›

The James Bond Debate Thread - 336 Craig looks positively younger in SP than he does in SF.

1…184185186187188190»

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    On 2nd watch, I think he looks younger than in SF in most of the film (particularly at L'American as mentioned before) but he also looks notably older in some parts, especially in M's office & during his chat with 'C'.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,506
    I think he is aging well, and is certainly in great shape!
  • Perilagu_KhanPerilagu_Khan
    Posts: 2,483
    doubleoego wrote: »
    jetsetwilly wrote: »
    SP was definitely Craig's best look for Bond, and SF was definitely his worst.

    I agree.

    SF he just looked like an escaped POW. In SP he was in cool and in-control alpha mode; looking unflappable and meticulously put together.

    Given that he had just come back from "death" he should have looked ragged and careworn. But after Moneypenny's shave he looked tickedyboo and better than he ever looked in SP.

  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Craig to me looks fuller in the face in SP. He may not look as near as unkept as he did in SF but he looks older to me.

    I'm the same age so it's not a bad thing lol.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    I surely watched SF lots of times, but in a way, it wasn't all pleasure, as he did look rather gaunt and exhausted throughout with few exceptions. With Sp its all different. He looks much better, younger and fitter.
  • mepal1mepal1
    Posts: 1,098
    I agree with the people who say Craig had a better haircut in SP than SF.

    It was far to short, with a tuffty bit in the middle, it made him look like a mohican, and definitely older.

    I wonder if this was DC's personal choice at the time, or whether it was a suggested look for the film?
  • TuuliaTuulia
    Posts: 2,081
    mepal1 wrote: »
    I agree with the people who say Craig had a better haircut in SP than SF.

    It was far to short, with a tuffty bit in the middle, it made him look like a mohican, and definitely older.

    I wonder if this was DC's personal choice at the time, or whether it was a suggested look for the film?

    In the end those are the same thing, really. Whoever came up with the idea for that hairstyle, or if it was the result of several people's ideas put together, it surely had to be something that Craig was okay with (considering his huge influence on the character anyway), EON was okay with (obviously), and that was deemed to fit the Bond of that particular movie. So whoever suggested it - Craig, hairstylist, or anyone else, is sort of irrelevant. Whoever did... well, it's not a good look for him, but I got used to it...

    Actors can contribute a lot of stuff to their characters, also stuff concerning their looks, hair obviously included. They don't necessarily negotiate with directors or producers beforehand, they may do what they do first, and then just show the results (the same thing with improvising while acting), and the directors/producers either happily go along with it, or have some reservations but eventually come around to it, or use their prerogative to just go "hell no" (can't think of specific examples of the last one right now, but surely it happens, too). No doubt actors can have more say in their character's look in some roles than in others. With Bond it would surely be fairly limited. But with any role, in the end, the actor's look has to be accepted by director/producers. So even if Craig just decided to have a haircut like that, it ending up in the movie or not surely wasn't really his choice.

  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    edited November 2015 Posts: 6,432
    Good question, there was one scene when sat in cinema it occurred to me, that he looked as young as he did in CR.
    It was the scene that led to him asking the mouse Who do you work for
    :))
  • timmertimmer
    edited November 2015 Posts: 4,622
    lalala2004 wrote: »
    I wouldn't say younger, but better. His skin looked better, although that could be make up, and if clothes do make the man, that didn't hurt, either.
    Right. He just looked real good, not so much younger. He moved real well too.
    An exemplary turn as 007 I thought.Yes aand he had a great haircut too. Very well groomed in SP.
  • Perilagu_KhanPerilagu_Khan
    Posts: 2,483
    What? Seriously? You liked SP, timmer? I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you!
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 7,973
    Tuulia wrote: »
    mepal1 wrote: »
    I agree with the people who say Craig had a better haircut in SP than SF.

    It was far to short, with a tuffty bit in the middle, it made him look like a mohican, and definitely older.

    I wonder if this was DC's personal choice at the time, or whether it was a suggested look for the film?

    In the end those are the same thing, really. Whoever came up with the idea for that hairstyle, or if it was the result of several people's ideas put together, it surely had to be something that Craig was okay with (considering his huge influence on the character anyway), EON was okay with (obviously), and that was deemed to fit the Bond of that particular movie. So whoever suggested it - Craig, hairstylist, or anyone else, is sort of irrelevant. Whoever did... well, it's not a good look for him, but I got used to it...

    Actors can contribute a lot of stuff to their characters, also stuff concerning their looks, hair obviously included. They don't necessarily negotiate with directors or producers beforehand, they may do what they do first, and then just show the results (the same thing with improvising while acting), and the directors/producers either happily go along with it, or have some reservations but eventually come around to it, or use their prerogative to just go "hell no" (can't think of specific examples of the last one right now, but surely it happens, too). No doubt actors can have more say in their character's look in some roles than in others. With Bond it would surely be fairly limited. But with any role, in the end, the actor's look has to be accepted by director/producers. So even if Craig just decided to have a haircut like that, it ending up in the movie or not surely wasn't really his choice.

    One that got really close for the 'no' version has become one of the most famous movie characters of recent times: Johnny Depp's Captain Jack Sparrow. Disney wasn't at ll pleased, but in the end went along with it.

  • TuuliaTuulia
    edited November 2015 Posts: 2,081
    CommanderRoss wrote: »
    Tuulia wrote: »
    mepal1 wrote: »
    I agree with the people who say Craig had a better haircut in SP than SF.

    It was far to short, with a tuffty bit in the middle, it made him look like a mohican, and definitely older.

    I wonder if this was DC's personal choice at the time, or whether it was a suggested look for the film?

    In the end those are the same thing, really. Whoever came up with the idea for that hairstyle, or if it was the result of several people's ideas put together, it surely had to be something that Craig was okay with (considering his huge influence on the character anyway), EON was okay with (obviously), and that was deemed to fit the Bond of that particular movie. So whoever suggested it - Craig, hairstylist, or anyone else, is sort of irrelevant. Whoever did... well, it's not a good look for him, but I got used to it...

    Actors can contribute a lot of stuff to their characters, also stuff concerning their looks, hair obviously included. They don't necessarily negotiate with directors or producers beforehand, they may do what they do first, and then just show the results (the same thing with improvising while acting), and the directors/producers either happily go along with it, or have some reservations but eventually come around to it, or use their prerogative to just go "hell no" (can't think of specific examples of the last one right now, but surely it happens, too). No doubt actors can have more say in their character's look in some roles than in others. With Bond it would surely be fairly limited. But with any role, in the end, the actor's look has to be accepted by director/producers. So even if Craig just decided to have a haircut like that, it ending up in the movie or not surely wasn't really his choice.

    One that got really close for the 'no' version has become one of the most famous movie characters of recent times: Johnny Depp's Captain Jack Sparrow. Disney wasn't at ll pleased, but in the end went along with it.

    Oh? That's interesting. The look was his creation? I didn't know that. Also didn't know Disney wasn't happy with it. I wonder what their problem with it was. Thanks for that example. I could think examples for the other two categories, good to have one for the third one, too. :)

    In general the studios and producers should let the actors and directors do their job and not interfere in everything. It's completely ridiculous, for instance, that they try and demand actors to look prettier than is suitable for the role (especially women)... the assumption presumably being that audiences only wish to see pretty people.

Sign In or Register to comment.