassionally been turned down but certainly not on the scale you're suggesting.


Well, I just tend to scepticism where the numeral skills of some people are concerned. But you are right, there have apparently been only a handful of occasions where the need for a recast arose. Still, I'm not sure if using ones fingers to count them couldn't be a great help in life for the odd fan.



And what constitutes "turning the role of James Bond down"?

Was Patrick McGoohan really offered the part in 1962 or were the waters just tested with him and he said he wouldn't be interested due to religious reasons? Was he REALLY offered it again for OHMSS?

Was Richard Johnson presented with a contract for DR NO, or was it again a case of just being interviewed for the part and asked if he'd be prepared to commit to a multi-film contract?

Some claim Cary Grant declined DR NO, others that he was not offered it because United Artists could not afford his fee and to make the movie?

Was Clint Eastwood ever seriously offered the role in 1969? Burt Reynolds in 1971? Tim Dalton SERIOUSLY before he signed his 1986 contract?

So how many - and who - have actually heard EON say, "We'd like you to do James Bond and are instructing our legal people to prepare the papers" before replying, "No, thanks. Having time to consider, James Bond's not for me."

James Bond might not be "evert male actor's heaven". But I suspect for 9/10 of those ever likely to be offered it, it certainly is.


I would argue it isn't because simply put the part isn't for 9 out of 10 male actors. Danny DeVito, David Caruso, Robbie Coltrane or Peter Firth would just not fit into the part and they know it. That's part of the whole actor stock, knowing which parts you can depict and which are beyond you. The whole illusion is based on it and actors can get nightmares if they are confronted with something that would break the spell. Bond for most actors - even quite charismatic ones - would. It's not only about creating a presence but also about creating the exactly right kind of presence, which in itself is much harder to do. Some fans still haven't got over Dalton and Moore, let alone Lazenby and Craig now. I have no doubt an actor can effectively wreck his career and temporarily sink the series with a wrong decision. Craig is not a dullard and will have done serious thinking. Clooney practically killing off Batman could have been a cautionary tale there. And Clooney as Batman was a choice far more accepted than Craig as Bond. The cheque doesn't quieten all the fears.

#69 David Schofield

David Schofield

    Commander

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3026 posts

Posted 10 August 2011 - 09:18 AM



James Bond might not be "evert male actor's heaven". But I suspect for 9/10 of those ever likely to be offered it, it certainly is.


I would argue it isn't because simply put the part isn't for 9 out of 10 male actors. Danny DeVito, David Caruso, Robbie Coltrane or Peter Firth would just not fit into the part and they know it. That's part of the whole actor stock, knowing which parts you can depict and which are beyond you. The whole illusion is based on it and actors can get nightmares if they are confronted with something that would break the spell. Bond for most actors - even quite charismatic ones - would. It's not only about creating a presence but also about creating the exactly right kind of presence, which in itself is much harder to do. Some fans still haven't got over Dalton and Moore, let alone Lazenby and Craig now. I have no doubt an actor can effectively wreck his career and temporarily sink the series with a wrong decision. Craig is not a dullard and will have done serious thinking. Clooney practically killing off Batman could have been a cautionary tale there. And Clooney as Batman was a choice far more accepted than Craig as Bond. The cheque doesn't quieten all the fears.


I certainly agree on actors like DeVito, Caruso (though is he really any less likely than Craig pre-CR?), Coltrane, Firth, etc, which is why I added the rider about "those ever likely to be offered it". Players like those you mention would never get tested. I think the Craig-variant is about as wide as the EON net is ever likely to be cast. Hell, didn't Lewis Collins claim he never got far with Cubby because Cubby didn't think he was physically right????!!!

I do, however, maintain that whoever EON let in for an interview would both feel they were capable of playing Bond and would willingly take the part.

Clooney-Batman is an unusual situation, IMO. A bad film, with Clooney wasted. Would Clooney have faired worse than Christian Bale if his Batman had been BATMAN BEGINS, and vise-versa? I suggest not. But hell, I think Batman is pretty rubbish comistrip anyway: Val Kilmer was as good as any of 'em. ;)

#70 Dustin

Dustin

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5786 posts

Posted 10 August 2011 - 10:08 AM




James Bond might not be "evert male actor's heaven". But I suspect for 9/10 of those ever likely to be offered it, it certainly is.


