Who Still Has a Difficult Time Getting Into Craig?

OOWolfOOWolf Savannah
edited July 2019 in Actors Posts: 63
Ok, I just want to be clear. This discussion is not meant to be a Craig bashing one; however, I feel compelled to share my piece of mind -in regards to him as OO7- and invite others share their constructive opinions.

Ever since the announcement/initiation into the EON clan in 2005, I've been nothing but bamboozled by the choice of his casting. The only person that came to mind, while watching the ride on the Thames, was Andreas Wisnewski whom many may know as Necros from 'The Living Daylights.' This guy, clearly, was physically the polar opposite of what Ian Fleming envisioned as his hero.

Now, I gave Craig a chance when he did 'Royale,' and its taken me a long time to accept the film, since it was a hard reboot featuring a very unorthodox looking Bond. I will say that he did a good job in the film and seemed to have handled the role to the absolute best of his abilities. I'm personally, one of the appreciators of Craig's non-Bond films such as 'Layer Cake' and 'Defiance.' Anyway, the further along he got into his career as Bond, the more I couldn't gel with his casting decision.

In my eyes, 'Casino Royale' was his peek and everything else weak in general. I felt that in each successive film he started to look less Bond-like, especially in 'Skyfall' and 'Spectre.' On top of that, I didn't feel his conviction to the role like when he portrayed Bond in CR. So, between the questionable scripts, the increasing Putinesque/Steve McQueen look and the rugged, depressed state that he's always in, nothing has really helped me to get into his incarnation of James Bond.

Again, don't mean to offend any Craig fans. Just sharing my thoughts on the subject.
«134

Comments

  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    Posts: 2,063
    I do. But not because of him, he does a fine job in Casino Royale and I think it's due to Martin Campbell's directing of the actors. Campbell gets Bond and this is reflected in Bond's character in CR. I'm not a fan of his other three films but that's due to the direction and other reasons.

    That might change in later years as the new Bond is announced and I might go through a reappraisal of the Craig era. My childhood was the Brosnan era and it took me a while to warm up to the other 4 actors who played James Bond
  • edited July 2019 Posts: 1,644
    (The following comments about the Bourne franchise are well known to all Bond fans so I'm not offering anything that hasn't been discussed before.)

    Craig's Bond has been subconsciously or deliberately influenced by the Jason Bourne spy franchise. In all probability Eon looked back on Die Another Day and compared it to The Bourne Identity and found it too old fashioned and, dare I say, silly. The Bourne Identity was released in the summer of 2002 so it must have had a big impact on the Bond producers. Did they want to have another Brosnan film with the puns and outrageous action scenes or did they want to start again, a soft reboot, with a gritter, less obvious choice Bond actor? If you look at it from that perspective you could argue Craig's casting was the way to go. The casting reinvented the franchise. On the other hand, if you feel Bond should look and act a certain way, act with more panache and refinement, a character deep rooted in the 1950s/1960s, remaining essentially the same as each decades comes and goes, you could argue Craig was miscast in the part. It's possible there were other actors with a bit more natural charm, perhaps.

    Craig's Bond persona has always felt rather blunt and a tad one dimensional. You could argue Roger Moore's Bond was one dimensional, Connery's too, but they seemed to have a greater understanding of the balance between the character's nihilistic quality (Bond is a killer with dubious morals) and his gentlemanly charm. Craig's Bond could never be described as a gentleman. Jason Bourne is not a gentlemanly spy. Barbara Broccoli didn't want Bond 6 to be a gentlemanly spy with a ruthless licence to kill. She wanted a rougher round the edges Bourne inspired Bond and she found Craig.

    Was Craig inspired casting or not much like Bond at all? Pro and anti Craig Bond fans could argue their case and never find a compromise position. I belong in the anti-Craig camp however after the release of QOS I accepted him in the part. Acceptance is not the same as liking, of course. ;)
  • OOWolfOOWolf Savannah
    Posts: 63
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    (T Acceptance is not the same as liking, of course. ;)

    Right?

    Yeah, good discussions from both commentators. I honestly cannot help, but think that Barbara Broccoli has some deep attraction to Craig to cater to his every need. I don't think a single Bond actor has received the treatment that Craig has. It's amazing to herald someone for being so one dimensional, blunt and lacking of charisma.

