It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Craig didn't raise the bar, all the actors before him had chops of their own. Lazenby with his vulnerability, Moore with his delivery, Dalton with his intensity, Peirce with his coolness. They all have their own gifts, and indeed weaknesses. Craig is no different from the rest, and the only agenda comes from thinking otherwise. The next guy who takes over will find their own angle on the character, and that will be where the franchise goes on from, whirring on another course. Personally I look forward to that day, one because the franchise has grown stale, but also so we can see the day that the grandstanding around Craig can finally be put into context.
Your loathing, or annoyance, or boredom with Craig, whatever it is, is palpable. You’re continually misconstruing people’s comments in the assumption they’re some sort of attack, or defence. This has nothing to do with the other Bond’s or what they brought, or who brought the most, or how valuable what they brought is, or any other BS.
Craig raised the acting bar, period. They’re not going to move for an acting non-entity, just because he ‘looks’ the part. My position is really simple to grasp and it’s not degrading anyone that came before him.
Edit: That's not to say that an actor with a similar range shouldn't get the role (obviously), but I find the current films to fit Craig's wishes to display the "full range" a bit too much. It's more drama than entertainment for me.
Since then I've felt him to be a bit walled off for my liking, whereas the material allowed us insight into his Bond's psyche and persona in CR. I'll go so far as to say he only really came alive in CR during his interactions with Mikkelsen, Giannini and Green. There was a spark to him in those scenes.
I don't think they need his level of acting skills going forward. They certainly do need a good actor though. Someone who can play the icon as readily as he can act. Someone with versatility. I've said this before, but I think versatility allows directional changes during an actor's tenure, which benefits the film makers.
That's why Connery and Moore will always be the top dogs for me (although neither may be as critically acclaimed as Craig, even with Connery's Oscar). They both had what it took to play in a variety of sandboxes as the script required, without losing their credibility.
Yes, it is because you just mentioned in you're own post. "Craig raised the bar" "the next guy needs chops". No, the next guy needs his own in, just like the six guys before him. It has never been the case the guy taking over has done so by following suit.
But can the man of steel also be Bond? I have my doubts. Still, Cavill would be a perfect fit for "dark and handsome" Bond, he' s at the perfect age and he has the physique to kick arse.
The next guy needs to be able to act. Not ‘act’. That isn’t Cavill. I’m open to whatever else the candidate can bring.
Craig has been great, but let's not get another drama actor as the nexy James Bond.
Bond needs to be fun agsin.
Again, that depends on what the take will be that they will go with. For instance, I think it is a bit strange that we never see an actual seduction scene in Craig's tenure. He gives the woman a look, maybe a line "I can't find the stationary." And then cut to them in bed after the deed is done. Now think about how many times Brosnan gets into seductive scenes. Xenia, Bond evaluator and Natalya in GoldenEye, the Danish girl and Paris Carver in TND, The doctor and Electra in TWINE, the Masseuse and Jinx and Madeline Swann in DAD. So many examples, and barely any for Craig. You'll probably disagree, but I found the one time That Craig gets a proper seduction scene in SP to be extremely cringey. His delivery was not convincing, he just seems very uncomfortable doing that, sorry that's calling it as I see it. So you could say Craig lacks the chops to make that scene feel as it should, whereas Peirce made it convincing time after time. But, ultimately it doesn't matter, because they can (and have) shot around those scenes with Craig are the audience most of the time doesn't even notice ( Madeline Swann "what do we do now?" Cut already ripping each others clothes off. Solange: "one drink" drives off Cut already on the hotel room floor). So they can draw and pull focus whether they want it. This idea that the series was this malmable thing which could be made to fit any purpose, but then Craig stepped in tandem now he's set the bar which others must follow is just nonsense. How can you not observe how the character is continually being reinvented with each incarnation, and the audience adapts until this simply becomes the norm, and an idea of doing it differently becomes strange and foregien. Besides, the best acted scene in the series comes from the Bond with the least experience acting, and I have yet to see Craig deliver anything at match the tenderness and sobriety of OHMSS's final moments.
That beats any Craig scene for me. Again, Craig is terrific, but Lazenby really made a moment there.
This.
Agreed. To be perfectly honest, I like Craig but I find him to be incredibly overrated as an actor, especially by folks here on this site. I wouldn't even call him a great actor but more a competent one at best.
Yeah, some like to talk about that role in Layer Cake like it was a Brando level performance.
He would be on 6 films then,the same as Connery...would he even squeeze B27 in (if filmed soon after B26 ) to equal Sir Roger's 7 ?
I think the opposite. It's the perfect opportunity to introduce a new actor and get bums on seats. A big anniversary push, a new Bond to excite the media the audiences.
Spot on.
I agree.
Craig already had one anniversary (probably the most successful one) and is already the longest serving Bond.
Leave some for the other fellas.
+1
Lets hope that's the case,Nackers !!
Hah, who knows? I do suspect though that Craig, unlike Roger or Timbo, won't be a supportive actor when it comes to Bond anniversaries. I imagine he will be a Connery-esque no-show.
Edit: when he finishes as Bond I mean..
I get the impression he's not as dedicated about the role as Rog or Tim...even Pierce.
Seems more like a good career choice and great pay day for Danny boy.
I've enjoyed Craig in the role, and look forward to his return in Bond 25. But I don't think he'll miss the role.
Like a lot of people I was stunned and delighted at his incredible transformation into Bond for CR and how he totally reinvented the role.
And equally disappointed that they chose to make him tired and warn out , complete with regimental haircut in SF (a film I otherwise love). The whole point about his Bond - buffed, sexy, arrogant - was stripped away. Gone. I still liked him in that film, much, much less so in Spectre. I hope he rediscovers some of that early smoulder for Bond25.
Yes,Bond is arrogant,always has been,but not rude and disrespectful.
Surely Pierce was one of the most dedicated about the role: he even based his whole pre Bond career on it! He didn't always knew what to do with the role but he sure knew he wanted to have it then keep it!
Connery wont bother ,Craig I think would be 50/50 ?
He was certainly good in Layer Cake, but not spectacular. I felt that Moore was just as good (if not better) in The Man Who Haunted Himself, as was Brosnan in The Fourth Protocol/The Noble House. These were similarly roles which preceded their time as OO7.
+2.