Producer says Daniel Craig's tenure may end when it peaks

1568101116

Comments

  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    edited August 2012 Posts: 4,012
    doubleoego wrote:
    See, one can be good looking and lack being sexy whilst also one can be lacking in the superficial, traditionally accepted as being good looking but still be regarded as sexy.

    Being sexy is also like having swag. It's an attitude and how one carries themselves.

    Exactly! But I still think he is very good looking. But it's not obvious, regular, bland beauty. He's beautiful in an unusual and almost disturbing way. That adding to the way he moves, talks, smiles, etc make him incredibly sexy.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Grinderman wrote:


    Just to echo Sandy's comment. For what it's worth, every woman I know lusts after Craig. Every one. Including my wife, sadly. And it was that way before Bond. So maybe us guys aren't the best judge of what man is "good looking" or not.


    My girlfriend thinks he's the ugliest Bond. She reiterated it when we watched CR the other night. Her words were something like 'He's just not good looking'. My mother shares the same opinion. For the record my girlfriend happens to be gorgeous (totally punching above my weight) so I wouldn't consider this a spiteful comment on her part. I understand there is a certain type of woman that goes for this look but I would argue he has nowhere near the appeal Connery had.

  • VeryBond wrote:
    VeryBond wrote:
    And I must admit I get a kick out of those clinging to the ideal image set down by the CNB all these years later ;)

    C'mon, Henry. It wasn't set down by CNB, it was set down by the FIRST 20 FILMS. From 1962 to 2002. And again, I don't have to tell you that.

    You're right, you don't have to tell me that. I was willing to be a charter member of that crew if you remember. Until I realized that I had stereotyped what Bond should look like just like they did, instead of judging the man on his portrayal. If someone doesn't like how he does the role, that's fine by me, that's fair. But judging him by his face and body, that's something a woman is better qualified to speak on than you, I, or any other guy on this board. They love the guy. Who am I to argue? The franchise is making money and I like the Craig era thus far. I'd rather judge Bond girls than resort to stereotyping, thank you very much.

    Well, respectfully sir, I couldn't disagree more. People judged Brosnan for being too thin or not having enough muscle, so what's the difference? Physical qualifications play a part in EVERY iconic film role. Would you be okay with an obese Indiana Jones? How about a disabled actor or the world's shortest man playing Bond? Still think it shouldn't matter? Of course not. It's ridiculous to think these things are not relevant. DC's fans are just desperately in denial about his fugliness. Some women like him, yes, but would they if he was a plumber? I don't think so. I think the fact that he's Bond makes him appealing - that, and I guess his confidence level. Only the opposite sex can comment on someone's looks? That's the same homophobic stereotype I'm talking about. Bond's ladykiller looks are a large part of his persona.

    And who said anything about Bond girls? We judge them too, of course. And we "stereotype" what a Bond girl should look like...

    I can't follow your logic.

    Famke Jansen was kind of ugly to me, actually. Halle Berry, though woeful in her part, was hot as hell. Sophie Marceau was the sexiest and best of recent years, IMO.

    I'm not turning in my straight-guy card by noticing DC has a plantain for a nose.

    PS> I don't like the grim way he plays the role either.

    That's the only thing you've said, aside from your correct assessment of Sophie (I like Famke too and she could give me a squeeze anytime she likes) that I can at least understand. Most of your post is irrelevant gibberish to me and you've got me wrong for the most part. For one, my statement was not written as a homophobe, I'm being a realist about this topic. While certainly not the way I'm wired, I won't tell someone to be unhappy and untrue to their wiring because it conflicts with my view, nor fear or insult them either because they are different. Two, I had a feeling you might bring up some nonsense regarding physical appearance that is obviously never going to happen in casting Bond. You can think what you like about Craig's hair color and plantain nose but it reeks of nitpicking when the majority outside of the CNB crew, of which you certainly appear to qualify for a leadership role in, appear to see your view as the minority. Craig puts female asses in theater seats as well as renting or purchasing his Bond films and I don't see that as homophobic in pointing out that is the only point regarding his appearance that matters to EON or moviegoers in general. Certainly how you or I may see it is irrelevant in that regard. Craig's Bond is attractive as far as women seem to generally view him so arguing against box office and popular reality is a non issue for me because everything I've noted is a positive and ensures that for the time being that the series in successful and making money. Craig is doing a fine job as far as I am concerned for a guy who's played a version of Bond that cannot be fairly compared to the others that came before. He's done what many including myself see as a classic in CR and may be involved in another come November given the all star cast and crew.