    I'm curious to know if there's still a wide audience, eager to see the return of a more dynamic lead who also looks like a more traditional Bond. I'm just worried that EON have lost their step in regards to having a clear picture laid out. The films will always fair well in the box office, due to the legacy, but I'm afraid they'll misfire again with the script writers and of course casting choice. I'm pretty much unimpressed with most of the contenders and somehow I don't feel like Barbara Broccoli is really in tune with the lifelong, hardcore fans. The films were Cubby's baby and I'll just leave it at that. We'll never know, but I hardly doubt that Cubby would have given Craig the time of day, let alone allowed him to audition.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 3,796
    The fixation on Craig's looks has never resonated with me. He's blond, so what? He's fit, he's attractive, and most importantly, he's a damn fine actor who rejuvenated the franchise when it was on creative life support in 2002. We're lucky we have Craig.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded Dancing at midnight under the BeBop Moon
    Posts: 11,715
    Well, just to say no. I've never had a moment of not getting into Craig. He had me at "I know where you keep your gun ..." in Casino Royale. Totally Bond for me. And has been ever since.

    But I'll leave this thread to others, no worries. I simply wanted to say I cannot relate to that point.
  • Posts: 13,223
    After four films I think I can safely settle on an opinion of Craig; It's taken me that long. He's my least favourite Bond, that's for sure. He's a good actor and all, but his Bond doesn't resonate with me. I see an actor playing Bond, but it never goes beyond that.

    Is it the looks? I don't know, but he's far from the image I see of Bond when reading the books for example. All the other Bonds have traits and features that somewhat influence the way I picture the character when reading. I'm currently rereading Forever and a Day, and I've been picturing all the other actors at some point; either in whole chapters or just briefly when reading a sentence or two.

    Then there's the direction they've taken the character. I know the books have explored darker moments of Bond too, but as far as the films go, this is four pretty depressing films, IMO. I'm sure that works well with Craig's qualities as a dramatic actor, but it alienates me from the current era. I'm curious as to how Fukunaga will approach Bond, but it'll take a lot to make me really excited.
  • edited July 2019 Posts: 4,690
    After four films I think I can safely settle on an opinion of Craig; It's taken me that long. He's my least favourite Bond, that's for sure. He's a good actor and all, but his Bond doesn't resonate with me. I see an actor playing Bond, but it never goes beyond that.

    Is it the looks? I don't know, but he's far from the image I see of Bond when reading the books for example. All the other Bonds have traits and features that somewhat influence the way I picture the character when reading. I'm currently rereading Forever and a Day, and I've been picturing all the other actors at some point; either in whole chapters or just briefly when reading a sentence or two.

    Then there's the direction they've taken the character. I know the books have explored darker moments of Bond too, but as far as the films go, this is four pretty depressing films, IMO. I'm sure that works well with Craig's qualities as a dramatic actor, but it alienates me from the current era. I'm curious as to how Fukunaga will approach Bond, but it'll take a lot to make me really excited.

    This.

    I've never settled comfortably in thinking Craig is Bond. Although I do appreciate his era a lot. And these have been the best years of my life, so I associate the two.

    I do like him, he looks interesting and came to prove Bond doesn't need to be a pretty boy. The blunt instrument thing never resonated with me. I like my Bond smart and savvy and suave.

    Having said that, I dread the day they choose a new Bond. I can't help but think that the next one will be so far from the Bond I imagine while reading Fleming that there will be nothing left from it on screen.

    I think I'll come to miss Craig in the role, despite not being my favourite Bond, not even my second, third or fourth. I actually came to appreciate Lazenby more, because of him.

    So, I like Craig, and I love his era of films. But Sean and Tim are my Bonds. And I grew up with Pierce as the character and the love I had for him as Bond died a violent death when I saw DUD in the cinema and was embarrassed by it. I was never embarrassed by Craig. That's something, I suppose.
  • edited July 2019 Posts: 13,223
    Univex wrote: »
    After four films I think I can safely settle on an opinion of Craig; It's taken me that long. He's my least favourite Bond, that's for sure. He's a good actor and all, but his Bond doesn't resonate with me. I see an actor playing Bond, but it never goes beyond that.

    Is it the looks? I don't know, but he's far from the image I see of Bond when reading the books for example. All the other Bonds have traits and features that somewhat influence the way I picture the character when reading. I'm currently rereading Forever and a Day, and I've been picturing all the other actors at some point; either in whole chapters or just briefly when reading a sentence or two.

