›

Craig to be the longest serving Bond

1235789

Comments

  • shadowonthesunshadowonthesun Banned
    Posts: 1,894
    He'll do more films than Moore and he'll still be younger than Moore by the end of it.
  • timmertimmer
    edited December 2011 Posts: 4,622
    Actually, my guess is that Mendes is firmly in control of this show and that he wants to distance himself from the heavy QoS vibe and get back to the early 60's vibe including some GF style. Part of that would be to have Craig embrace the more self assured style of the young Connery, and I'm sure Craig is down with that as well. Surely he's done with angsty origins-Bond too.
    I think MGW is liking what he sees. Babs? Not sure what she's up to. Probably distracted trying to work the blue speedo into the story. :P
  • 002002
    Posts: 581
    Craig should do 2 more...4 films should be enough- then give the role to Fassbender who looks like Bond and doesnt need to put on a pair of Speedos to impress a producer
  • 001001
    Posts: 1,575
    It's hard to say how many bond films he'll make,but the producers like him a lot and he seems to like making them at the moment, but everything might change very quickly for some reason, like pierce brosnan after dad.
    Fassbender seems to be quite popular as a new bond so you never know.
  • forgotmyusernameforgotmyusername
    Posts: 2,782
    Germanlady wrote:
    I remember very well, that everybody was yearning for some seriousness after the **** that was DAD - so they were given that with CR and QOS. I feel, this was exactly right for the time. Now everybody starts to ask for more lightness again, which I think, is legal and normal and I have the feeling, they are being heard. SF will be more Bond then the two previous ones. DC and others have stretched that point so often now, that it would be pure silliness, if they wouldn't deliver exactly that. Bond with capital B...my two...

    %-(
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    edited December 2011 Posts: 7,571
    Samuel001 wrote:
    The mods are going to have a field day with this.

    In truth Sam, I really don't know where to start...but I would ask that everyone cool it. I have scanned through the content of the thread andit would be best if we all take a deep breath. Opinions will differ, at least agree on that.

    Or the thread.....will diiiie.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    of
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    If this is indeed true imagine how Pierce Brosnan must feel about this. He wanted to play the role as long as he could and EON dumped him as quickly as possible. And I honestly think had DAD not been the 40th anniversary (not the right time to establish a new actor) that EON might have even dropped him after TWINE. Brosnan said he wanted to do 6 films to equal Connery's run, possibly even more, and he didn't even come close. Craig is getting exactly what he wanted. At the same time we shouldn't feel too bad for him as he made over 35 million dollars in his years as Bond.

    Well he did do four. I suppose four isn't far from six.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    forgotmyusername wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    I remember very well, that everybody was yearning for some seriousness after the **** that was DAD - so they were given that with CR and QOS. I feel, this was exactly right for the time. Now everybody starts to ask for more lightness again, which I think, is legal and normal and I have the feeling, they are being heard. SF will be more Bond then the two previous ones. DC and others have stretched that point so often now, that it would be pure silliness, if they wouldn't deliver exactly that. Bond with capital B...my two...

    %-(

    Not listening as your icon suggests on an internet forum would mean, to NOT read it. Try that and thus stay true to your little note above...

    Daniel Craig lined up for five more Bond movies but is taking it one film at a time
    Just the answer, he is always giving, but indicating, that another one would be nice.
    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/showbiz/2011/12/19/daniel-craig-lined-up-for-five-more-bond-movies-but-is-taking-it-one-film-at-a-time-86908-23645545/
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited December 2011 Posts: 13,894
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    In Craig's defense, Crusie is 49 or 50 ish and still looks and plays Hunt's role great in Mission Impossible. I could see him staying.

    True, but Cruise does looks much younger than Craig. I've not seen MI4 (i'll wait for the DVD), but from what i've seen of Cruise lately, I think he could pack in a 5th MI film in 3-4 years time. Craig, I can't see him making 8 Bonds (unless they kept throwing money at him, Connery style or he stops ageing). Honestly, I can't see him making 6 Bonds. I guess it'll depend on how he ages over the next 2 years, and let's not forget how badly Moore aged between 1979 and 1981.
  • JamesPageJamesPage Administrator, Moderator, Director
    Posts: 1,380
    That Daily Record piece seems to be a Frankenstein with cobbled together quotes from lots of recent interviews.
  • forgotmyusernameforgotmyusername
    Posts: 2,782
    Germanlady wrote:
    forgotmyusername wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    I remember very well, that everybody was yearning for some seriousness after the **** that was DAD - so they were given that with CR and QOS. I feel, this was exactly right for the time. Now everybody starts to ask for more lightness again, which I think, is legal and normal and I have the feeling, they are being heard. SF will be more Bond then the two previous ones. DC and others have stretched that point so often now, that it would be pure silliness, if they wouldn't deliver exactly that. Bond with capital B...my two...

    %-(

    Not listening as your icon suggests on an internet forum would mean, to NOT read it. Try that and thus stay true to your little note above...