    And yet again despite your protests to the contrary, I fear your hypercritical view will forever interfere with your view towards Skyfall or any other Craig film, and that your mind has been made up by a trailer rather than seeing how his normal Bond turns out.

  • Posts: 165
    doubleoego wrote:
    See, one can be good looking and lack being sexy whilst also one can be lacking in the superficial, traditionally accepted as being good looking but still be regarded as sexy.

    Being sexy is also like having swag. It's an attitude and how one carries themselves.


    Exactly. It was this realization that turned the corner for me in my single days. Mild success with women before that, plenty of.......um, success, after. Which directly lead to me finding eternal happiness with my now-wife. :-) The problem most guys have is they confuse "swag" or "confidence" with obnoxiousness and ego.

    My, are we way off topic now or what?
  • Posts: 1,492
    VeryBond wrote:
    I'm sure they find him very sexy...in a fugly, rough trade, ex-boxer kind of way. Still doesn't make him the majority's vision of sophisticated suave James Bond.

    You know criticise a Bond actor for his films, his acting ability, his presence, his eyebrow acting, his pain face, his mumbling..

    but his looks crosses the line

    Awful thing to say...
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited August 2012 Posts: 11,139
    but I would argue he has nowhere near the appeal Connery had.

    To be fair, no other Bond actor has.

  • edited August 2012 Posts: 306
    doubleoego wrote:
    VeryBond wrote:
    Grinderman wrote:
    Sandy wrote:
    This discussion is going out of control again. But I have to add that Daniel Craig would continue being an extraordinarily sexy man even if he was a plummer, a miner, an accountant, etc and that's not just my opinion. It's not the suit that makes the man, it's the man that makes the suit. He was sexy before Bond and will continue to be so after he leaves the role.


    Just to echo Sandy's comment. For what it's worth, every woman I know lusts after Craig. Every one. Including my wife, sadly. And it was that way before Bond. So maybe us guys aren't the best judge of what man is "good looking" or not.


    Well that's certainly scientific evidence.

    And she thought PB was too "pretty", right? "Not her type"? Yeah...

    And BS on "before" Bond - most women in the world had no idea who DC was before he was cast as Bond.

    I'm sure they find him very sexy...in a fugly, rough trade, ex-boxer kind of way. Still doesn't make him the majority's vision of sophisticated suave James Bond.

    I find it interesting abd somewhat telling that you persistently can't help yourself from using the word fugly to describe Craig. Do you want to be Bond or do you want to shag him? I'm a little confused but I guess we wouldn't want that now, would we.

    There you go again. You're really hung up on that gay thing, aren't you? What's that about? Projecting maybe?

    And I call him fugly because when you look up "fugly" in the dictionary, there's a picture... That and I have eyes. It's a modern melding of the F word and ugly, just to bring home the point. And it fits.

    Sorry if that upsets you.



  • actonsteve wrote:
    VeryBond wrote:
    I'm sure they find him very sexy...in a fugly, rough trade, ex-boxer kind of way. Still doesn't make him the majority's vision of sophisticated suave James Bond.

    You know criticise a Bond actor for his films, his acting ability, his presence, his eyebrow acting, his pain face, his mumbling..

    but his looks crosses the line

    Awful thing to say...

    Agreed 100% with you Steve. It's only truly important if looks affect the box office. It hasn't, just the opposite has happened if anything, hence it isn't that big of a deal all things considered as far as how the Craig era has gone. Just VB trying to justify why he doesn't like Craig, nothing more, nothing less, just predictable. I think of my input as trying to enlighten him a little, and quite frankly enjoy winding him up from time to time.

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Seeing Dan trapse around in his tux in CR shows how refined and suave he can be. His moments at the table and off are very cool, calm, and collected.
  • Posts: 306
    actonsteve wrote:
    VeryBond wrote:
    I'm sure they find him very sexy...in a fugly, rough trade, ex-boxer kind of way. Still doesn't make him the majority's vision of sophisticated suave James Bond.