I would argue it isn't because simply put the part isn't for 9 out of 10 male actors. Danny DeVito, David Caruso, Robbie Coltrane or Peter Firth would just not fit into the part and they know it. That's part of the whole actor stock, knowing which parts you can depict and which are beyond you. The whole illusion is based on it and actors can get nightmares if they are confronted with something that would break the spell. Bond for most actors - even quite charismatic ones - would. It's not only about creating a presence but also about creating the exactly right kind of presence, which in itself is much harder to do. Some fans still haven't got over Dalton and Moore, let alone Lazenby and Craig now. I have no doubt an actor can effectively wreck his career and temporarily sink the series with a wrong decision. Craig is not a dullard and will have done serious thinking. Clooney practically killing off Batman could have been a cautionary tale there. And Clooney as Batman was a choice far more accepted than Craig as Bond. The cheque doesn't quieten all the fears.


I certainly agree on actors like DeVito, Caruso (though is he really any less likely than Craig pre-CR?), Coltrane, Firth, etc, which is why I added the rider about "those ever likely to be offered it". Players like those you mention would never get tested. I think the Craig-variant is about as wide as the EON net is ever likely to be cast. Hell, didn't Lewis Collins claim he never got far with Cubby because Cubby didn't think he was physically right????!!!

I do, however, maintain that whoever EON let in for an interview would both feel they were capable of playing Bond and would willingly take the part.


Fair point. Ok, let's suppose Jeremy Irons had been offered the role in 1980 (I faintly remember having read speculation about it back then). He had the looks to some extent and surely wouldn't have been more unlikely than Lewis Collins. I highly doubt he'd have taken it. Other examples of people I can imagine gladly turning down would have been Anthony Hopkins and Richard Burton. It may seem grotesque to fans, but Bond is a very special part for actors. As is Siegfried for opera singers. Not everybody is a tenor and not every tenor is a Siegfried. And some tenors looking like Siegfried just cannot stand Wagner.

Clooney-Batman is an unusual situation, IMO. A bad film, with Clooney wasted. Would Clooney have faired worse than Christian Bale if his Batman had been BATMAN BEGINS, and vise-versa? I suggest not. But hell, I think Batman is pretty rubbish comistrip anyway: Val Kilmer was as good as any of 'em. ;)


Sure. But the argument isn't less valid because of it. Craig was by far no Clooney when Casino Royale was offered. Imagine him in DAD and you probably have a good idea about the final film of the entire series. I really do believe him turning down initially. And not because of any artistic pretensions but out of simple common sense.

#71 David Schofield

David Schofield

    Commander

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3026 posts

Posted 10 August 2011 - 11:09 AM





James Bond might not be "evert male actor's heaven". But I suspect for 9/10 of those ever likely to be offered it, it certainly is.


I would argue it isn't because simply put the part isn't for 9 out of 10 male actors. Danny DeVito, David Caruso, Robbie Coltrane or Peter Firth would just not fit into the part and they know it. That's part of the whole actor stock, knowing which parts you can depict and which are beyond you. The whole illusion is based on it and actors can get nightmares if they are confronted with something that would break the spell. Bond for most actors - even quite charismatic ones - would. It's not only about creating a presence but also about creating the exactly right kind of presence, which in itself is much harder to do. Some fans still haven't got over Dalton and Moore, let alone Lazenby and Craig now. I have no doubt an actor can effectively wreck his career and temporarily sink the series with a wrong decision. Craig is not a dullard and will have done serious thinking. Clooney practically killing off Batman could have been a cautionary tale there. And Clooney as Batman was a choice far more accepted than Craig as Bond. The cheque doesn't quieten all the fears.


I certainly agree on actors like DeVito, Caruso (though is he really any less likely than Craig pre-CR?), Coltrane, Firth, etc, which is why I added the rider about "those ever likely to be offered it". Players like those you mention would never get tested. I think the Craig-variant is about as wide as the EON net is ever likely to be cast. Hell, didn't Lewis Collins claim he never got far with Cubby because Cubby didn't think he was physically right????!!!

I do, however, maintain that whoever EON let in for an interview would both feel they were capable of playing Bond and would willingly take the part.


