It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Actually, he's not. He can bypass all the fans and do the photo shoots only. On Broadway, many actors do not stop and just go straight to the limo. There's no obligation on his part to sign autographs. My guess is that he does so because he appreciates the fans and the masses. In general, as seen in the work he did for Orbis (watch that short documentary, if you haven't), DC is a good, kind-hearted person...and very funny. Sometimes his sense of humor is mistaken for rudeness.
I assume you didn't mean that bolded bit literally. :)
Of course actors can and do have private lives, no matter what roles they play. How protective they are of their privacy is mostly up to them. I mean that one doesn't need to invite any journalists or photographers to one's home, or release any private photos of weddings, children, etc., or talk about private life on late night talk shows or magazine interviews, and so on - some choose to, but it's their choice. Actors - even famous ones - can lead normal lives in a lot of privacy if they choose to. Even paparazzi leave them alone most of the time, ordinary life isn't exciting enough to earn much money from.
Of course there will be increased public interest with roles such as Bond, but that's mostly some paparazzi as well as ordinary people taking pictures in public places and releasing those pictures, and people asking for photos and autographs all over the place (including sometimes when they really should have some common sense not to). There are better ways to deal with those things than Craig's, yes, but oh well. In any case pics and autographs are just that, they don't mean one has no privacy left. It can obviously be somewhat irritating and intrusive at times, but still, not a major matter.
So true.
I suppose it's a personality issue, he's simply not able to deal with it better for whatever reason. It is what it is.
And I'm a fan as well.
I'm actually amazed by how patient and gracious some are with people asking for autographs or pics in front of hotels, at airports, on the street, etc. (= not promo situations, not work time), or how much they try to do it "at work" - not just the bare minimum (those situations where their colleagues either only give a few token autographs, or don't at all - and they sign and sign and sign). I wouldn't even ask for anybody's autograph or pic (I've never properly understood why people do), I'm just saying that as an interested observer.
I'm not sure how well I'd deal with it myself.
Yes there is an obligation to do it, and most major leads in plays who are professional do it. It is considered bad form not to do it. Which is exactly why he did it for Rain and for Betrayal and signs at the premiers. He hates this kind of stuff but these are controlled events with body guards and police at the busy stage doors, and press agents, body guards, police and other suits at the premiers to control the crowds. The press would trash him if he didn't sign at these venues. Again, I do think he is usually a decent guy, but he is not great at protecting his rep with the press and the public. Tom Hangs should give a graduate class to the Craigs in the business on how to behave like an A level star. It's not brain surgery.
If that is true and it very well could be, he feels, that now, never mind what he does, it will lead to nothing good, so he just acts the way he feels.
He can and want to sell a product but not himself.
"Self promotion is like going to the dentist" seems still true for him.
All in all I still think, there is a balance and its not, that he is the most hated guy arround. He is just not as liked as he could be had he chosen to show his sunny, likeable side more.
it would be interesting to know, how and if he would change those ways with the knowledge he has now, if he could go back to CR times and on from that.
But I meant in public.
I have never heard of this.
But he does selfies, its like with all the other obligations, he doesnt feel, he has. Sometumes he is up to.it, sometimes not. As stupid as it might sometimes appear to be, I admire his courage to be himself, all the time, never mind what.
With fans a lot depends on how you approach him, too. Do it respectful and ask and he might shake your hand instead of taking a pic, bit he will be friendly. Nothing wrong with that.
I sorta agree with you, BUT... why should he, or indeed anyone else, CARE about the stupid rags like DM and the rest of them. The tabloid "press" is so utterly despicable that I've never understood how they survive. I mean, where does the money come from? Who the hell wastes their money on them? As far as I can tell they do trashy stories year in, year out also about people who never give the finger to paps, never snap at fans and generally behave in a gentlemanly manner. If one has ever done anything one shouldn't have it will be re-hashed for ever and ever for all eternity. It makes absolutely no difference in the end. If Craig started behaving like an angel it would make no difference, they'd mock him, and bring out the old stuff. They're simply vile. They - and their readers - are best just ignored. What tabs do is trash people, that's why they exist, I guess. What people actually DO is irrelevant in the end, they'll get trashed all the same, sooner or later, one way or another. --- Bloody hell, this isn't good for my blood pressure, shouldn't even think about the British tabloids. Well, I guess I made my point... ;)
Ok, I can imagine that if I lived in the UK, I'd see the front pages occasionally, here and there, and that would undoubtedly be bad for blood pressure as well, so I guess I see your point from that perspective. Other than THAT they don't actually matter - do they?