    You know criticise a Bond actor for his films, his acting ability, his presence, his eyebrow acting, his pain face, his mumbling..

    but his looks crosses the line

    Awful thing to say...

    Eyebrow acting? Who is that aimed at? PB maybe? And you never criticized him during his tenure for being too effete or too slight or whatever? When an actor plays a part, everything about he or she is on the table because they are the instrument of their art. And anyway, I did criticize his acting ability and presence. But I see that as going hand and hand with his scowling stone face.
  • edited August 2012 Posts: 3,494
    Seeing Dan trapse around in his tux in CR shows how refined and suave he can be. His moments at the table and off are very cool, calm, and collected.

    Indeed. Do you feel he never changes expressions? Somehow I must have missed his smiling at Vesper, the torture scene, flirting with Solange and the OC receptionist, he must have done it all so fast that some of us missed it ;). Yep, time to get rid of old stone face. Oh wait, nevermind, that was George. Wrong Bond, my bad.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    VeryBond wrote:
    There you go again. You're really hung up on that gay thing, aren't you? What's that about? Projecting maybe?

    And I call him fugly because when you look up "fugly" in the dictionary, there's a picture... That and I have eyes. It's a modern melding of the F word and ugly, just to bring home the point. And it fits.

    Sorry if that upsets you.

    I'm not projecting, contrary to what you may think and I'm not upset. Although, you seem more upset and I dare say furiously butt-hurt over Craig being Bond, expressed by your rather harsh assessment of the man's looks.




  • Posts: 306
    RC7 wrote:
    Grinderman wrote:


    Just to echo Sandy's comment. For what it's worth, every woman I know lusts after Craig. Every one. Including my wife, sadly. And it was that way before Bond. So maybe us guys aren't the best judge of what man is "good looking" or not.


    My girlfriend thinks he's the ugliest Bond. She reiterated it when we watched CR the other night. Her words were something like 'He's just not good looking'. My mother shares the same opinion. For the record my girlfriend happens to be gorgeous (totally punching above my weight) so I wouldn't consider this a spiteful comment on her part. I understand there is a certain type of woman that goes for this look but I would argue he has nowhere near the appeal Connery had.

    Thank you, RC7. I was beginning to think I had switched over to an alternate universe where black was white and up was down. Most women I know feel the same, but that's not even the point - he just doesn't look like James Bond to me. Period.

  • VB, I will do you a favor and submit your application for the international presidency of the "Craig Not Bond" union.

    Kindest regards and all the best in your campaign,

    Sir Henry ;)
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Seeing Dan trapse around in his tux in CR shows how refined and suave he can be. His moments at the table and off are very cool, calm, and collected.

    The way Craig walked through the casino in CR was with such swagger and that little smirk on his face as he approached the metal detectors was just absolutely cool on the most Bondian way.
  • Posts: 306
    doubleoego wrote:
    VeryBond wrote:
    There you go again. You're really hung up on that gay thing, aren't you? What's that about? Projecting maybe?

    And I call him fugly because when you look up "fugly" in the dictionary, there's a picture... That and I have eyes. It's a modern melding of the F word and ugly, just to bring home the point. And it fits.

    Sorry if that upsets you.

    I'm not projecting, contrary to what you may think and I'm not upset. Although, you seem more upset and I dare say furiously butt-hurt over Craig being Bond, expressed by your rather harsh assessment of the man's looks.

    LOL. Butt-hurt. Dude, you can't help yourself...

    You can't debate it without attacking the messenger.

    You're right. I don't like his looks. I don't like his low-class attitude. I don't like his inability to act anything other than morose comatose "tough guy" - which is the antithesis of Bond to me and exactly why I didn't become a fan of other action heroes. I think he is a one-note, highly limited actor who cannot loosen up enough to enjoy being the hero of a popcorn franchise. Instead, in a pretentious bid for some kind of "depth" and "weight", he just wants to wallow in darkness and pain.

    There. Am I being clear enough?
  • Posts: 306
    doubleoego wrote:
    Seeing Dan trapse around in his tux in CR shows how refined and suave he can be. His moments at the table and off are very cool, calm, and collected.

    The way Craig walked through the casino in CR was with such swagger and that little smirk on his face as he approached the metal detectors was just absolutely cool on the most Bondian way.

