›

Anyone love Craig as an actor, but can't buy him as James Bond?

CISCIS Suspended
edited March 2011 in General Discussion Posts: 52
I think I might be leaning toward this opinion. I loved <i>Casino Royale</i>, and I also loved Craig's acting in it, but to me I just can't accept him as the character of James Bond. It has to do with his looks and stature no doubt, but I also think his general attitude and demeanor puts me off as well.

Again, superb actor and he wowed in CR, but I just can't watch that film and convince myself that he's agent 007, Commander James Bond.

All 5 other actors work for me. Thoughts?
«13456

Comments

  • Perilagu_KhanPerilagu_Khan
    Posts: 2,483
    I love Craig as James Bond, but can't buy him as a person.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited March 2011 Posts: 15,690
    I love Craig as an actor, I am all for him as Bond, but I dont buy his characterization of Bond for one second. Just as I love Brosnan as an actor, but can't stand his take on Bond.
  • LudsLuds MIA
    Posts: 1,986
    Khanners, is that really you? Welcome!

    Na I really like Craig as Bond, after the Brosnan fiasco. Not like everything was his fault, the scripts were horrendous, the stupid gadgets, etc.

    Craig is basically a 2010 version if Dalton's Bond. \m/
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    My opinion of Craig isn't as high as it was after CR but i hope that with a good script and a lighter atmosphere he can be how Bond is supposed to be in B23 .
  • Perilagu_KhanPerilagu_Khan
    Posts: 2,483
    Thanks, Luds. Are there on-site avatars for us to upload, or can we just upload any old pic as our avatar?

    I know, I know...off topic.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,564
    PK, just the man I've been dying to see around here. Let me have the honour of welcoming you now, sir. ;;)

    As for Craig, I buy him as an actor, as a person and yes - as James Bond! But I have to admit it took me some time when they first announced him as Bond to get used to the idea. I was sold though when I saw the first poster.
  • timmertimmer
    Posts: 4,622
    Craig is a fine actor and he seems like a very likeable sort. I don't quite buy him as Bond though. He's passable but I really do think the classic look of the character should have been insisted upon.
    He needs to get himself out from under Bab's spell though and find his inner Sean and inner Rog. Then he might ultimately be salvageable and re-deem himself before he retires, to make way for the new, young, tall, dark- haired Bond eg. the next Sean.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited March 2011 Posts: 11,189
    I must say I really have mixed feelings about Craig as Bond and I can't help thinking that there is a certain amount of pure hype surrounding him. If I remember correctly a certain Mr Brosnan was described as the best since Connery in 1995. Now the ever-so-fickle public seem to have suddenly changed their tune all thanks to the damm DAD. A similar thing happened when Craig was first cast in 2005, people were saying he was wrong for the part, didn't look right blabla. I predicted he would win over audiences and suprise suprise he did.

    I still have difficulty thinking of him as Fleming's ideal however. He simply doesn't have the "gentlemanly" quality IF describes (yes, Bond is a gentleman).

    I can't deny he did he great job in CR however but in Quantum I just....didn't really care much for either him or the film. Craig acted the part but the character just felt like a rather generic figure (a tortured soul who beats people up and is a lose canon to the authorities). Craig is seen as the second coming despite the mess that was QoS, yet Brosnan is equally being used as the scape goat for DAD.

    To tell the truth I miss the more refined secret agent, the one who - despite his troubles - gets on with his job and doesn't need to be babysat by M every step of the way.

    I don't know, I suppose I'm going to have to wait until B23 (a film I'm not even sure I'm that excited about to be brutally honest) and watch the older films in the mean time.
  • jaguar007jaguar007
    Posts: 638
    I love Criag as Bond (despite being underwhelmed with QoS). After Moore, Dalton (who I really like as Bond) and Brosnan, we finally we have a Bond again who I can actually believe can kick some ass.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,564
    Quoting BAIN123: To tell the truth I miss the more refined secret agent, the one who - despite his troubles - gets on with his job and doesn't need to be babysat by M every step of the way.