Fair point. Ok, let's suppose Jeremy Irons had been offered the role in 1980 (I faintly remember having read speculation about it back then). He had the looks to some extent and surely wouldn't have been more unlikely than Lewis Collins. I highly doubt he'd have taken it. Other examples of people I can imagine gladly turning down would have been Anthony Hopkins and Richard Burton. It may seem grotesque to fans, but Bond is a very special part for actors. As is Siegfried for opera singers. Not everybody is a tenor and not every tenor is a Siegfried. And some tenors looking like Siegfried just cannot stand Wagner.


Dunno.

All of Irons, Hopkins and Burton have made what might be termed "paying the bills rubbish". Why not commit to a Bond movie every couple of years which, after all, may well be rubbish but pay the bills most handsomely? None of the three can claim they made every movie or TV series purely out of artistic integrity. And, of course, we know Burton had agreed to play Bond for McClory in THUNDERBALL before McClory and EON deccided to make the film together... But of course the point is mute; we do not know if EON at any stage would have been interested in offering the Bond role to them anyway.

The best example I can give of the appeal of Bond to a "proper" actor is Tim Dalton. By 1986 Bond had been taken down the comedy toilet as far as it was possible to go, and, I suggest, into a a far bigger hole - far less cool or popular - than it was after DAD. And yet Dalton took Bond on despite it being in that state, and despite the fact that Dalton had an extremely successful theatre career. Simply because Bond is a far more appealing deal, both financially and professionally, than garbage like CHARLIE'S ANGELS, SINS, MISTRAL'S DAUGHTER, BRENDA STAR, etc.

I maintain Craig was in exactly the same position in 2005. Bond gives a security and position certainly LARA CROFT and THE INVASION do not, nor evn LAYER CAKE and MUNICH. As I suggested earlier, even Craig's great guide, Steven Spielberg, makes commercial rubbish these days with no greater artistic value than DAD. Craig was never likely to turn Bond down when the offer was made finally to take the part.

#72 elizabeth

elizabeth

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2285 posts
  • Location:SDSU - Go Aztecs!!!

Posted 10 August 2011 - 03:27 PM



Exactly WHEN was the last time, I spoke to this "genleman"? Its been ages...I hardly post here or read (for obvious reasons) but I did dare to post a few links recently to vids, that might interest people here. I hope, that is ok with you though. Since I have NO interest whatsoever in him as a person, pm's would be a bad deal - its his posts or rather the content that get - VERY rarely actually - a response from me and since I then try to point out, where he is just going overboard again, pm's wouldn't make much sense, won't they?



Yeah, but here's the thing: when you do post, it's almost always in response to something that I've said...or you've at least done it enough times to give even Santa that impression. And so what if I"m going "overboard" again. Are you the Overboard Police?


I can see, how much my few posts hurt the forums quality, but maybe this forum would be more active, if more people would tell off those, who are clearly haters.



Ahhhh, the direct approach. So this is about calling out the "haters" i.e. anyone who doesn't melt down their gold earrings, gold necklaces (I'm sure GermanMalady has some gold fillings lying around that she could smelt) and make a graven image of Daniel Craig to worship!!! The most laughable part of GermanMalady's statement is that I'm a "hater". I hate LICENSE REVOKED...I hate pot-smoking hippies....I DO NOT HATE DANIEL CRAIG. DC doesn't even rate a mild-dislike from me. I have no idea where JermaineLady gets the idea that I 'HATE' Daniel Craig, but it's obvious that she's got a love-jones for Craig really bad and can't stand to tolerate anyone who doesn't worship the ground he hovers above.


Tell them to come back, when the Craig tenure is over and THAT might help to drop the level of animosity, you were talking about.



Or, and maybe this is just a crazy suggestion, you could IGNORE and NOT READ my posts, or go take a diversity or tolerance class at your local university and learn to live among opinions that don't mirror yours one-hundred-percent of the time.


You know - just because HE is a guy and most of YOU are guys doesn't mean, he is in the right.



Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. Now you're trying to play the Gender Card.


Gravity: 2358 (1.17 per day) 28-January 06

Germanlady 868 (0.56 per day) 04-May 07



And I bet a disproportionate amount of your posts are in response to mine, complaining about how I'm 'hating' on Daniel Craig. Big whoop! What are you? President of his fan club?

