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
I would still disagree when it comes to sacking the agent. That's pretty radical. I don't know the exact job description for agents, but I feel like actors should use their own brains and shouldn't be needed to be told obvious stuff. (Naturally I'm only talking of grown-ups here.) Any movie can turn out worse than hoped and various things can go wrong, but with that thing, surely there couldn't have been anything to suggest it might actually end up good, so...
Actors can just as easily be given wrong advice (by agents or other people) about what they should or shouldn't do. Ultimately nobody can be absolutely sure in advance about most things. Sometimes it's kinda easy to see why actors would be advised against doing certain roles, and how they could go really, really wrong. (Such as Patrick Bateman.) Therefore actors must be fully responsible themselves - they read the scripts, meet with directors, etc. and if they decide to do or not do something - regardless of anybody's advice for or against - then then it's up to them to deal with it.
As for Dornan specifically, since I've only seen him in one small role(in which I found him irritating and unsuitable) and one trailer (in which I found him boring), I can't really comment on his talents. If he is good, though, then his career shouldn't be done and dusted after one bad choice. Of course it makes it tougher, but small roles done well can still help him along to bigger and better things.
1. An actor can feel comfortable with a role without it having to be similar to himself (and probably needs to be comfortable, to be able to do it well, I presume). An actor can also be just as willing and able to promote the film, and be happy to talk about it all over the place without having to be similar to the character. Have you been unhappy about Craig's promotional work or do you feel him not being like Bond in real life has somehow harmed the brand or the individual movies? I don't see that myself. He may not love the promotional work too much, but I think he has done just fine.
2. I see what you mean, and mostly agree. I don't necessarily prefer extroverts or non-shy people, it depends on the person... A lot can be said for not being too confident, as well, and introverts can be more interesting than extroverts. Shyness or some level of awkwardness can be kinda appealing and adorable, actually. And also, one can be confident, yet shy or an introvert, and being an extrovert can also be a cover for lack of confidence.
Does it really matter though, as far as movies are concerned, how much actors enjoy junkets etc.? How many people care? People don't go to the movies depending on such things anyway, so it doesn't matter that much as far as the promotion goes if actors aren't having a blast in interviews.
I understand the preference as far as watching interviews goes, even though I don't quite share it. I mean that I'd rather watch an interview with, say, Craig than Connery any day. On the other hand I'd rather watch an interview with a relaxed Craig than a not-so-relaxed Craig - and the same with anyone whose interviews I bother to watch - everybody's interviews can be vastly different depending on the interviewer, and various other stuff (like level of tiredness, personal stuff, etc.) I feel bad for them when they look like they'd rather not be there, and it can be a joy to watch when they look like they're happy to be chatting. (It can be pretty much a night and day difference for the same actor.)
But none of that affects the movies or my enjoyment of them.
Ultimately, what does some discomfort in interviews matter? It makes no difference in the acting performance. Beyond Bond actors, take someone like Tom Hardy; sometimes he can be very, sort of... oh poor guy (he's clearly trying, though)... but on screen, well, just wow, he can be just about anything. I find that difference fascinating.
Anyone playing Bond would definitely need to be absolutely non-shy and all that on screen, but off-screen... it's not that important as long as they can handle promotional duties (and clearly Craig has).
I agree about his Bond being introvert rather than extrovert.
An interesting thought about Fleming's Bond in a tv interview, hmm... I can also imagine he'd rather not be there. :))
I'm not so sure about the confidence thing, though. Being confident and being comfortable in interviews is not the same thing. He seems confident to me, but I'm not an expert. But I'm sure he isn't (nor should he be) as confident off screen as himself as his Bond is on screen. I still wouldn't call that lacking confidence, though, merely having normal levels of confidence. :)
Only one thing wrong with this theory: Craig ain't shy. Don't confuse his discomfort in interviews as shyness as it has more to do with his dislike of all the razzamatazz that comes with these junkets, and of course who is interviewing him. You don't have to by shy to dislike something! The guy is as bold as brass. How do I know? Why, I've spent quite a few hours in his company and can tell you he's quite a strong-minded bloke who doesn't suffer fools gladly, and not once did it enter my mind that he was shy. I wouldn't call Craig a raconteur, certainly not in the Moore league, as he swears like a trooper and no doubt finds it difficult curbing his language for interviews. I think he'd laugh his socks off if he read half these comments about him being shy. What I saw in real life was a tough bloke who reminded me of a young Connery. And he's not shy about being physical with someone, so don't think you can mess with him either.