    A point well made, sir. To be honest, I think this is where some of the Bourne - and other - influences may come well into play. Audiences seem to appreciate the rougher version nowadays and so Bond's adopted the trend for now. I assume there's some space for the gentleman Bond now, especially since the earlier days of 007 might be considered over with the ending of QoS suggesting as much. Besides that though, Bond was pampered in a way by M, somewhat reducing the roughness but then in a way I can't fully appreciate. Other than making the gentleman resurface, I'd also want Bond much less closely controlled by M. Brief him on the mission and we'll handle it from there. Bond can go about his business and we know he'll do the right thing. All those 'red tape' conflicts really don't add anything to the game.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited March 2011 Posts: 11,189
    Quoting DarthDimi: Brief him on the mission and we'll handle it from there. Bond can go about his
    business and we know he'll do the right thing. All those 'red tape' conflicts
    really don't add anything to the game.
    Exactly. I really don't recall the M of the novels having the paternal, babysitting relationship that Dench has. It was more a close but professional relationship. M, being of an old-fashioned Victorian background, didn't necessarily approve of Bond's "philandering" but trusted his ability to do the job. The two both knew the risks the line of work carried and were highly professional, experienced people.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited March 2011 Posts: 23,564
    Exactly. Also, Fleming stated that whenever M called Bond 'James', it meant some complicated issue was going to be brought up. And we did get a few of those occasions in the novels, always pointing to a slightly less official conversation. The theatrical M, especially in recent times, has a much less sober, clear and even respectful connection to Bond. Even when she compliments him on a job well done, it almost feels to me like she's a mother telling her four year old that the drawing he made in kindergarten, while no Van Gogh, is good for his standards: "you did well, boy". It borders on patronizing in my book. We came down from what I believe was a very good Bond - M conversation in GE to an M who MacGyvers herself through Bond's mission, as if he has to complete it in levels and she needs to approve of every one of them before he can proceed to the next. Whether grounded in reality or not - I don't know and don't much care either - I'm more interested in a Bond who can achieve the proper results on his own terms, rather than a Bond who needs to manoeuvre from one checkpoint to the next. I think the best praise M can give Bond, is a silent one.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Doesn't he call Bond "James" at the start of MR when he's trying to convince Bond to help him investigate Drax?
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,564
    Yes, he does. Like I said, a slightly less official conversation ensued. M needs a personal favour - hence the more personal approach. And still there's no talk about 'knowing who to trust...' and whatnot.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    "knowing who to trust" - the most overly used line in modern action adventure films.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    M also calls 007 'James' in TSWLM when Bond and Anya are trying to score points of eachother.
    "Well done James".
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,564
    And that is a good occasion for it too, I think. Representing the British empire, no doubt M would want to encourage Bond to outsmart the Russians. Also, I've never had trouble accepting M's thorough appreciation of Bond in that exact scene. He used the first name, he made the friendly face. Not sure Bond needed to give Amasova the "got ya there, love" face.
  • zebrafishzebrafish <°)))< in Octopussy's garden in the shade
    Posts: 4,312
    Craig = terrific actor and absolutely believable as Bond, BUT:
    The idea of the reboot, where he turns into the Bond we know in the period between CR and Bond 23 is unbelievable with an actor of Craig`s age in the role. If Bond were in his early twenties and went through that metamorphosis, I could buy it, but Craig plays a pretty mature, no-nonsense Bond. His character would not absorb the "suave" lifestyle anymore. If someone does not give a toss to the way he drinks his Martini, then nothing will seriously change that or an inherent general lack of style.
    In short, I buy Craig as a rough version of the Bond that Fleming had in mind. But only Moore and Connery had that sophisticated arrogance that goes with the image of Bond that many people grew up with.
  • LudsLuds MIA
    edited March 2011 Posts: 1,986
    Quoting zebrafish: In short, I buy Craig as a rough version of the Bond that Fleming had in mind. But only Moore and Connery had that sophisticated arrogance that goes with the image of Bond that many people grew up with.
    Perhaps the metamorphosis isn't quite done by Bond23's end. IT may take more flicks and another actor to make it happen.
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,262
    Craig's a terrific actor but he suffers from the fact that he's not playing Ian Fleming's James Bond 007. He's playing Barbara "Elektra King" Broccoli's re-imagined version of the character. There's enough of a remnant of Fleming's Bond in CR'06 to prevent me from ranking him as the weakest Bond(Brosnan gets that distinction IMHO). Plus, Craig's not only a stronger actor than Brosnan but he's also a much more plausible man of action than Brosnan. However, I rank the much maligned Dalton's Bond and Lazenby's Bond higher than Craig's Bond. Craig might be a better actor than Lazenby and a more buff man of action than Dalton but Laz and Dalts play a character much closer to the one you find in the books of Fleming.
  • Agent7FAgent7F
    Posts: 820
    I liked Daniel Craig as James Bond he my third Favorite. I do seen him in other movies. I'm glad he's James Bond many other characters. I should say those people who were against him 4 years ago as Bond are losers. So He good. He would be been a star without or any other character. ~X(
  • CoH_GHOST_007CoH_GHOST_007
    Posts: 303
    The way that i put it is that, the modern bond is trying to fit the nowaday style;
    A darker-tone rougher and more 'realistic' reboot, just as with Batman.

