Daniel Craig Era in Retrospect:What does he mean to you.

Eric_007Eric_007 Mobile
Hello fellow agents.
The day I've feard since 2008 when I was 13 has come. I'm 21 now and Daniel Craig is doing his last Bond film. Never thought the day would come. However i wanted to express how grateful I am to have gotten Craig as Bond. He's been so relatable and the best bond ever. From getting his 007 Licence as a Raw Agent in CASINO ROYALE to Taking Vengence on Dominic Greene And QUANTUM to find his SOLACE for Vespers Death. To SKYFALL and faceing M's past in order to save the future all the way to SPECTRE and Finding new Love in Madeline Swan the daughter of Mr.White while Confronting Blofeld who caused all his pain. It truly has been a journey with Craigs Bond. Spectre left me so happy and satisfied that i was okay if it was his last one but i wouldn't mind another. NO TIME TO DIE releases April 2020 and it will be the end of an era...maybe even Bond. In Retrospect I'm just thankful to have experienced a Bond I could relate too and grow up with. I'll be sure to tell my kids one day. In Retrospect how do you see The Daniel Craig Era?


  • BondStuBondStu Moonraker 6
    Posts: 89
    Well young man, I'm a tad older than you. Pierce Brosnan I consider to be the Bond of my generation.

    I thought everything was going so well. When Die Another Day came out I knew Brosnan wasn't getting any younger and the end for him as Bond was probably in sight... but I still thought at the time he had one more in him. And to this day I'll always say that - Brosnan did have one more in him - and it could've been his classic.

    When Casino Royale and Daniel Craig were announced I was dead against the idea. I really couldn't see past Brosnan. Also - I hated the idea they were wiping out previous continuity. But - there was nothing I could do about it - so I just went and saw the film.

    And I liked it. Didn't love it, but liked it. And I actually liked Quantum Of Solace too. Then a few years passed - four I think - where no Bond film was made. 50th Anniversary came out and Skyfall was released.

    And that's when I FINALLY jumped aboard the Daniel Craig train. That's when the whole concept of him, the reboot and everything finally won me over.

    And I even enjoyed Spectre - and I think I'm one the few round these parts that did.

    And I look at Casino Royale and Quantum Of Solace more fondly than I did too.

    It took me a while but I'm there. I can't wait for Craig's new movie and I'll be sad to see him go.
  • It's kind of sad that Brosnan wasn't given higher quality scripts during his tenure as he's a good Bond for sure. He's got the charisma and he had the look but scripts for TND, TWINE (to a lesser extent) and most especially DAD let him down.
    Casino Royale is brilliant and suited Craig just fine. Tbh I couldn't see Brosnan pulling off Bond in CR like Craig did. Craig has that masculine quality Brosnan lacks.
    I was on the fence with Craig up until Skyfall, like I think many others were. Skyfall is absolutely brilliant in that it's a film which reintroduced some of the more outlandish elements of previous films prior to Craig's era but also retaining the gritty tone that is now hallmarks of his film series. Brosnans films were aimless and didn't have any sort of arc whatsoever. Even Moore and Connery had sort of loose threads running through their films and the characters at least showed signs of growth over number of films but with Brosnan it's all a bit tired and on autopilot from TND onward.
  • BondStuBondStu Moonraker 6
    Posts: 89

    Yeah - that's a fair cop. Brosnan's era is one of missed opportunities. Goldeneye is his only true great Bond movie.

    Wouldn't it have been awesome if Teri Hatcher's character Paris Carver was Sylvia Trench?
    Writes itself doesn't it?

    Like all of them or not, the filmmakers have been pushing the boundaries of what a Bond film can be with Craig... just wish they could have shown the same kind of faith in Brosnan.

    Oh well.
  • Posts: 4,932
    I know how my Dad felt when Connery resigned the role.

  • The Craig era, I'm afraid, will always mean to me, a good run of quality movies with a miss-cast actor playing Bond. And I know I'm wrong in thinking that, because the public love him, so he's not miss-cast, only in my head.
    A lot has to do with visuals. It's how I see James Bond in my mind's eye - he looks nothing like Craig, so I can't get past the inconsistencies.
  • Posts: 640
    shamanimal wrote: »
    The Craig era, I'm afraid, will always mean to me, a good run of quality movies with a miss-cast actor playing Bond. And I know I'm wrong in thinking that, because the public love him, so he's not miss-cast, only in my head.
    A lot has to do with visuals. It's how I see James Bond in my mind's eye - he looks nothing like Craig, so I can't get past the inconsistencies.