I have no problem reading some of the debates on these forums (some are very good, and some are total garbage) but it irks me when some of you draw your conclusions from baseless facts. I know its an opinion but I just want to inform you that the Craig I met wasn't the one a few of you have formed your opinions on.
Anyway, I'll retreat back into the shadows and give the floor to someone else.
But apart from that, I consider him as being very much sure of himself and this also shows in the fact, that he never hides any of his short comings such as fidgeting (I saw him sitting still for 90 minutes during A Steady Rain) or his very limited pleasure in doing certain tasks, among others. He has the confidence in always giving you 100% DC and doesn't give a damn whether or not the public likes it. For that alone, you need to be very assured of yourself.
He is always described as having a very charismatic presence, which he can't tone down, even if he wants to. That you cannot act, you have it or you don't.
Plus he is - to many, even collegues, surprisingly a total goof. Funny as hell, WHEN he feels coMfortable amonG friends and collegues.
Ok, Craig is not shy. Thanks for establishing that. I stand corrected. Some of us haven't had the privilege of speaking with the man one on one like you.
Having said that, these forums are for debates and discussion. I'm sure a lot of the stuff that's on here may be baseless to those in the know, but as long as it's discussed properly there's nothing wrong with it. There's no need to jump on your high horse based on inside information you may have that others do not, but thanks for pointing out that Craig is not shy. At least that's sorted out.
My response was to repeated questioning as to why I prefer Moore/Connery in interview settings vs. Craig. I stand by my opinion that I much prefer those two to DC (even though I have a very high regard for DC as Bond). I thought it was either possibly (a term I should have used) shyness or it was that he was uncomfortable. You have confirmed that it is the latter. Well, I sense that every time I see him in an interview. The question was who do you prefer in interviews? My answer remains imho: Moore and Connery.
I don't see much similarity between Connery in the interview setting (at least the way he presents himself in the interviews) vs. Craig. On screen I see a lot of similarities between them.
Plus, I don't really like seeing this (and I see it a lot) even if it's always in jest. Goes to your point about him swearing like a trooper and finding it difficult to curb his language for interviews (which I've seen in some of the written pieces) or suffering fools lightly.
I am 100% in agreement with you @DaltonCraig007.
I put it down to shyness, and it appears I was wrong. There is definitely a big visible difference between DC the person and his James Bond persona imho.....at least to me.
I completely agree with you on Moore/Connery. To me they seemed seamless between the interview version and the on-screen version. 100% agreed.
Harrison Ford has two major characters under his belt, neither compromises the other.
Isn't the chap who plays Napoleon Solo also Superman (you can see how up to date I am?)
There used to be an age old problem that soap actors couldn't get roles outside soap because they were too identified with their soap character. Not an issue these days - Tv realises those actors are popular and they utilise them accordingly.
Well, I don't think being known as, what, Superman, is a problem now? (poor old George Reeves, if only ..) So, if someone is an X Man today, he could still be Bond tomorrow.
We certainly don't seem to mind Ironman being Sherlock Holmes do we? Accept that and we can accept anything.
So I guess you are right @NicNac, but still a part of me think the next Bond is at this very moment building a good resume in smaller movies and on TV.
I do agree about that - an unknown who we don't know about yet.
However, I think where EON will draw the line is if the characters played by the actor are too close or similar, particularly if the portrayal is occurring concurrently.
-So I think Cavill may be out due to Solo, if not Supes
-Similarly I think Bale would have been out due to the Bat/Wayne while he was playing it, but possibly not now, since he's been done with it for a while
-I don't think Hiddleston is out due to Loki (different genre)
Just my thoughts..
Agree 100% L
Normally and based on historic practice, I agree with you @doubleoego.
However, as I said somewhere a few days back, I do think things have changed post-SF. Now that Bond is as big as it is again (which it hasn't been since Connery's heyday in the mid 60's and Moore's heyday in the late 70's) I don't think EON will necessarily go that far off course, particularly since studios are much more risk averse these days (which has been discussed elsewhere on this forum), since movies cost more to make and payoffs have to be more certain.
I think EON will go with a middle ground this time......not as much of a risk as they took with DC. I think there is also a chance that they will cast someone known (although not too known). Somewhat like how Moore/Brosnan were rather than how Lazenby/Dalton were.
So when they eventually replace DC, I'm sure we'll all have heard of the guy, no matter where we reside.