THE TRUTH IS you always zero in on the posts of mine you disagree with; you never spend one nano-second of your time responding to posts in other threads you might actually agree me with about, and instead launch bitter, unprovoked personal attacks against me and drag this forum down into the same low-level sink of debauchery you accuse others of inhabiting.

We've had this discussion before...and before that...and before that. Try doing something absolutely original for a change and DON'T READ MY POSTS. Find your inner strength and courage to avoid reading anything I have to say, instead of constantly thinking up a final solution to the Gravity's Silhouette problem.

GermanMalady, you're about as significant to me as a tick on a dog's [censored]. Your posts wouldn't even be on my radar if it weren't for the vicious, personal attacks you launch against me or other posters in these forums that I like. You only get the attention that you do by sponging off of me and my name. So do the whole message board a big, fat [censored]ing favor and ignore the hell out of me. Don't do it for me or for yourself, but for the quality of discussion and the feelings of everyone else that you profess so much to care about.

Gravy, just curious, do you watch the '31 Dracula quite a bit? Because you sound an awful lot like Dwight Frye's Renfield. And you've sounded like that quite a bit on these boards.

#73 Germanlady

Germanlady

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1381 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 10 August 2011 - 04:52 PM

Gravy, just curious, do you watch the '31 Dracula quite a bit? Because you sound an awful lot like Dwight Frye's Renfield. And you've sounded like that quite a bit on these boards.


Plus he still insists and here lays the fault, that DC turned it down KNOWING, they would go after him. There was no indication at that time, that they wouldn't just let him go and get themselves another boy. He is just not willing to accept, that there are people, who believe in what they do and are not willing to sacrifice that. Maybe in HIS world it is like that...sadly...but stop putting down others on that level. You can't win this - he said No and took a high risk to never see them again. FACT and you can talk around this as much as you want, its not gonna change that fact.

I don't care at all, what you think personally but seeing your wrong accusations all over this board is just wrong. Why? This is a Bond board and DC is the resident Bond (like it or not) and hence, people should judge him FAIRLY for all good or bad he is doing. If he fails - fine - call it failure, but this doesn't belong in that category. Au contraire...

Edited by Germanlady, 10 August 2011 - 05:05 PM.


#74 Safari Suit

Safari Suit

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5099 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 10 August 2011 - 05:07 PM

Hartnett, on the other hand, may at his roots just be an "indie-type" actor who never felt comfortable with such a huge spotlight on him such as the Superman franchise would have given him, but if he was an actor who was looking for bigger fame and better roles he sure didn't accomplish it by turning down SUPERMAN RETURNS. And no matter what anybody thinks of SUPERMAN RETURNS, it did gross $400 million dollars.


Yeah, but it hasn't really gotten Branden Routh any further; he's already in the Return of the Man from UNCLE phase of his career doing films like Scott Pilgrim and Dylan Dog that one suspects he gets mostly because he was cast in a lead role in a comic book movie before

#75 Dustin

Dustin

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5786 posts

Posted 10 August 2011 - 06:10 PM

Dunno.

All of Irons, Hopkins and Burton have made what might be termed "paying the bills rubbish". Why not commit to a Bond movie every couple of years which, after all, may well be rubbish but pay the bills most handsomely? None of the three can claim they made every movie or TV series purely out of artistic integrity. And, of course, we know Burton had agreed to play Bond for McClory in THUNDERBALL before McClory and EON deccided to make the film together... But of course the point is mute; we do not know if EON at any stage would have been interested in offering the Bond role to them anyway.


Lots of paying the bills rubbish, no arguing that. But for the most part only once their class was established and there really was no doubt about their potential as actors.

Didn't know Burton agreed to play Bond in McClory's project, I always assumed he wasn't interested in the part.





The best example I can give of the appeal of Bond to a "proper" actor is Tim Dalton. By 1986 Bond had been taken down the comedy toilet as far as it was possible to go, and, I suggest, into a a far bigger hole - far less cool or popular - than it was after DAD. And yet Dalton took Bond on despite it being in that state, and despite the fact that Dalton had an extremely successful theatre career. Simply because Bond is a far more appealing deal, both financially and professionally, than garbage like CHARLIE'S ANGELS, SINS, MISTRAL'S DAUGHTER, BRENDA STAR, etc.