    Then there's the direction they've taken the character. I know the books have explored darker moments of Bond too, but as far as the films go, this is four pretty depressing films, IMO. I'm sure that works well with Craig's qualities as a dramatic actor, but it alienates me from the current era. I'm curious as to how Fukunaga will approach Bond, but it'll take a lot to make me really excited.

    This.

    I've never settled comfortably in thinking Craig is Bond. Although I do appreciate his era a lot. And these have been the best years of my life, so I associate the two.

    I do like him, he looks interesting and came to prove Bond doesn't need to be a pretty boy. The blunt instrument thing never resonated with me. I like my Bond smart and savvy and suave.

    Having said that, I dread the day they choose a new Bond. I can't help but think that the next one will be so far from the Bond I imagine while reading Fleming that there will be nothing left from it on screen.

    I think I'll come to miss Craig in the role, despite not being my favourite Bond, not even my second, third or fourth. I actually came to appreciate Lazenby more, because of him.

    So, I like Craig, and I love his era of films. But Sean and Tim are my Bonds. And I grew up with Pierce as the character and the love I had for him as Bond died a violent death when I saw DUD in the cinema and was embarrassed by it. I was never embarrassed by Craig. That's something, I suppose.

    There's something to be said for EON's choice after DAD, that's for sure. It was risky, but it has paid off in many ways, no doubt about it. If anything, Craig has an unique look which is instantly recognisable and anything but a bland pretty-boy (as you write, @Univex). Even so, he doesn't resonate with me as Bond, unfortunately. Hopefully the next guy will have a more a traditional look. It's safe to go back to that now, I think.

    I too dread the day when they have to pick a new Bond. Finding the right guy will be as tough as ever for EON. I just hope they have a clear vision what they want to do with the character before they do so. I also hope they won't take too long a time before finding the next guy; Bond needs to be relevant – and I'm not just thinking in terms of characterisation and plots, but in terms of there actually being a Bond film "around the corner". If they wait too long, it might end up feeling like they're reviving a franchise (much like Hollywood seems to do with almost every film these days).

    After his era finishes, I might end up missing Craig in the role too, but there are a couple of films I probably never will like, so my opinion of this era will rely a lot on what Fukunaga delivers. I wish to feel as excited putting on a Craig film as I do with the other actors.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited July 2019 Posts: 3,941
    Craig was Bond from the get go for me and apart from the blip of the last film where he looked nowehere as engaged as the previous 3 I think he's knocked it out the park and charisma, the man oozes it, naturally.

    Charisma free, it's amazing how differently some of us see his portrayal but I was never convinced that Pierce was Bond, maybe asthetically but the actual character and the conviction, not one jot I'm afraid.

    Craig to me is the most cinematic Bond since Connery, no other actor took the mantle from the get go and went with it.

    It took Roger till SWLM to cement his portrayal and be comfortable and Dalton despite being great still looks awkward in some aspects of his portrayal.

    Though DC for me from the moment he says "yes considerably" and holsters his PPK I felt the 21st Century Bond had truly arrived.

    I'm willing to give the next guy a chance but feel I'll mourn DC when he's gone and despite the haters, the next guy will have a tough hill to climb and they know it.
  • Posts: 1,308
    Casino Royale is my favorite Bond film, but I'm ready for Craig to go.

    Then again, that probably has a lot to do with the writing and directing of some of the recent films.
  • Posts: 620
    Craig is my least favourite movie incarnation of Bond, but he's possibly one of the most talented actors to take one the part, and I think the Craig era run of Bond films is the strongest run since the 60's. So to say 'I don't like Craig's Bond so much as the others' is a bit of a hazy statement, because the films are great. And I do enjoy his take on Bond. But he's not Bond in the way that Brozza was, in that I considered brozza playing the same character that Sean, Laz, Rog and Tim did. To me, Craig is a dog-eared, thuggish version of a movie character that was most exemplified to me in the modern era, when Brosnan sat alone drinking vodka in TND. Which was the last time I thought they got the movie/Fleming Bond in perfect sync.
    That said, the Brozza films were pants compared to the Craig era.
  • Posts: 4,690
    May I say something highly controversial. I'm a book man. So I'm a Fleming fan. That's why I'm a James Bond fan. I adore the first four Bond films and OHMSS. But books are my thing. I've been a writer for most of my life and I live surrounded by thousands and thousands of books. And the Fleming ones made my childhood a better place, so did the Jules Verne books. Those two made me the person I am. When I was a pre teen I started on the heavy classics and it skyrocketed from there on. Thing is, and this is the controversial thing, I've never found Fleming's Bond in any of the actors who have portrayed the character on screen. The title of this thread could be true for the 6 actors. Connery is the man, that's for sure. Still, he's not the Bond I imagine while reading the books. I still wish they'd adapt the books more closely, and with an actor who is the spitting image of the Bond Fleming described. But that will probably never happen.