    Interesting view. Which makes me wonder what your thoughts are on those who suggest Bond should be a woman or of a different nationality, especially in light of Brosnan just suggesting Bond should be a woman.
  • edited September 11 Posts: 3,256
    The Craig era, to me, means the best years of my life, which is very well damn fine because I had to wait a hell of a time for a Bond film to come out each and every time. So I'm glad lots has happened in my personal arena.

    I was a Connery fan first. Then, a Fleming's Bond fan. After that, I learned to love Roger and I couldn't help but like Lazenby - he did star in my favourite Bond film after all. I was a Dalton fan, a Brosnan fan, and when Craig took the role, I was in need of some awakening punch of sorts, a return to that macho brutal Bond Connery and the Bond from the novels encapsulated so well. And, despite hating the fact that he was blonde, I loved him in CR. I liked QOS a lot. I still wear my 2008 PO everyday, for the last 11 years. Adored SF, was disappointed with SP, and am very much awaiting with anticipation for NTTD.

    In the meantime, I've had my share of novels written and some to some success, and I've built another career with even more success. I also happily married a girl more beautiful than Domino Vitali. So, there ya have it, the Craig era, for me. Good years, with a good actor and quality films all around.

    Oh, and since I've been around Mi6, CBn and AJB007 since the beginning, heck, since 1999 maybe? (I have no ideia) I must say it's been a blast to follow the productions here with most of you guys and girls.

  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 2,359
    Bond should be a woman only if he's still named James. Otherwise it's a no from me. :))
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    edited September 11 Posts: 643
    I became a Bond fan when I was around 10 and Connery was (and is) my number one Bond actor. While I liked them all (I don‘t think anyone was miscast), there were Connery‘s first 4 movies plus „the others“. Nothing ever came close - even I enjoyed every Bond film.

    It took until 2006 when finally a Bond movie came out that matches those „magic 4“ Bond movies I described - Casino Royale. To me, Craig‘s first 3 are all „up there“ together with DN, FRWL, GF and TB. I can repeatedly watch them and never feel bored.

    It‘s just SP that for the most part I simply want to forget and most likely will never watch again. To me, it ain‘t even „good bad“ like MR is (to me). Some really great scenes and (besides Blofeld and Denbigh) really good characters ... good visuals ... but ruined by that fiasco of a script.

    So, the Craig era means a lot to me - it made me an even bigger Bond fan than I was and Craig‘s Bond reached me differently than Connery‘s but both are, to me, in their different ways „perfect“.

    With Craig most likely leaving after NTTD I think I won‘t be reached by Bond again this much like I was 2 times - once as a kid with Connery, once as an adult with Craig. Until I die I will go and see every new Bond movie but I am sure my all-time-favorite actors in the role will remain Connery and Craig.
  • BT3366 wrote: »
    shamanimal wrote: »
    Interesting view. Which makes me wonder what your thoughts are on those who suggest Bond should be a woman or of a different nationality, especially in light of Brosnan just suggesting Bond should be a woman.

    Bond can't be a woman, because he's a man. At the start of every Bond film it says 'as Ian Fleming's James Bond'. If they want to make movies with a female (or black) James Bond, then the movies will cease to ne about the character created by Ian Fleming.
    At least with the Craig era, they've honoured the Fleming character, I'll give them that. Particularly with the Casino Royale script, which was surprisingly close to the novel, given the 50 year time gap between writing and filming. And the end of Skyfall, with the parent's graves etc, all gave respect and reference to the literary Bond.
    If the series gets bought up by Disney, and they have a woman Bond, or a black Bond, then that may well put bums on seats, but not mine.