I don't think this is a question of garbage entertainment vs serious art. Dalton undoubtedly had the look, the basic understanding and the potential to become a great Bond, and I think he knew that perfectly well. The only question would have been the right point to take it - if it's still on offer, that is. I think he took it at just the right moment in his career but was decades ahead of his time for the Bond series itself. But the simple fact is that at the time he became Bond he didn't have prove anything any more in terms of his acting.




I maintain Craig was in exactly the same position in 2005. Bond gives a security and position certainly LARA CROFT and THE INVASION do not, nor evn LAYER CAKE and MUNICH. As I suggested earlier, even Craig's great guide, Steven Spielberg, makes commercial rubbish these days with no greater artistic value than DAD. Craig was never likely to turn Bond down when the offer was made finally to take the part.



Craig ran a much higher risk and could well have become the last Bond for a time. And flicks as LARA CROFT and INVASION would soon be forgotten when the last Bond film for a given time would be a thing people would remember for a very long time.

#76 elizabeth

elizabeth

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2285 posts
  • Location:SDSU - Go Aztecs!!!

Posted 11 August 2011 - 04:36 PM



Gravy, just curious, do you watch the '31 Dracula quite a bit? Because you sound an awful lot like Dwight Frye's Renfield. And you've sounded like that quite a bit on these boards.


Another unprovoked attack accusing someone of being mentally ill that will go completely unchallenged by a moderator.

I'd be careful about aligning myself with GermanMalady, Elizabeth....they don't have a particularly strong record on tolerating people that don't live up to their standards of perfection.

Believe me...I think I know who's the winning party here. And it ain't you.

#77 Mr. Blofeld

Mr. Blofeld

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9173 posts
  • Location:North Smithfield, RI, USA

Posted 11 August 2011 - 07:21 PM

Oh, lovely; has Grav'y joined a minstrel show? Certainly wouldn't be out of character for him... :rolleyes:

I know it's probably only one of two people who're putting down my rep; one of them is you, and the other is a bitter former mod. I know you both are reading this thread, and to both of you (whoever is doing it), I say: Knock. It. Off.

If you want to attack me, do it in writing; don't act like an anonymous putz who thinks he's being clever by bringing down rep -- because you're not; you're just being incredibly petty, selfish, and stupid.

#78 coco1997

coco1997

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2821 posts
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 11 August 2011 - 07:47 PM

I know it's probably only one of two people who're putting down my rep; one of them is you, and the other is a bitter former mod. I know you both are reading this thread, and to both of you (whoever is doing it), I say: Knock. It. Off.

If you want to attack me, do it in writing; don't act like an anonymous putz who thinks he's being clever by bringing down rep -- because you're not; you're just being incredibly petty, selfish, and stupid.


Why. Do. You. Care. So. Much. A-bout. Your. Rep-u-ta-tion?

How supercilious of you to assume that only one or two people on these forums don't like you.

#79 Santa

Santa

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6445 posts
  • Location:Valencia

Posted 11 August 2011 - 07:48 PM

I think it's safe to say there are no winners here. All losers for sure.

#80 jaguar007

jaguar007

    Commander

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

Posted 11 August 2011 - 07:56 PM

This thread has become increasingly dull. Can we please go back to talking about Bond and not bickering about one another???

#81 coco1997

coco1997

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2821 posts
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 11 August 2011 - 08:12 PM

:tup:

#82 Chief of SIS

Chief of SIS

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 921 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 08:27 PM

To paraphrase the great American Revolutionary War patriot from CONNECTICUT, Nathanal Hale: 'I only regret that I have but one profile on CBn to lower Mr.Blofeld's reputation.'


I feel like I've heard that quote, though more accurately, before.....





hmmmmm........

Edited by Chief of SIS, 11 August 2011 - 08:27 PM.


#83 Mr. Blofeld

Mr. Blofeld

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9173 posts
  • Location:North Smithfield, RI, USA

Posted 11 August 2011 - 09:40 PM

There are race riots in London and Wisconsin

Who said anything about "race riots"? There's rioting in London (nothing to do with race), but I haven't heard much uproar in Wisconsin... unless you mean the Koch brothers attempting to screw with write-in balloters.