    Daniel Craig lined up for five more Bond movies but is taking it one film at a time
    Just the answer, he is always giving, but indicating, that another one would be nice.
    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/showbiz/2011/12/19/daniel-craig-lined-up-for-five-more-bond-movies-but-is-taking-it-one-film-at-a-time-86908-23645545/

    :-@
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    edited December 2011 Posts: 6,601
    002 wrote:
    Craig should do 2 more...4 films should be enough- then give the role to Fassbender who looks like Bond and doesnt need to put on a pair of Speedos to impress a producer

    I agree to 4/5, but he was hired on his rather lean Layer Cake body...so he didn't need them either. The bulking up was his own decision.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    Something tells me forgotmyusername isn't happy with the way things are going on this forum.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    MajorDSmythe wrote:
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    In Craig's defense, Crusie is 49 or 50 ish and still looks and plays Hunt's role great in Mission Impossible. I could see him staying.

    True, but Cruise does looks much younger than Craig. I've not seen MI4 (i'll wait for the DVD), but from what i've seen of Cruise lately, I think he could pack in a 5th MI film in 3-4 years time. Craig, I can't see him making 8 Bonds (unless they kept throwing money at him, Connery style or he stops ageing). Honestly, I can't see him making 6 Bonds. I guess it'll depend on how he ages over the next 2 years, and let's not forget how badly Moore aged between 1979 and 1981.

    DC has had a rough 2 years - personally and professionally and in his face, it always shows, whether he is living his "bad boy" habits or not. Good thing though - in those 6 years, since I became a fan, I have seen him looking rough today and up to "hunk standard" the next. So - at this point, with personal life all cleared up etc - everything is possible IMO. He could continue ageing or just pause, where he is now and even get better. He looked great in summer, but then, he has had some hair. That hair is a bit of a killer. Hope there is a good reason for it and theys allow it to grow...
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    Predictably, the NBC interview closed with host Matt Lauer asking about "Skyfall"...

    ML: "You're in the middle of shooting your third Bond. How's that going?"

    DC: "It's going good, yeah."

    ML: "How long do you have ahead of you?"

    DC: "We've shot six weeks, and we shoot 'til the end of May... I can't work that out. It's a long time."

    ML: "Staying true to the genre and what people expect?

    DC: "Oh yes, and more so. A little bit more this time."

    http://jamesbondauction.co.uk/news/2011/12/18/daniel-craig-talks-about-tattoo-and-skyfall-on-nbc-photos-video/

    the vid included in case, anybody is interested.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited December 2011 Posts: 15,691
    shadowonthesun wrote:
    He'll do more films than Moore and he'll still be younger than Moore by the end of it.

    But Craig looked older at age 38 in CR than Moore at age 47 in TMWTGG. So who knows how Craig will age... but he really looks old in some pics of SF filming...
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    DaltonCraig007 wrote:
    shadowonthesun wrote:
    He'll do more films than Moore and he'll still be younger than Moore by the end of it.

    But Craig looked older at age 38 in CR than Moore at age 47 in TMWTGG. So who knows how Craig will age... but he really looks old in some pics of SF filming...

    However that might be and however that might develop, I am sure, he isn't the person, who would overdo his welcome. So, I suppose, the fans are save and won't see him clinging to his role, if his time is up - for whatever reason. He'll step back gracefully...
  • Monsieur_AubergineMonsieur_Aubergine Top of the Eiffel Tower with a fly in my soup!
    Posts: 642
    http://news.sky.com/home/showbiz-news/article/16133183

    Sky News seem to be working on this idea too. Nice comment from MGW towards the end of the article too around the 'feel' of Skyfall. :-)
  • SecretAgentFanSecretAgentFan
    Posts: 2
    Craig is wonderful as Bond. If the dreadful MGM situation hadn´t occured we would already look forward to his fourth film. To have five more with him would definitely be interesting, creating a whole era that maybe could follow the character´s trajectory of the novels.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,571
    Craig didn't look older in CR than Moore in TMWTGG. Moore's youthful appearance was apparant for a while in the 70s, but it caughtup with him and in hindsight he did look like what he was - a man in his mid 40s.

    Craig is more rugged yes, but he still looks about his age, early 40s.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    BAIN123 wrote:
    of
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    If this is indeed true imagine how Pierce Brosnan must feel about this. He wanted to play the role as long as he could and EON dumped him as quickly as possible. And I honestly think had DAD not been the 40th anniversary (not the right time to establish a new actor) that EON might have even dropped him after TWINE. Brosnan said he wanted to do 6 films to equal Connery's run, possibly even more, and he didn't even come close. Craig is getting exactly what he wanted. At the same time we shouldn't feel too bad for him as he made over 35 million dollars in his years as Bond.

    Well he did do four. I suppose four isn't far from six.