    So, does anyone have a difficult time getting into the cinematic Bond? I do. But I love them all. Just not as much as the books, with the exception of the first four films (and the masterpiece that is OHMSS).
  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    Posts: 2,063
    Univex wrote: »
    May I say something highly controversial. I'm a book man. So I'm a Fleming fan.

    Around here probably not controversial. Unconventional perhaps. While you can't 'get into' cinematic Bond, doesn't mean you can't appreciate and like them :)
  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    Posts: 2,063
    OOWolf wrote: »
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    (T Acceptance is not the same as liking, of course. ;)

    I'm curious to know if there's still a wide audience, eager to see the return of a more dynamic lead who also looks like a more traditional Bond. I'm just worried that EON have lost their step in regards to having a clear picture laid out. The films will always fair well in the box office, due to the legacy, but I'm afraid they'll misfire again with the script writers and of course casting choice. I'm pretty much unimpressed with most of the contenders and somehow I don't feel like Barbara Broccoli is really in tune with the lifelong, hardcore fans. The films were Cubby's baby and I'll just leave it at that. We'll never know, but I hardly doubt that Cubby would have given Craig the time of day, let alone allowed him to audition.

    You're going to get a lot of answers if you ask the fan community. Honestly I don't think the wide audience cares who plays Bond as long as the movie is good
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 3,941
    w2bond wrote: »
    OOWolf wrote: »
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    (T Acceptance is not the same as liking, of course. ;)

    I'm curious to know if there's still a wide audience, eager to see the return of a more dynamic lead who also looks like a more traditional Bond. I'm just worried that EON have lost their step in regards to having a clear picture laid out. The films will always fair well in the box office, due to the legacy, but I'm afraid they'll misfire again with the script writers and of course casting choice. I'm pretty much unimpressed with most of the contenders and somehow I don't feel like Barbara Broccoli is really in tune with the lifelong, hardcore fans. The films were Cubby's baby and I'll just leave it at that. We'll never know, but I hardly doubt that Cubby would have given Craig the time of day, let alone allowed him to audition.

    You're going to get a lot of answers if you ask the fan community. Honestly I don't think the wide audience cares who plays Bond as long as the movie is good

    Plus these films have never been made for the hardcore fanbase, that is just your perception even Cubby realised this was for a mass audience and you might be right about Cubby not giving DC time of day, although I think he'd be proud of what BB and MGW achieved after his death.

    The idea that they've soiled his baby is totally preposterous.
  • Posts: 5,534
    Shardlake wrote: »
    Craig was Bond from the get go for me and apart from the blip of the last film where he looked nowehere as engaged as the previous 3 I think he's knocked it out the park and charisma, the man oozes it, naturally.

    Charisma free, it's amazing how differently some of us see his portrayal but I was never convinced that Pierce was Bond, maybe asthetically but the actual character and the conviction, not one jot I'm afraid.

    Craig to me is the most cinematic Bond since Connery, no other actor took the mantle from the get go and went with it.

    It took Roger till SWLM to cement his portrayal and be comfortable and Dalton despite being great still looks awkward in some aspects of his portrayal.

    Though DC for me from the moment he says "yes considerably" and holsters his PPK I felt the 21st Century Bond had truly arrived.

    I'm willing to give the next guy a chance but feel I'll mourn DC when he's gone and despite the haters, the next guy will have a tough hill to climb and they know it.

    Exactly my sentiment @Shardlake ... Ugh, it guts me to think of another Bond at this point... And yes, for me it went: CONNERY............. CRAIG.

    Good bits with Laz, for sure (and my favourite Bond film in OHMSS), and some comfortable years with Rog; Dalton was a little too angry, but I loved his edge... Brosnan, I wished I took to more-- never did...

    DC captured Fleming and cinematic Bond within seconds of CR.... and never let it go (his weakest being SP, but I felt he tried to instil integrity into a very flawed film)....