    Nope. Because there was no real enjoyment. No cool, relaxed ease.

    He never seems to stop gritting his teeth.

  • Posts: 306
    VB, I will do you a favor and submit your application for the international presidency of the "Craig Not Bond" union.

    Kindest regards and all the best in your campaign,

    Sir Henry ;)

    Well, Henry - I'm a BOND FAN. Not a Daniel Craig fan. I don't hate the guy, I wish him well in life and hope he can find something (Rachel Weisz maybe?) that will make him actually smile. But right now he's playing my hero and I have to take Bond wherever I can get it. I have no choice. I hope the movie's better than I expect, I hope he manages to surprise me. Like with a line-reading that sounds a tiny bit different from the line he said just before that. One lives in hope.

    But I will in fact celebrate the day another actor takes over the role and gets back to playing the "real" Bond that I have been a fan of for 40+ years.

  • Posts: 1,453
    VeryBond wrote:

    Thank you, RC7. I was beginning to think I had switched over to an alternate universe where black was white and up was down. Most women I know feel the same, but that's not even the point - he just doesn't look like James Bond to me. Period.

    [/quote]

    U mean u have such a fixed idea of how Bond should "look" that you simply will not or cannot be open to a fresh perspective on the "classic" Bond look? Is that what u mean?

    Craig's Bond is, for me, completely compelling. He exudes danger and innate confidence, but also brilliantly reveals the (deep) flaws in Bond's armour. I believe in his flesh and blood Bond, and as such, he's by far the best Bond since Connery. No question about it IMO.

  • edited August 2012 Posts: 12,837
    This thread is hilarious to read because there's so many arguments and random comments going on.

    "Craig is fugly!"

    "No he isn't"

    "Yes he is"

    "You're gay"

    "I'm not"

    "You're butthurt"

    "He looks suave in CR"

    "My GF likes him"

    And to think all this started because MGW said that even though Brosnan was popular it was time for a change. Craig wasn't even actually mentioned.

    Oh yeah, and for the record my finance likes Craig but she thinks Brosnan was hotter. And Craig isn't the best since Connery, because that would mean nobody topped Connery. And lets not forget Timothy Dalton was Bond.
  • tqbtqb
    Posts: 1,022
    where are the mods
  • edited August 2012 Posts: 306
    ColonelSun wrote:
    U mean u have such a fixed idea of how Bond should "look" that you simply will not or cannot be open to a fresh perspective on the "classic" Bond look? Is that what u mean?

    Craig's Bond is, for me, completely compelling. He exudes danger and innate confidence, but also brilliantly reveals the (deep) flaws in Bond's armour. I believe in his flesh and blood Bond, and as such, he's by far the best Bond since Connery. No question about it IMO.

    And I respect your opinion, CS.

    We just have different views of the character, I guess.

    As I said, it's the look combined with the attitude. I don't want a flawed, tormented - or worst of all, according to Mendes, "bored" - 007. I want Bond to be so cool and at ease with his abilities that he doesn't have to constantly be grim and tough. I want Bond to ENJOY his life of danger, booze and sex. And I want him to be the best.

  • Posts: 306
    tqb wrote:
    where are the mods

    What's going on here that's out of bounds?

  • edited August 2012 Posts: 12,837
    VeryBond wrote:
    tqb wrote:
    where are the mods

    What's going on here that's out of bounds?

    It's all off topic and there's a bunch of arguments. It's funny to read but mods don't like it when a thread veers too far off topic.
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    edited August 2012 Posts: 4,012
    tqb wrote:
    where are the mods

    Probably laughing and betting how deep can this post dig :D

    P.S.: just joking
  • tqbtqb
    Posts: 1,022
    ^ :)
  • Posts: 165
    VeryBond wrote:
    ColonelSun wrote:
    U mean u have such a fixed idea of how Bond should "look" that you simply will not or cannot be open to a fresh perspective on the "classic" Bond look? Is that what u mean?

    Craig's Bond is, for me, completely compelling. He exudes danger and innate confidence, but also brilliantly reveals the (deep) flaws in Bond's armour. I believe in his flesh and blood Bond, and as such, he's by far the best Bond since Connery. No question about it IMO.

    And I respect your opinion, CS.