    With the massive scope of these productions being what they are it seems to me that just 2 more movies is a big deal. When Brosnan was still being considered for Bond 21 it was announced that the earliest it would be released was November 2005. Assuming Bond 22 with Brosnan would be released in 2007, that would mean he was cut off by 5 years. That seems like alot to me. And I think that he really wanted or atleast expected to do even more than that. Possibly even break Moore's record. Brosnan stated in an interview on TV that with DAD he was "just getting the hang of it". Saying that after doing 4 films already told me he had no plans of going anywhere in the near future. But Im glad they dumped him for Craig. The Bond series is much more interesting without him.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited December 2011 Posts: 15,691
    I think Brosnan had 4 more films in him - 2005, 2007, 2009, 2012. He still looks so Bond today, so maybe a 5th one in 2014 could have been possible... We'll see how he ages in the upcoming years. So yes Brosnan could easily have done 8 or even 9 films... And I would have loved to see that.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    To me, it seems, nobody is save, as it is - in the end - all about money, but something tells me, that Babs (from the beginning) and now Micke have a soft spot for DC ( which is well deserved moneywise AND also a personal affair). But lets not fool ourselves here - at the moment, he is not delivering the goods anymore, he is history...and so it should be...as a fan, I believe they should pay respect to the franchise and the actor...
  • forgotmyusernameforgotmyusername
    Posts: 2,782
    Germanlady wrote:
    DaltonCraig007 wrote:
    shadowonthesun wrote:
    He'll do more films than Moore and he'll still be younger than Moore by the end of it.

    But Craig looked older at age 38 in CR than Moore at age 47 in TMWTGG. So who knows how Craig will age... but he really looks old in some pics of SF filming...

    However that might be and however that might develop, I am sure, he isn't the person, who would overdo his welcome. So, I suppose, the fans are save and won't see him clinging to his role, if his time is up - for whatever reason. He'll step back gracefully...


    True, your level of insight is so spot on it's frightening. I wish I could think on this strategic level.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    DaltonCraig007 wrote:
    I think Brosnan had 4 more films in him - 2005, 2007, 2009, 2012. He still looks so Bond today, so maybe a 5th one in 2014 could have been possible... We'll see how he ages in the upcoming years. So yes Brosnan could easily have done 8 or even 9 films... And I would have loved to see that.

    I saw him just yesterday in Bag of Bones and he is WAY past his point of Bondian glory. IMO he was beginning to look too old in DAD. A 5th film would have been pushing it. I think the mandatory retirement age of a Bond actor should be 50. With the exception of Roger Moore who must've discovered the fountain of youth as he still looked great at 51 for MR. But he must've lost it after FYEO as his age quickly caught up to him after that.
  • JWESTBROOKJWESTBROOK
    Posts: 5,745
    MajorDSmythe wrote:
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    In Craig's defense, Crusie is 49 or 50 ish and still looks and plays Hunt's role great in Mission Impossible. I could see him staying.

    True, but Cruise does looks much younger than Craig. I've not seen MI4 (i'll wait for the DVD), but from what i've seen of Cruise lately, I think he could pack in a 5th MI film in 3-4 years time. Craig, I can't see him making 8 Bonds (unless they kept throwing money at him, Connery style or he stops ageing). Honestly, I can't see him making 6 Bonds. I guess it'll depend on how he ages over the next 2 years, and let's not forget how badly Moore aged between 1979 and 1981.

    You really should go see it in the theater if you can spare. Its a very very hood theater expirience.
  • ColonelSunColonelSun
    Posts: 1,453
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    I saw him just yesterday in Bag of Bones and he is WAY past his point of Bondian glory. IMO he was beginning to look too old in DAD. A 5th film would have been pushing it. I think the mandatory retirement age of a Bond actor should be 50. With the exception of Roger Moore who must've discovered the fountain of youth as he still looked great at 51 for MR. But he must've lost it after FYEO as his age quickly caught up to him after that.

    Out of interest, was Bag of Bones any good?

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,569
    DaltonCraig007 wrote:
    shadowonthesun wrote:
    He'll do more films than Moore and he'll still be younger than Moore by the end of it.

    But Craig looked older at age 38 in CR than Moore at age 47 in TMWTGG. So who knows how Craig will age... but he really looks old in some pics of SF filming...

    Nowadays they fix it in post like it meant nothing. ;-)

    Which is actually a scary thought...
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    ColonelSun wrote:
    DoubleOhhSeven wrote:
    I saw him just yesterday in Bag of Bones and he is WAY past his point of Bondian glory. IMO he was beginning to look too old in DAD. A 5th film would have been pushing it. I think the mandatory retirement age of a Bond actor should be 50. With the exception of Roger Moore who must've discovered the fountain of youth as he still looked great at 51 for MR. But he must've lost it after FYEO as his age quickly caught up to him after that.

    Out of interest, was Bag of Bones any good?

    I didn't care for it. It just seems that Stephen King's material has lost it's stride. Brosnan wasn't bad though.
  • ColonelSunColonelSun
    Posts: 1,453
    Yes, I read the book way back and felt I've seen it all before.
Sign In or Register to comment.