    Shardlake wrote: »
    w2bond wrote: »
    OOWolf wrote: »
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    (T Acceptance is not the same as liking, of course. ;)

    Plus these films have never been made for the hardcore fanbase, that is just your perception even Cubby realised this was for a mass audience and you might be right about Cubby not giving DC time of day, although I think he'd be proud of what BB and MGW achieved after his death.

    The idea that they've soiled his baby is totally preposterous.

    Poetry, @Shardlake ...
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    edited July 2019 Posts: 799
    I have to concur with OP and @Univex in this matter. Craig started on a high, but mostly due to Campbell and the terrific script. I like Craig as an actor, yet he never became Bond, to me. Connery and Dalton are in their own distinct ways Bond, as they share key elements that define Bond. I hope and I don't mean it in a mean way, that Craig's tenure seizes after B25. I still have my eye on a young man from Ireland and I reckon he has the extremely rare Bond factor, that matters very much.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,067
    Univex wrote: »
    May I say something highly controversial. I'm a book man. So I'm a Fleming fan. That's why I'm a James Bond fan. I adore the first four Bond films and OHMSS. But books are my thing. I've been a writer for most of my life and I live surrounded by thousands and thousands of books. And the Fleming ones made my childhood a better place, so did the Jules Verne books. Those two made me the person I am. When I was a pre teen I started on the heavy classics and it skyrocketed from there on. Thing is, and this is the controversial thing, I've never found Fleming's Bond in any of the actors who have portrayed the character on screen. The title of this thread could be true for the 6 actors. Connery is the man, that's for sure. Still, he's not the Bond I imagine while reading the books. I still wish they'd adapt the books more closely, and with an actor who is the spitting image of the Bond Fleming described. But that will probably never happen.

    So, does anyone have a difficult time getting into the cinematic Bond? I do. But I love them all. Just not as much as the books, with the exception of the first four films (and the masterpiece that is OHMSS).

    Agreed. For me Bond begins and ends with Fleming. Would love to see the books adapted properly as period pieces, although there's a slim chance of that ever happening. Probably why the first 3 films for me are untouchable. They were pretty faithful to the novels overall. For me the books and films are very seperate entities.

    Craig for me was my kind of James Bond straight away. It helped that the makers brilliantly updated Casino Royale and kept the spirit of Fleming in the film. I think he's an excellent actor and really succeeds being the 'blunt instrument' Fleming wrote about. Unfortunately in the last film he was saddled with a poor script and even worse dialogue. When the makers get it right i think Craig makes a convincing 007. He'll be a bloody hard act to follow that's for sure.

    My preference for 'Flemingesque' material is evident in my top 5 Bond films; GF, FRWL, DN, TLD and CR.
  • edited July 2019 Posts: 1,644
    Daniel Craig was blessed with good fortune.

    1) He was a close friend of Barbara Broccoli. That's the golden ticket into the Bond franchise. Craig initially turned down the part but I guess Babs persuaded him. If you're a friend of the producer of the longest running film franchise that gives you a huge advantage over the rest of the actors' field.

    2) His first Bond film was based on Ian Fleming material. Updating Casino Royale to the 21st century was a great decision. Craig was introduced as the new Bond battling a classic Bond villain Le Chiffre. Craig couldn't have asked for better material for his debut Bond film. The film critics and the general audience loved the film, it established Craig in the role. Stuff like "blond Bond" or "not that Bond looking" became irrelevant.

    Luck is attributable to all the Bond actors. For example, Sean Connery was fortunate to look like Bond and he become an actor. He happened to become an actor at the right time to play the part. Had he not become an actor and chosen a different path in life, no Connery Bond. That one decision in his life - "shall I become an actor?" was key to the start of the Bond film franchise. That one moment in his life could be why we're all here posting on this forum! Incredible, really.

    Perhaps Craig was meant to be Bond in the same way Connery and the others were meant to be Bond. Fate took its course? Who knows!


  • Posts: 620
    I'm always surprised when people read Fleming and say they picture a Bond actor in their mind. I've never done that. When I read Fleming, the Bond I seem to picture isn't like any screen Bond.
    FRWL I think, has perhaps the closest Fleming Bond vibe. Yes, OHMSS was true to the book, book Laz was more playful than the book Bond.
    But that said, Fleming purists can't really moan about the Craig era. We've had a quite faithful adaptation, albeit updated in CR, and the Skyfall plot acknowledged the books as well. I'm hoping for some more doffed cappage to the literary Bond in Bond 25.
  • NicNacNicNac Moderator
    Posts: 7,106
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    Daniel Craig was blessed with good fortune.