    I think that Craig is a brilliant actor, and yes, i do believe him as bond most of the time, but at other times, he doesn't really suit the role when compared to previous bonds, that's why i then remind myself that it's a reboot, but then again, i hope we get a 'proper' bond after Craig's leave...
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,350
    Quoting CoH_GHOST_007: i hope we get a 'proper' bond after Craig's leave
    We should "get a 'proper' bond" with the next film!
  • jaguar007jaguar007
    Posts: 638
    Quoting PrinceKamalKhan: Craig's a terrific actor but he suffers from the fact that he's not playing Ian Fleming's James Bond 007.
    But he is really no less Fleming's Bond than many of the other actors that have played him. None have really 'nailed' Fleming's Bond (I agree that Dalton is the closest and Roger Moore really played another version of his Simon Templar). That brings into question, what if Fleming's Bond? THe character of Bond changed quite a bit during the course of Fleming's books as well.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    edited April 2011 Posts: 6,791
    I think Daniel Craig is a terrific actor and he does make a good Bond. The others however are no lesser Bonds:

    Lazenby and Dalton are closer to Fleming.
    Connery and Moore have more charm.
    Connery and Brosnan have more style.
    Moore and Brosnan are more amusing.
    Lazenby and Dalton are more realistic/human.
    Connery and Dalton are more mascular.
    Connery and Lazenby fight better.
    Connery and Dalton are better actors.
    Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton and Brosnan are better at "Britishness".
    Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton and Brosnan have more class.
    ...
  • barryt007barryt007
    edited April 2011 Posts: 19,339
    A few points here GG - i wouldnt say that Connery/Dalton are more muscular that Craig,that Connery and Lazenby arn't better fighters (all about equal),Connery and Dalton are not better actors,and that all the other Bonds are better at 'Britishness'.
  • Mr_SterlingMr_Sterling
    Posts: 99
    Daniel Craig has really impressed me so far as 007 in both his top-drawer films. Its an interesting journey he's going on with the character...refining the blunt instrument into something much more dangerous. I anticipate his next film with great excitement.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited November 2012 Posts: 11,425
    Luds wrote:
    <blockquote><a href="/index.php?p=/discussion/comment/3063#Comment_3063">Quoting zebrafish</a>: In short, I buy Craig as a rough version of the Bond that Fleming had in mind. But only Moore and Connery had that sophisticated arrogance that goes with the image of Bond that many people grew up with.</blockquote>
    Perhaps the metamorphosis isn't quite done by Bond23's end. IT may take more flicks and another actor to make it happen.

    Prescient comment!

    That said, I rate DC highly in the role. Just preferred him in CR and QoS.
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited November 2012 Posts: 1,243
    Craig is a fine Bond, but this best Bond ever is a stretch for me. Bond is a complex character and each actor has added to the puzzle. Each Bond phase as in actor, is a reworking of the character and taken as far as the era permits.

    What I don't like about the new reboot era is that they are avoiding praising the actors contributions from before but want the credit that the reboot is part of the old series. I hardly hear Connery mentioned or the others in the Craig era. Damn, but it has been a long time since I heard the name Brosnan who was the predecessor.

    A fine example is that for the 40th anniversary, I saw 4 Bond actors at the DAD premiere. And not one apart from Craig at the SF 50th anniversary. That seems odd to me.

    Also, some pointed out that in the Bond Blu Ray trailers, Connery is in it for a very short period and there is way more Craig. Odd, because Connery did 6 official Bonds which is a quarter of the franchise almost.

    When I read the Craig is even better than Connery, I begin to get perturbed. Some critics praising Craig may as well credit him with the invention of the one liner and the Bond humour too. Because that is how highly they are praising him. There is nothing new under the sun just a different personality.

    All I am saying is by giving the credit to just one actor, you are effectively insulting the contribution of the others. Bond is family of actors and I believe in giving credit where it is due.


    When Craig started out as Bond I felt sorry for him and the media treatment. But six years later, I think it would be nice of him to show some praise for his predecessors who backed him when the odds were bad.


  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    Would you feel the same way, if all this praise would have gone to Dalton? This is meant as a sincere question, not insult.
Sign In or Register to comment.