Apparently others agreed with my impression that Craig is indeed confident. Another comment on the shyness issue. I didn't call him shy, but I'd also like to point out that there are different levels and kinds of shy. I'm sure @bondjames wasn't thinking of a quiet nerd, afraid to utter a word, so no reason to act like thinking of the possibility of Craig being shy is mad or something. Some people can be shy even around people they know, some are only shy around people they don't know, and how it shows can vary. Being uncomfortable being the center of attention and so on can easily be a form of shyness, too. Just saying. I'm not even talking about Craig here specifically, just a general observation. It obviously has nothing to do with goofing around with friends or colleagues, either, that's a whole other situation. I've seen other actors use the word "shy" about themselves even if they don't seem that way to me. I think the word can be used (and indeed is used) to mean more than the narrow definition and image of shy that some people may have.
You're absolutely right, Studios are more risk averse and it pains me how what is glaringly obvious the studio execs for tge most part ignore and make stupid changes that do nothing to better the problem. For the life of me I still can't understand why Logan was left alone so long to do his own thing which inevitably hindered production. The Bond movies are like an entity unto itself, the producers need to enforce certain parameters and stipulations to keep things on track and in check. It doesn't matter who gets cast, even if Fassbender decided to wave adios to all his future ptojects and commitments if the script is garbage so will the film, irrespective of how much or little money is made.
Which is somewhat concerning, because the guy who successfully and brilliantly directed/introduced the last two Bond actors is likely too old for the job now.
+1
Agreed. EON taking an actor from another franchise cheapens the brand. They don't want past (or current) associations with Superman or Magneto whoever overshadowing the part, and they don't want an actor for whom Bond is a second priority or having to negotiate with another studio about when he's available, or have his Bond interviews interrupted with "So who's the villain in X-Men 8?" questions. (Nor, and probably most importantly, do they want to have to pay them a large salary from the start, which is what comes with an actor who has had box office success!)
If nothing else, just look at the track record here. EON has NEVER hired a Bond who was an established big screen name. Moore and Brosnan were the closest thing to "stars" with known TV roles. They will want to mold their own hero from the ground up. I firmly believe that anyone who has already played any kind of iconic, big budget action/superhero role won't even be considered.
Totally agree. The logistics of trying to share an actor with what could be up to 10 years of additional franchise commitments with other competing studios and producers would be impossible. EON wouldn't put up with the insane scheduling logistics. Trying to launch a new film in the series is hard enough even with their Bond always able to give each new Bond filming schedule priority. Imagine trying to get cooperation with competing studios with competing film franchises. Producing these huge Bond films these days is impossible enough. EON will not go there.
Oh, Craig is very crass. He has a love/hate relationship with the press. You should read the strong "back the eff off" with an interviewer in a Cowboys and Aliens article a few years ago. I love DC to pieces, but did he not realize his private life was no longer going to exist after taking this role? I'm sure he did.
At the same time, many actors/actresses who've worked with him have said he is awesome on set. Even Waltz recently stated how surprised he was at Craig's preparation. I became a big DC fan after reading the complementary things Rooney Mara had to say about him, especially in regards to their sex scenes.
How crass can Craig be? Anne Hathaway will tell...
He took the role, and he takes the big bucks, but he does not seem to tolerate that it also comes with the responsibility on the marketing end to be professional and affable. These pictures of him above out in public point to his inability to understand the rules of the game. He's needlessly trashing himself in the press with this kind of juvenile stuff. Guys like Tom Hanks and Clooney are masters of the promo game. Craig by this point is obviously never going to adjust to it. He does what is required to promote, but that's it. Sometimes, he's comfortable in an interview and does well, but sometimes not and it can be disappointing to watch.
@smitty, you have elequently said in one post what I was trying to say but had trouble expressing clearly in almost five. Thank you sir.
Its a fight he cannot win, because like you say, he is mostly hurting himself. He is not stupid, he knows that, but decided to take this route anyway.
Its a very different persona to whom everybody describes outside of the public, who is a lot more amicable. He certainly is a very complex person, who might gladly go back to more privacy and less huzzle around his person. Time will tell what it will be.
Oh but he does do a great job of the promo work. It's mostly the paparazzi stuff where he tends to get annoyed. And who can blame him?
No, with fans and the red carpet premieres, DC is very good. When I saw him in NYC, at the stage door of Betrayal, he was as nice and sweet as can be.