    As for Brosnan, I think no-one wants to be seen as politically incorrect on TV, so he'd have agreed to Bond being a Black Lesbian Giraffe I reckon.
  • As for the 'different nationality', which you asked about, again, Bond is English. He can be played by any white male of any nationality, as long as he's portrayed as an Englishman. As indeed he was by George and Tim.
    What people need to understand, is when you say "I don't want a woman Bond, and I don't want an American Bond, and I don't want a black Bond", it's not the same as saying "I don't want a black newsreader on the TV" or "I don't want to see a woman dentist". Playing a recognised classic literary character automatically carries a responsibility to pay homage to the author's creation. Especially in this case, where his masculinity and Englishness are pivotal to the character.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 2,359
    When I became a Bond fan Craig was the leading Bond, so Craig is the Bond of my age. His Bond means a lot to me since I kind of grew up with his movies; I was very young and naive when I first watched them and Bond movies made me become more self-aware and self-confident. Moreover, CR, QoS and SF all sit at #2, #4 and #5 in my ranking so yeah, I'm very passionate about them.
  • Eric_007Eric_007 Mobile
    Posts: 26
    @bondstuI Definetly can respect that. I loved Brosnans Era. The World is not Enough in my Eyes is a Classic. Everyone says that Peirce had Missed Opportunities but to me all of his films especially Golden Eye and The World is not Enough we're amazing. Craigs Gave me so much to relate to as a young man growing up experiencing first heartbreaks and feelings and to have a vunerble Hero made all the difference to me. In retrospect Peirce and Craig are my 1 and 2.
  • Posts: 4,135
    Hm. Im very confused... You were 13 in 2008, and now in 2019 you are 21?? May I borrow the youth serum you are using? ;)
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    edited September 13 Posts: 2,359
    jobo wrote: »
    Hm. Im very confused... You were 13 in 2008, and now in 2019 you are 21?? May I borrow the youth serum you are using? ;)

    Indeed; in 2008 he was older than me and now he's younger than me :))
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 616
    I think this era will always be a somewhat divisive one(not amongst critics, but the fanbase).

    I have never been Daniel Craig's biggest fan. What I will say though, is that he was the right Bond at the right time. The action/adventure films that captured the zeitgeist during his early era where the likes of Bourne and The Dark Knight Trilogy. Craig's Bond fits well in this company.

    I think tastes in general are trending towards lighter fare now, so Craig is probably leaving at the right time.
  • edited September 13 Posts: 4,135
    On a more serious note:

    I am a huge fan of Craig and his films. Like with you, he was the Bond I grew up with. However, in retrospect, I can't help feeling there was potential for more than what we got. Casino Royale was such an outstanding succes on so many levels. It rebooted and rejuvenated Bond in a way that created so much enthusiasm for what to come. Bond felt fresh again and had transitoned perfectly into the 21st century. Quantum of Solace was more flawed and less polished, but still a promising continuation, following in the same style.

    Then Skyfall came. And don't get me wrong, I love the film in itself. But in the context of Craig's era and character arc, it created problems. I have never cared much for continuation in Bond, and accepting that we have now suddenly gone from a rough and young rookie agent just starting out on his spy career, to an old and seasoned veteran is not a big issue in itself. The problem is that it created a sense of loss and unfulfilment. Because I really wanted to vitness that transformaion! Starting fresh with a young Bond gave so many interesting possibilities. I wanted to take part in young Craig's adventures, watch him get new experiences, see him mature like a fine wine. Instead we are just told that he is old and experienced now, and potentially interesting and fascinating chapters in the story of Craig's Bond are simply erased and discarded just like that. In the context of celebrating 50 years of Bond, Skyfall hit the bullseye. In the context of the new arc that was established, it should have been Craig's last film with many interesting stories inbetween.

    And the problem is that it is basically impossible to undo. You can't simply return back to square one. In some ways Spectre tried to do that. I am certainly not one of the films biggest detractors, but I think this is the film's biggest sin: Trying to tie Craig's films together in such a contrived, plainly unsuccesful way. It makes the era look even more confused and strengthens the sense of loss I previously have described.

    This post should not be interpreted overly dramatic though. I am not saying that Craig's Bond is ruined or anything. No Time To Die will have a huge say on how I will finaly come to rate his era, however. If Craig can finish on a high with another great film and strong performance, I will most likely deem his Bond an undisputed triumph and rank him up there with Connery as the quintessential Bond. If not, I will probably conclude his tenure was one of unfulfilment, the promised modern "Silver Age" of Bond we should have had but didn't get.
  • NicNacNicNac Moderator
    Posts: 6,688
    I can't answer this question until i see NTTD. Craig meant a hell of a lot to me up to and including SF.
    In SP he seemed to shift his stance a little, and as a result I didn't buy in to his performance.
    Will he be more CR or more SP when the new film hits the screens?
Sign In or Register to comment.