Craig: stay or go? has SPECTRE changed any opinions?

1910111214

Comments

  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,882
    If Craig continues in the same vein as in Spectre, then i'd like to see him come back for one more. Beyond that, who knows.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited March 2016 Posts: 7,966
    -
  • TuxedoTuxedo Europe
    Posts: 251
    Bring on an actor for Bond 25 who is going to work as hard as Craig did for CR. Could be Craig himself, but I doubt that. In CR he was pushing very hard to find his take on the role. After the big success of SF he "was" Bond in SP but his hard acting was no longer "fresh". It was a bit habitually to me (can't find a better word).
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,368
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    50 is not old for Bond.

    If they begin filming with a new actor who starts at age 50, alongside the rate they manage to churn out Bond movies these days, then yes, it's too old for Bond. He'll get two, three movies max by the time he's 60.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,248
    compare pics of Hugh Jackman in the first X-MEN film and the last one. The proper diet/nutrition, exercise regime (and a small dose of HGH), will get Danny tight as a whistle for the next film. The skin on his face will also tighten. Otherwise his features have always been craggy... I think he looked better in this film than he did in SF... Providing his heart is in it, Dan's the Man and owns the tux.

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,966
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    50 is not old for Bond.

    If they begin filming with a new actor who starts at age 50, alongside the rate they manage to churn out Bond movies these days, then yes, it's too old for Bond. He'll get two, three movies max by the time he's 60.

    Did you know that Liam Neeson in the FIRST taken film wasn't much younger than Moore was AVTAK. Just goes to show.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,586
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    50 is not old for Bond.

    If they begin filming with a new actor who starts at age 50, alongside the rate they manage to churn out Bond movies these days, then yes, it's too old for Bond. He'll get two, three movies max by the time he's 60.
    Agreed. Though 50 works for Craig because his Bond is meant to age with the films.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,368
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    50 is not old for Bond.

    If they begin filming with a new actor who starts at age 50, alongside the rate they manage to churn out Bond movies these days, then yes, it's too old for Bond. He'll get two, three movies max by the time he's 60.

    Did you know that Liam Neeson in the FIRST taken film wasn't much younger than Moore was AVTAK. Just goes to show.

    Did you know that the FIRST 'Taken' film centers around an aged, retired agent, unlike Bond? I never said 50 is too old for action, I said it's too old for a Bond actor's very first film.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I think it will all depend on his general fitness level post-knee operation. Those things can be tricky to fully heal from, and I wouldn't want the next Bond film to have less than stellar action sequences on account of it. So hopefully he does in fact get back to tip top shape and form.
  • Posts: 1,964
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    50 is not old for Bond.

    If they begin filming with a new actor who starts at age 50, alongside the rate they manage to churn out Bond movies these days, then yes, it's too old for Bond. He'll get two, three movies max by the time he's 60.
    Of course a new actor should never start out as Bond past 45. I'm talking about Craig. 50 as Bond is not old for him. Age is only a number to me. As long as you can still make a great movie you can be 100 as Bond for all I care
  • Posts: 1,964
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    50 is not old for Bond.

    If they begin filming with a new actor who starts at age 50, alongside the rate they manage to churn out Bond movies these days, then yes, it's too old for Bond. He'll get two, three movies max by the time he's 60.
    Of course a new actor should never start out as Bond past 45. I'm talking about Craig. 50 as Bond is not old for him. Age is only a number to me. As long as you can still make a great movie you can be 100 as Bond for all I care
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,966
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    fjdinardo wrote: »
    50 is not old for Bond.

    If they begin filming with a new actor who starts at age 50, alongside the rate they manage to churn out Bond movies these days, then yes, it's too old for Bond. He'll get two, three movies max by the time he's 60.
    Of course a new actor should never start out as Bond past 45. I'm talking about Craig. 50 as Bond is not old for him. Age is only a number to me. As long as you can still make a great movie you can be 100 as Bond for all I care

    Yeah, I agree. It always helps to be on the right side of history in these matters. seems kinda obvious, tbh.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,248
    I'm honestly confused why anyone would want to get rid of Craig? I could understand if he looked slow and tired. But the man is vibrant and alive. As he ages (in this universe, he's no longer the rookie), it could build to some interesting dynamics.
    Craig is so much better than any suggestion made thus far. He just owns the role, and, to take a page out of Naomie's book, it's kind of disrespectful.
    Instead of calling for the head of the man who's entertained and wowed us, we should be calling for the heads of the writers who need to catch up to the pace that DC is moving at. Just my two cents.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,966
    peter wrote: »
    I'm honestly confused why anyone would want to get rid of Craig? I could understand if he looked slow and tired. But the man is vibrant and alive. As he ages (in this universe, he's no longer the rookie), it could build to some interesting dynamics.
    Craig is so much better than any suggestion made thus far. He just owns the role, and, to take a page out of Naomie's book, it's kind of disrespectful.
    Instead of calling for the head of the man who's entertained and wowed us, we should be calling for the heads of the writers who need to catch up to the pace that DC is moving at. Just my two cents.

    Exactly right. Well put. =D>
  • Posts: 158
    As DC would say "Hire me or fire me. It's entirely up to you"
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,248
    peter wrote: »
    I'm honestly confused why anyone would want to get rid of Craig? I could understand if he looked slow and tired. But the man is vibrant and alive. As he ages (in this universe, he's no longer the rookie), it could build to some interesting dynamics.
    Craig is so much better than any suggestion made thus far. He just owns the role, and, to take a page out of Naomie's book, it's kind of disrespectful.
    Instead of calling for the head of the man who's entertained and wowed us, we should be calling for the heads of the writers who need to catch up to the pace that DC is moving at. Just my two cents.

    Exactly right. Well put. =D>

    Cheers to you too Mendes. We must respect the actor who, whether the script is up to par or not, continues to give us a 007 who always delivers (that's a talented actor who rises above the drivel he was fed)...
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,248
    peter wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I'm honestly confused why anyone would want to get rid of Craig? I could understand if he looked slow and tired. But the man is vibrant and alive. As he ages (in this universe, he's no longer the rookie), it could build to some interesting dynamics.
    Craig is so much better than any suggestion made thus far. He just owns the role, and, to take a page out of Naomie's book, it's kind of disrespectful.
    Instead of calling for the head of the man who's entertained and wowed us, we should be calling for the heads of the writers who need to catch up to the pace that DC is moving at. Just my two cents.

    Exactly right. Well put. =D>

    Cheers to you too Mendes. We must respect the actor who, whether the script is up to par or not, continues to give us a 007 who always delivers (that's a talented actor who rises above the drivel he was fed)...

    ... but saying that, although I know this film has issues, it also had so many wonderful qualities as shown in our favourite quotes discussion.

    There is much to love in this film (and, yes, it will grow over time as a damn fine piece of entertainment, headlined by an old-school, charismatic leading man-- a man's man that the men admire and the ladies go, yah, that's a man I'd be with...)
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    peter wrote: »
    I'm honestly confused why anyone would want to get rid of Craig? I could understand if he looked slow and tired. But the man is vibrant and alive. As he ages (in this universe, he's no longer the rookie), it could build to some interesting dynamics.
    Craig is so much better than any suggestion made thus far. He just owns the role, and, to take a page out of Naomie's book, it's kind of disrespectful.
    Instead of calling for the head of the man who's entertained and wowed us, we should be calling for the heads of the writers who need to catch up to the pace that DC is moving at. Just my two cents.

    But it's kind of his own fault. When he himself is casting doubt and a lack of clarity about his return it's only natural people will start going on about who the next Bond should be. Also, Craig's a smart guy and he knows how the media can be, afterall, the abuse he experienced first hand when he was cast should reinforce how he interacts with them; WE know what his wrist-slitting comment meant and how it was intended and I suspect many of the media did too but the words were too good to pass up to not use it as a means to over sensationalise Craig possibly being done with the role.

    Anyway, I really hope he comes back for a 5th at least and I'm pretty sure he will. Unfortunately we just have to wait.
  • Posts: 1
    I found the trouble with Spectre was this ridiculous notion to arc across Daniel Craig's outings. Now that they literally tied them together, it would be refreshing to actually have Craig do a stand alone Bond film. Furthermore I really hope they never do that again or sequels for that matter.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,966
    I love the ending of SPECTRE. No heavy drama s%@t, just good old fashioned Bond. I imagine Madeline could walk straight for weeks after they got to their getaway. Dan and lea probably messed around on set. You can't fake chemistry like that, folks! =P~
  • Posts: 1,680
    Craig had way better chemistry with Lea than Eva Green IMO.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,966
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Craig had way better chemistry with Lea than Eva Green IMO.

    ABS O F Uc Ki N g LuTeLY
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,248
    the question of the thread is:
    Craig: stay or go.

    Having just watched SPECTRE again, no matter what you think of the film, this man in the tux absolutely should stay. He's too commanding in the role. Even with a knee injury, the guy is full of energy, charm, sarcasm, yet can turn the cold on (again, no matter what you think of the scene where Madeline breaks off the relationship with Bond, it's played beautifully. And when DC gets in the car with M, he's as cold as an air conditioner on the hottest day of summer).

    I would hate to be BB and MGW. DC is too good in this role. As I stated in another thread (or maybe this one), take whatever actor you have in mind to replace Craig, then imagine specific scenes of Craig Bond vs the Actor. For example:

    Craig vs Actor fighting atop a moving train, seducing Monica Bellucci, in a gambling sequence, in a face-off against M... and so on...

    Can this Actor come out on top of most of these scenarios vs Craig?...
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    peter wrote: »
    the question of the thread is:
    Craig: stay or go.

    Having just watched SPECTRE again, no matter what you think of the film, this man in the tux absolutely should stay. He's too commanding in the role. Even with a knee injury, the guy is full of energy, charm, sarcasm, yet can turn the cold on (again, no matter what you think of the scene where Madeline breaks off the relationship with Bond, it's played beautifully. And when DC gets in the car with M, he's as cold as an air conditioner on the hottest day of summer).

    I would hate to be BB and MGW. DC is too good in this role. As I stated in another thread (or maybe this one), take whatever actor you have in mind to replace Craig, then imagine specific scenes of Craig Bond vs the Actor. For example:

    Craig vs Actor fighting atop a moving train, seducing Monica Bellucci, in a gambling sequence, in a face-off against M... and so on...

    Can this Actor come out on top of most of these scenarios vs Craig?...

    Love this!

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,966
    I want Aidan Turner to be the next Bond, but only after Daniel no longer wants to be Bond. Until then, Dan is the man! :D
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited March 2016 Posts: 9,020
    Here is a nice video with Aidan Turner from Being Human

    <iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/tqXd8gODKMs"; frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited March 2016 Posts: 4,043
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Craig had way better chemistry with Lea than Eva Green IMO.

    ABS O F Uc Ki N g LuTeLY

    While think the chemistry between Craig and Lea was fine the problem was the script, an actress of her ability did what she could with such an under written role a bit like Almaric in QOS though I think he was more memorable despite the criticism's levelled at his villain, she certainy doesn't get anything as great as that Medrano moment where Greene reveals he's been conned, Mathieu utterly shines here.

    I don't see how she could have had better chemistry than Green had with Craig though, I understand you might prefer it but to say way better I just don't see it.

    Eva's Vesper still remains the Bond girl to beat in this era and I've no doubt she'll go down as it's Tracy in fans minds long after SPECTRE has been released.

    The acting isn't the problem with the film it's the material they were given, Waltz comes across as going through the motions to me but I think that is more to do with he just has some of the dullest dialogue to spout considering who actually is revealed to be playing.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 7,966
    Shardlake wrote: »
    Tuck91 wrote: »
    Craig had way better chemistry with Lea than Eva Green IMO.

    ABS O F Uc Ki N g LuTeLY

    While think the chemistry between Craig and Lea was fine the problem was the script, an actress of her ability did what she could with such an under written role a bit like Almaric in QOS though I think he was more memorable despite the criticism's levelled at his villain, she certainy doesn't get anything as great as that Medrano moment where Greene reveals he's been conned, Mathieu utterly shines here.

    I don't see how she could have had better chemistry than Green had with Craig though, I understand you might prefer it but to say way better I just don't see it.

    Eva's Vesper still remains the Bond girl to beat in this era and I've no doubt she'll go down as it's Tracy in fans minds long after SPECTRE has been released.

    The acting isn't the problem with the film it's the material they were given, Waltz comes across as going through the motions to me but I think that is more to do with he just has some of the dullest dialogue to spout considering who actually is revealed to be playing.

    Vesper is one of those aspects of CR that is overrated. the fact that she is the yard stick used to measure all subsequent Bond Girls against is ridiculous. Both Camille and Madeline are better Bond girls than Vesper. That's my opinion.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    @Mendes4Lyfe

    I also think Seydoux and Craig had perfect chemistry.

    Eva Green more or less outplayed Craig in CR and very much so. One of the reasons I doubted Craig's ability to be a 100% Bond back then.
    Green stole every scene.

    As for Vesper, she was a special Bond girl, like Tracy. In that regard I can't really compare her (and Tracy) to other Bond girls.

    But I did like Vesper very much, not for the written character but for the actress Eva Green who is simply puts CR on a higher level.
  • edited March 2016 Posts: 11,189
    I may like Swann even more than Vesper too, but as a couple the winner is Craig/Green - no question.

    To be honest I think Lea ends up doing most of the work in her scenes with Craig during SP. The train scene right before the fight is a good example. She's the one I'm smiling at and feeling engaged with. In the equivalent scene with CR, the two actors were on a far more even keel. Craig seems a bit like he's going through the motions sometimes. He's better in the earlier scene with Lucia.
Sign In or Register to comment.