(Throughout writing the above I was trying to think what was the last DM story I read and why I read it, and why did it piss me off so. Finally remembered... So that was why I felt like strangling people left and right while writing. :)) (No worries, nobody else in the room.) Not going into it, but boy can they do a story combining things that have nothing whatsoever to do with each other, and twist it all out of shape and make it look nasty, take an innocent little news item about a nice thing, and turn it ugly for no other reason than spite. WHY people keep them in business of doing that by paying for it, I'll never understand.)
Sound like something his Bond from GF or TB would do without breaking a sweat.
There IS no comparison. That's not a well mannered jerk vs. a badly mannered jerk. That is a person with sometimes questionable manners for somewhat understandable reasons (=doesn't make him a jerk) vs. an actual jerk acting despicably in ways, which cannot be defended at all.
(I admit I don't know much anything about Connery, really. My limited information is based mostly on what people write here - such as that comment, which nobody contradicted, and the likes of which I've seen before - and I think read one article somebody linked once.)
I started that conversation , and I did not criticise Craig. I was merely saying the off-screen Connery and Moore are extensions of the take on Bond. IMO, Craig is different off-screen than his Bond in the films. It was never a negative statement, as I do like the 'real life' Craig, I was merely stating that he does not act like his Bond off the screen.
It only proves the point that SC is more like Bond off screen than DC is.
My posts never drew any comparison between Craig and Connery's off screen conduct. Craig's "giving the finger" stuff to the paps or getting irritated with some fan taking a picture are silly stuff that I just wish he'd better control because they get into the press (and not just the rotten DM) and give a false impression of Craig's nature. This stuff in no way compares to Connery slapping women around, a fact Connery himself admitted to in a Barbara Walters interview many years ago. I think that interview was a major news story at the time and I bet he greatly regretted saying it.
I'm not suggesting you did @smitty. I personally do believe that Connery off screen projects more like Bond than Craig does. I've said it here and I stand by it.
RE: his slapping women about - it's something I've heard on here. Obviously it's wrong, but he is from a different era and I don't know the full context.
Bottom line, Bond has misogynist inclinations and it appears that Connery may as well. For me, it just goes to confirm that he is more like Bond than some of the other actors.
In fact, I personally think the reason that Connery/Moore had such fantastic runs as Bond, and the reason that they are so respected for their Bond performances, and the reason that many like one over the other, is because they represent/project different sides of James Bond: - Connery is more the machismo half and Moore is more the English/suave/polished side. Two sides of a coin, with the coin itself being the character of James Bond.
He is a product of his age, as we all are.
Does he though? I mean really? I don't see that. Fleming's Bond doesn't really seem misogynistic to me, and the female characters are often much better in books than in movies. The film Bond sometimes yes, sometimes no. Connery's slapping in real life as well as in films is not something I see as part of the character.
It makes no difference to his acting work as Bond or otherwise, that remains the same, of course. It sure impacts my opinion of the man, though, how the hell could it not? Being a product of whatever age is no excuse whatsoever for me as far as that issue is concerned. Donating money to good causes doesn't make it any more acceptable either.
I'm not much of a connoisseur or the books, but I have read Casino Royale many years ago. Some quotes:
"stupid bitch, why couldn't she just stay and home and cook dinner and let men get on with men's work. This will result in a shoot out and if she gets shot, so be it." when Vesper is kidnapped.
"the sweet tinge of rape" when contemplating sex with Vesper
"women are for sex only, on the job they get in the way with their emotional baggage" before meeting Vesper
As mentioned though, I'm not much of a reader of the books, and I realize book Bond seems to fall for a girl in many books and is more monogamist than film Bond, but the latter certainly is more misogynist imho.
True, it is not acceptable, but I am able to forgive this crudeness on his part, given the times he was brought up in when a lot of things that are wrong were considered more acceptable.
Didn't Connery actually beat up his wife pretty badly? And the stuff he says... Oh, never mind. No point. Thankfully the men of about the same generation and even older that I've known didn't/don't share his views, and I don't think violence towards women is that much of a generational thing, but depends more on the person.
Please let's get back to discussing any possible potential future James Bond actors.