    1) He was a close friend of Barbara Broccoli. That's the golden ticket into the Bond franchise. Craig initially turned down the part but I guess Babs persuaded him. If you're a friend of the producer of the longest running film franchise that gives you a huge advantage over the rest of the actors' field.

    2) His first Bond film was based on Ian Fleming material. Updating Casino Royale to the 21st century was a great decision. Craig was introduced as the new Bond battling a classic Bond villain Le Chiffre. Craig couldn't have asked for better material for his debut Bond film. The film critics and the general audience loved the film, it established Craig in the role. Stuff like "blond Bond" or "not that Bond looking" became irrelevant.

    Luck is attributable to all the Bond actors. For example, Sean Connery was fortunate to look like Bond and he become an actor. He happened to become an actor at the right time to play the part. Had he not become an actor and chosen a different path in life, no Connery Bond. That one decision in his life - "shall I become an actor?" was key to the start of the Bond film franchise. That one moment in his life could be why we're all here posting on this forum! Incredible, really.

    Perhaps Craig was meant to be Bond in the same way Connery and the others were meant to be Bond. Fate took its course? Who knows!
    Are you sure they knew each other before Bond? I thought she saw Layer Cake and that was what motivated her to get him on board?
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing South Florida
    Posts: 3,455
    shamanimal wrote: »
    I'm always surprised when people read Fleming and say they picture a Bond actor in their mind. I've never done that. When I read Fleming, the Bond I seem to picture isn't like any screen Bond.
    FRWL I think, has perhaps the closest Fleming Bond vibe. Yes, OHMSS was true to the book, book Laz was more playful than the book Bond.
    But that said, Fleming purists can't really moan about the Craig era. We've had a quite faithful adaptation, albeit updated in CR, and the Skyfall plot acknowledged the books as well. I'm hoping for some more doffed cappage to the literary Bond in Bond 25.

    I picture whoever played them in the movie
  • Posts: 19,339
    NicNac wrote: »
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    Daniel Craig was blessed with good fortune.

    1) He was a close friend of Barbara Broccoli. That's the golden ticket into the Bond franchise. Craig initially turned down the part but I guess Babs persuaded him. If you're a friend of the producer of the longest running film franchise that gives you a huge advantage over the rest of the actors' field.

    2) His first Bond film was based on Ian Fleming material. Updating Casino Royale to the 21st century was a great decision. Craig was introduced as the new Bond battling a classic Bond villain Le Chiffre. Craig couldn't have asked for better material for his debut Bond film. The film critics and the general audience loved the film, it established Craig in the role. Stuff like "blond Bond" or "not that Bond looking" became irrelevant.

    Luck is attributable to all the Bond actors. For example, Sean Connery was fortunate to look like Bond and he become an actor. He happened to become an actor at the right time to play the part. Had he not become an actor and chosen a different path in life, no Connery Bond. That one decision in his life - "shall I become an actor?" was key to the start of the Bond film franchise. That one moment in his life could be why we're all here posting on this forum! Incredible, really.

    Perhaps Craig was meant to be Bond in the same way Connery and the others were meant to be Bond. Fate took its course? Who knows!
    Are you sure they knew each other before Bond? I thought she saw Layer Cake and that was what motivated her to get him on board?

    That's what I thought,Nackers.
  • Posts: 1,644
    From what I read online, they were friends before he was cast as Bond. Layer Cake was released in 2004 so they met up around then?

    Babs on Craig:
    We knew we wanted him from the beginning,” Broccoli said. “But the studio especially doesn’t want to see any stone unturned, so they wanted us to see everybody. So we met them. But when Craig is on the screen you can’t take your eyes off him. It doesn’t matter how big or small the role. I remember him from Our Friends in the North on the telly, or films like Elizabeth, where you think, ‘My God, he has such presence and such charisma.’ He’s a movie star – that extraordinary combination of movie star and great actor.”
    From Superhero Hype website - March 2006

    Daniel, when we talked to you last April, there were already a lot of rumors about you playing Bond, and you seemed a bit tentative about taking on such a role. What made you change your mind?

    The script really and Barbara badgering me. I hadn’t seen a script at that point, and I was obviously giving it serious thought then. I’d have been stupid not to.

    Why did you go with Daniel over all the other options that were thrown around?

    Barbara Broccoli: Well, he’s a phenomenal actor. I think he’s the actor that defies his generation of actors. I was a huge fan of his work, the films he’d made, and when we decided we were going to make “Casino Royale,” it’s obviously a big decision who we’re going to use, and he was always in the forefront of our minds. Obviously, there was a lot of stuff in the press, but the reality was that he was in the forefront, and it wasn’t until we were able to give him the script that we started talking, and once we did, things moved very quickly.

    4F5DC8DA00000578-6096309-image-a-28_1535147171346.jpg





  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 3,796
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    Daniel Craig was blessed with good fortune.

    1) He was a close friend of Barbara Broccoli. That's the golden ticket into the Bond franchise. Craig initially turned down the part but I guess Babs persuaded him. If you're a friend of the producer of the longest running film franchise that gives you a huge advantage over the rest of the actors' field.

    2) His first Bond film was based on Ian Fleming material. Updating Casino Royale to the 21st century was a great decision. Craig was introduced as the new Bond battling a classic Bond villain Le Chiffre. Craig couldn't have asked for better material for his debut Bond film. The film critics and the general audience loved the film, it established Craig in the role. Stuff like "blond Bond" or "not that Bond looking" became irrelevant.

    Luck is attributable to all the Bond actors. For example, Sean Connery was fortunate to look like Bond and he become an actor. He happened to become an actor at the right time to play the part. Had he not become an actor and chosen a different path in life, no Connery Bond. That one decision in his life - "shall I become an actor?" was key to the start of the Bond film franchise. That one moment in his life could be why we're all here posting on this forum! Incredible, really.

    Perhaps Craig was meant to be Bond in the same way Connery and the others were meant to be Bond. Fate took its course? Who knows!

    Was he friends with BB? That's news to me. I thought she saw him in Layer Cake like the rest of us.

    BB was also the one who pushed to buy CR, which in retrospect was even smarter than getting the Spectre rights back.

    Don't underestimate Barbara Broccoli, just because she's a woman! She's smart and savvy.
  • OOWolfOOWolf Savannah
    Posts: 63
    I hate to say it, but I think EON's choice to cast Craig was a personal choice and not a democratic one. I don't think it really helps Craig as an actor if B.Broccoli has an "interest" in him. 25 mil is a lot of money to give to a guy who's past his prime. Just sayin'...
  • edited July 2019 Posts: 1,644
    Craig looks a fair bit older in his new film:



    I accept he's going to look leaner and more buff in Bond 25 - no cream cakes, Daniel! - but I think he'll call it quits after his fifth Bond film. For better or worse, I look forward to a new actor becoming agent 007 in Bond 26: A Reason Not To Die.

    ;))
  • Posts: 385
    OOWolf wrote: »
    I hate to say it, but I think EON's choice to cast Craig was a personal choice and not a democratic one. I don't think it really helps Craig as an actor if B.Broccoli has an "interest" in him. 25 mil is a lot of money to give to a guy who's past his prime. Just sayin'...

    Craig was chosen because Babs fancies him. That’s it. And that’s why he sticks around.
  • Posts: 1,644
    MooreFun wrote: »
    OOWolf wrote: »
    I hate to say it, but I think EON's choice to cast Craig was a personal choice and not a democratic one. I don't think it really helps Craig as an actor if B.Broccoli has an "interest" in him. 25 mil is a lot of money to give to a guy who's past his prime. Just sayin'...

    Craig was chosen because Babs fancies him. That’s it. And that’s why he sticks around.

    I can't see any attraction between the two of them:

    british-actor-daniel-craig-talks-to-producer-barbara-news-photo-83483384-1553719711.jpg

    =))

    (I think this thread should end before it gets even more silly!) :P
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,067
    MooreFun wrote: »
    OOWolf wrote: »
    I hate to say it, but I think EON's choice to cast Craig was a personal choice and not a democratic one. I don't think it really helps Craig as an actor if B.Broccoli has an "interest" in him. 25 mil is a lot of money to give to a guy who's past his prime. Just sayin'...

    Craig was chosen because Babs fancies him. That’s it. And that’s why he sticks around.

    :))
Sign In or Register to comment.