    We just have different views of the character, I guess.

    As I said, it's the look combined with the attitude. I don't want a flawed, tormented - or worst of all, according to Mendes, "bored" - 007. I want Bond to be so cool and at ease with his abilities that he doesn't have to constantly be grim and tough. I want Bond to ENJOY his life of danger, booze and sex. And I want him to be the best.


    But isn't the problem with that is that you can also take that attitude too far? I mean, a Bond that is too cool, too at ease and too much 'the best', is pretty boring. If we as audience members don't feel that Bond is ever in any real peril, then we don't get invested in the story or the character of Bond. And the way we see that Bond is indeed in real peril, is how the actor portrays him.

    So there's a balance to be struck there, between the cool, competent, unflappable Bond, and a Bond that knows, and feels, the danger he is in.
  • " People judged Brosnan for being too thin or not having enough muscle, so what's the difference?".

    Ahhh, but I wouldn't be one of them. I don't think his lack of physical presence was a major problem and I never judged his tenure on that. I appreciate Craig much more because he's trying to establish his own version and not trying to be a caricature of previous Bonds, in particular Roger Moore, which is pretty much what we got in the Brosnan era. I certainly couldn't understand where he was trying to differentiate himself. Pierce admits he struggled with where to go with the character that would make him stand out from the others. It's an open book. But if you'd prefer a caricature, well...

    You still haven't addressed your erroneous and half baked claim that Craig never changes his facial expressions. I gave you quite a few examples to refute that theory, as have others. I guess it doesn't happen often enough for you. Maybe it's you who needs the oculist ;)

    Can't wait to hear your thoughts on enjoying danger, booze, and sex come November. Looked like he was at least enjoying the latter two in Turkey. Maybe he'll even smile some more for you :D
  • edited August 2012 Posts: 12,837
    If Brosnan is Roger Moore light like lots of people say, by that logic, Craig is Dalton light. Since he was a serious Bond first like Moore was a light hearted one first. OR, since people are saying Craig is so close to Connery, he's Connery light.

    I think both took past Bond traits (Brosnan had Connery's charm and Moore's jokes, Craig had Daltons darkness and Lazenbys fighting skills), and mixed them up to make their own Bond.

    And I don't get how every single actor can make it completely his own without any past Bond traits, there are only so many versions of a character you can do.
  • Posts: 306
    Grinderman wrote:
    VeryBond wrote:
    ColonelSun wrote:
    U mean u have such a fixed idea of how Bond should "look" that you simply will not or cannot be open to a fresh perspective on the "classic" Bond look? Is that what u mean?

    Craig's Bond is, for me, completely compelling. He exudes danger and innate confidence, but also brilliantly reveals the (deep) flaws in Bond's armour. I believe in his flesh and blood Bond, and as such, he's by far the best Bond since Connery. No question about it IMO.

    And I respect your opinion, CS.

    We just have different views of the character, I guess.

    As I said, it's the look combined with the attitude. I don't want a flawed, tormented - or worst of all, according to Mendes, "bored" - 007. I want Bond to be so cool and at ease with his abilities that he doesn't have to constantly be grim and tough. I want Bond to ENJOY his life of danger, booze and sex. And I want him to be the best.


    But isn't the problem with that is that you can also take that attitude too far? I mean, a Bond that is too cool, too at ease and too much 'the best', is pretty boring. If we as audience members don't feel that Bond is ever in any real peril, then we don't get invested in the story or the character of Bond. And the way we see that Bond is indeed in real peril, is how the actor portrays him.

    So there's a balance to be struck there, between the cool, competent, unflappable Bond, and a Bond that knows, and feels, the danger he is in.

    This is the best post in the whole thread.

    You make a solid point.

    I understand what you're saying, but I felt we got that balance with Brosnan. He was very human, I thought, and put into real peril - but he had that inherent coolness and wit. The scripts were never as good as he deserved, but that wasn't his fault. I don't mind a more physical or younger Bond, but Craig is just way too grim for me. He was actually much more Bondian in QOS, I thought. So I was hoping he would keep on that slight (very slight) trajectory in the right direction. However, the clips so far do not make me feel better. Just the psych test alone...

    But hey - I've seen about 1/1000th of the film.

Sign In or Register to comment.