Thanks for changing the topic, though; how nice of you.

#84 coco1997

coco1997

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2821 posts
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 11 August 2011 - 09:59 PM

Thanks for changing the topic, though; how nice of you.

Kind of like how you changed the topic of why your CBn rep is so valuable to you? :rolleyes:

#85 TCK

TCK

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 341 posts
  • Location:France

Posted 11 August 2011 - 10:22 PM

Boys with toys !

#86 Righty007

Righty007

    Discharged.

  • Veterans Reserve
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 13051 posts
  • Location:Station CLE - Cleveland

Posted 12 August 2011 - 02:21 AM

I know it's probably only one of two people who're putting down my rep; one of them is you, and the other is a bitter former mod. I know you both are reading this thread, and to both of you (whoever is doing it), I say: Knock. It. Off.

I know for a fact you've been PMing your few "allies" here with pleas to help increase your reputation score. How cute. :)

#87 Mr. Blofeld

Mr. Blofeld

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9173 posts
  • Location:North Smithfield, RI, USA

Posted 12 August 2011 - 02:31 AM

I know for a fact you've been PMing your few "allies" here with pleas to help increase your reputation score. How cute. :)

Have I? Get off on it, do you? Get out of here.

#88 Righty007

Righty007

    Discharged.

  • Veterans Reserve
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 13051 posts
  • Location:Station CLE - Cleveland

Posted 12 August 2011 - 02:36 AM

I know for a fact you've been PMing your few "allies" here with pleas to help increase your reputation score. How cute. :)

Have I? Get off on it, do you? Get out of here.

Huh? :confused:

#89 elizabeth

elizabeth

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2285 posts
  • Location:SDSU - Go Aztecs!!!

Posted 12 August 2011 - 06:53 AM



Believe me...I think I know who's the winning party here. And it ain't you.


I wins every time you respond to my comments. I wins every time you talks about me, gurl. I wins every time I get under yo skinz so badly with an opinion dat you don't like dat you have to resort to petty names-callin and unprovoked dattacks, revealing what a immature child you is. I wins every time I say sumpin' dat you can't intellectually process and have to resort to character ossassinations to defend yo "position".

It's all good baby. It's cheddar. It's butter. Keep 'em coming like dat, cool breeze; I can hang.

Uh, wow.

You're not cool.

You're just retarded.

You don't win.

At all.

That was just...wow. My eyes hurt reading that.

Dwight Frye would be so proud of you, Gravy. Oh wait, no he wouldn't. He only liked cool people.

#90 elizabeth

elizabeth

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2285 posts
  • Location:SDSU - Go Aztecs!!!

Posted 12 August 2011 - 07:07 AM


Boys with toys !


I know, but it'll all be over very soon. You see, we'll have a "moderator" swoop in and say: "Knock it off EVERYONE. You've made a point, he's made a point, you've all made points. Happy? Now let's all hold hands and look at that dazzlingly beautiful sunset over Tottenham" (Oh wait! That's bright, reddish orange light isn't a sunset?) as if *everyone* deserves equal shares of the blame for this flame war instead of the actual people who started it: GermanMalady, Dustin, Mr.Blofeld and Elizabeth (I'll at least begrudgingly admit that Dustin and Mr.Blofeld do attempt to be both both real Bond fans and start up some original lines of discussion, while Elektra Woman GermanMalady and her side-kick, Dyna-Girl Elizabeth, mostly sponge off the names of more well-known posters and individuals for any sort of recognition they can get; like dogs underneath the dinner table waiting patiently for the master's supper scraps to fall to the floor. Poor things, really. Nobody would even know who those last two are if it weren't for their constant nose fight picking with me.

I was juggling between this and Alice Cooper's "Ballad of Dwight Frye" but I think this'll do. Gravy, your part starts at around 5:00. And don't screw up this time, please. Remember, you are merely an understudy to the great Mr. Frye. However, you're so scary good that Tod Browning almost considered you for the main part. Way to go!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWk8SzooWBo&feature=related



Dwight Frye would be so proud of you, Gravy. Oh wait, no he wouldn't. He only liked cool people.

if you're the only one on a message board of thousands that knows who Dwight Frye is *AND* thinks that's cool

Yeah, because I said that. :rolleyes: