The DANIEL CRAIG Appreciation thread - Discuss His Life, His Career, His Bond Films

19192949697169

Comments

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I think the buzzcut does age him, and he hasn't aged brilliantly any way, but at this point it doesn't really matter. He's only doing one more, he's still good looking, he doesn't look ancient, he'll get himself in shape as he always does, and at this point Bond is actually meant to be an older seasoned agent. So I think he'll be fine. It's not a Roger Moore situation because they actually acknowledge his age now, so he's allowed to look it.

    I don't really think we can sensibly compare this to Roger in AVTAK, who seriously looked ready for the retirement home in his last film, wrinkles as deep as canyons. I think Dan looked amazing in SP, and I don't think he'll have any issues going into Bond 25 either. He's older, sure, but the man is going to be in his 50s by the time the next film starts shooting. His completely youthful days are obviously over, but I think he looks damn good for his age and is aging pretty naturally all things considered. He's always had that rough, crag, cruel look, but it's that look that adds so much to his take on Bond.
  • I think the buzzcut does age him, and he hasn't aged brilliantly any way, but at this point it doesn't really matter. He's only doing one more, he's still good looking, he doesn't look ancient, he'll get himself in shape as he always does, and at this point Bond is actually meant to be an older seasoned agent. So I think he'll be fine. It's not a Roger Moore situation because they actually acknowledge his age now, so he's allowed to look it.

    I don't really think we can sensibly compare this to Roger in AVTAK, who seriously looked ready for the retirement home in his last film, wrinkles as deep as canyons. I think Dan looked amazing in SP, and I don't think he'll have any issues going into Bond 25 either. He's older, sure, but the man is going to be in his 50s by the time the next film starts shooting. His completely youthful days are obviously over, but I think he looks damn good for his age and is aging pretty naturally all things considered. He's always had that rough, crag, cruel look, but it's that look that adds so much to his take on Bond.

    Well obviously he doesn't look as old as Moore did by the end, but my point in comparing them was that it wouldn't matter if he did, because Bond's age is actually acknowledged now. They've made a point of showing that he's getting on a bit. I don't think he's aged badly, I just don't think he's aged brilliantly. He looks his age. Which is fine because the movies actually acknowledge that, so it doesn't make a difference either way. Nothing wrong with a 50 year old man looking 50 as long as they don't pretend he's a lot younger imo, and so far they haven't done that which is a good thing. They acknowledged it in SF, and in SP it wasn't directly acknowledged but there weren't any proper daredevil/athletic stunts and he had Bond girls that fit his age (Seydoux looked a lot younger but I think like the "I love you" that can be explained by Madeline having daddy issues).
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I think the buzzcut does age him, and he hasn't aged brilliantly any way, but at this point it doesn't really matter. He's only doing one more, he's still good looking, he doesn't look ancient, he'll get himself in shape as he always does, and at this point Bond is actually meant to be an older seasoned agent. So I think he'll be fine. It's not a Roger Moore situation because they actually acknowledge his age now, so he's allowed to look it.

    I don't really think we can sensibly compare this to Roger in AVTAK, who seriously looked ready for the retirement home in his last film, wrinkles as deep as canyons. I think Dan looked amazing in SP, and I don't think he'll have any issues going into Bond 25 either. He's older, sure, but the man is going to be in his 50s by the time the next film starts shooting. His completely youthful days are obviously over, but I think he looks damn good for his age and is aging pretty naturally all things considered. He's always had that rough, crag, cruel look, but it's that look that adds so much to his take on Bond.

    Well obviously he doesn't look as old as Moore did by the end, but my point in comparing them was that it wouldn't matter if he did, because Bond's age is actually acknowledged now. They've made a point of showing that he's getting on a bit. I don't think he's aged badly, I just don't think he's aged brilliantly. He looks his age. Which is fine because the movies actually acknowledge that, so it doesn't make a difference either way. Nothing wrong with a 50 year old man looking 50 as long as they don't pretend he's a lot younger imo, and so far they haven't done that which is a good thing. They acknowledged it in SF, and in SP it wasn't directly acknowledged but there weren't any proper daredevil/athletic stunts and he had Bond girls that fit his age (Seydoux looked a lot younger but I think like the "I love you" that can be explained by Madeline having daddy issues).

    I think Dan's Bond has always been older in the tooth than most as a 00, and that fits with his backstory. Most of his life career-wise appears to have been in the service of the navy, which he kept well into his late 30s. But something happened at one point that made him seek out employment with the 00s, but it's hard to tell if he did this by choice or force. I think he may've been shuffled out or possibly kicked out for being reckless and bold to do what was right on a mission (which fits his character) and as punishment he was shuttled off to MI6. That would explain why he seems to dislike the feel of the job at the start, and why he mocked the life expectancy of it, like he'd heart horror stories and knew what he was up for. That's just my head canon though and what I perceive. In a way I like that we never get a solid answer, as mystery is important.

    Long way of saying that this Bond was going to be the best one to build a timeline with, because there was already growth we could sense and an arc to the character. The other Bonds seem to have been 00s for most of their careers, same with Fleming's Bond who had a pre-war history with the agency and went on to be an exclusive agent for years and years, whereas being a 00 is relatively new for Craig's Bond and comes late in his career. We can only imagine what his naval history was like, how long he'd served (had to be at least ten to fifteen years maybe) and why he ended up becoming a 00 at such a later date in his late 30s.

    With the timeline taken into account and the passage of at least 4 to 6 years allowed between QoS and SF, we've got a pretty solid idea of the man's life and how he's developed, which does back up how he's matured physically and mentally. I don't think the films have ever treated him as younger, or hid away from the fact that this was going to be a more developed version of the character than what we're accustomed to, not only in how he's characterized over time, but in how his relationship with the 00 section is different. From jump Dan and EON were pretty vocal that they wanted to do something different, somewhat stripped back and serious with the character, and I think the output shows that.
  • I think with how 00s have gradually changed from secret service officers/civil servants to assassins/black ops agents, the whole Commander Bond Navy backstory doesn't really fit anymore. Worked in the novels because of the whole WW2 background but nowadays Royal Marines then SBS seems more likely to me, and none of the Bond actors besides Moore and to a lesser extent Connery really strike me as the officer type anyway. Craig's Bond seems more of a squaddie imo and while it was nice seeing him in uniform I can't really picture Brosnan's Bond in the military at all. Dalton I could buy as a Navy commander but it's hard to picture because his Bond is so jaded when we first meet him.

    I don't think it's likely that he was sent to MI6 as some sort of punishment as it's a completely different service. But then I also can't picture him quitting the military and applying online with the uni graduates. I think he was probably SAS or SBS with him being picked from there to work as a deniable agent of some sort, the best of which get promoted to being a 00. It is interesting to think about. I wouldn't mind if Bond 25 delved into his military background a bit more, show how he came to be recruited. Weird how they've delved into his childhood so much with the Young Bond books and then SF and SP, but that part of his life has been left more or less untouched.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I think with how 00s have gradually changed from secret service officers/civil servants to assassins/black ops agents, the whole Commander Bond Navy backstory doesn't really fit anymore. Worked in the novels because of the whole WW2 background but nowadays Royal Marines then SBS seems more likely to me, and none of the Bond actors besides Moore and to a lesser extent Connery really strike me as the officer type anyway. Craig's Bond seems more of a squaddie imo and while it was nice seeing him in uniform I can't really picture Brosnan's Bond in the military at all. Dalton I could buy as a Navy commander but it's hard to picture because his Bond is so jaded when we first meet him.

    I don't think it's likely that he was sent to MI6 as some sort of punishment as it's a completely different service. But then I also can't picture him quitting the military and applying online with the uni graduates. I think he was probably SAS or SBS with him being picked from there to work as a deniable agent of some sort, the best of which get promoted to being a 00. It is interesting to think about. I wouldn't mind if Bond 25 delved into his military background a bit more, show how he came to be recruited. Weird how they've delved into his childhood so much with the Young Bond books and then SF and SP, but that part of his life has been left more or less untouched.

    It's funny that I view the 00 job as a negative position, simply because it's written/portrayed to be this punishing thing. I just doesn't feel like the place the best go, as you could quickly lose the best at any time; the hazard of the job is just insanely high, and you'd think it'd be seen as something to avoid. When Bond gets it he doesn't feel interested or excited, but very cynical, like it wasn't his choice and that he wasn't happy about it. One could even see his breaking into M's apartment as him actively trying to get fired, as he didn't care either way. I dunno.

    I think it'd be nice to get more details about how this Bond ended up where he is, though nothing major is really needed for me. I would love to see Dan in uniform though, simply because I love the image of it. One of the coolest moments in the franchise is seeing Moore's Bond going to his briefing in full uniform with danger in the air; it's just so cool to see Bond in that mode, wearing his "stripes" so to speak.

    Fleming only gave whispers of Bond's past, and the account of a mission here or there, and those were usually after he'd become a 00 and not to do with what he did before that. But even in SF and SP what we learn of Bond is from Fleming on the whole, outside of the Blofeld addition. The only difference being that Fleming tells us about Bond's origins in Scotland, his parent's deaths and his orphaning, whereas Mendes just went a little extra and showed us exactly where Bond grew up; instead of being told by Fleming, we're shown by the film. SP continued the trend by having Oberhauser as a mentor to a young orphan Bond, but again gave more context and character to it than Fleming did.

    If the threat in Bond 25 is ripe, the story could indeed justify showing Bond in uniform if he's arriving for a very serious briefing or traveling somewhere militaristic (a base or headquarters) where planning for a threat is going on while working as an MI6 liaison. If SPECTRE are throwing everything at the world in the plot, it could be the perfect way to show Bond in uniform and bring him into contact with the military world he left, as the threat of the rising organization is too much for just MI6 to handle.
  • I agree he views it negatively but I think that's part of the tragedy of it. Nobody is forcing him to do what he does, and he hates it, but he does it anyway. Partly out of patriotism and a genuine desire to defend his country but mostly because what else would he do? And because deep down he really lives for the excitement of it all. So I think he definitely views his job negatively but he's still there of his own accord, not something he has to do to avoid a dishonourable discharge or something.
  • Posts: 1,162
    Well, as far as I recall Flemings bond loved his job. To him there was nothing else that gave him that excitement and edge he so desperately missed in normal life.
  • edited October 2017 Posts: 12,837
    Well, as far as I recall Flemings bond loved his job. To him there was nothing else that gave him that excitement and edge he so desperately missed in normal life.

    He did and he didn't. He knew he could never settle for a normal life because he'd miss the excitement, but still came across as quite jaded and conflicted a lot of the time and he really hated having to kill people. GF is the best example I can think of with the little subplot of him "going soft".

    I think there's a bit of that in Craig. He knows he's expendable and doesn't enjoy having to kill people, hence the snarky comments to M in CR and his navel gazing after he kills Obanno. But he carries on anyway out of patriotism and out of knowing that he couldn't walk away from it even if he tried (like in SF, he can't stay away from the action). In SP they finally seemed to resolve this conflict he's had going on by giving him the perfect way out (Madeline, a woman who's lived in his world all her life and also wants to escape) so it'll be interesting to see how he comes back from that imo.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I agree he views it negatively but I think that's part of the tragedy of it. Nobody is forcing him to do what he does, and he hates it, but he does it anyway. Partly out of patriotism and a genuine desire to defend his country but mostly because what else would he do? And because deep down he really lives for the excitement of it all. So I think he definitely views his job negatively but he's still there of his own accord, not something he has to do to avoid a dishonourable discharge or something.

    I'd say he's definitely hot and cold on it. But the thrill/adrenaline must be a factor, as well as the duty of it. As he says in SP, he didn't really have a choice in life. Perhaps he's resigned himself to it.
    Well, as far as I recall Flemings bond loved his job. To him there was nothing else that gave him that excitement and edge he so desperately missed in normal life.

    @noSolaceleft, I think Fleming's Bond was pretty hot and cold as well on the job. In the first book he discusses with Vesper the horrors of the job in very unpleasant details, and of how he hates being glorified as some hero just for killing some men with brutal means. So already we see a part of him that resents some of the job and what he's expected to do to complete his missions. As the novel goes on we eventually find him so mentally warped by his experiences that he's ready to give it up, as he is very disillusioned with it all and where he stands on a moral line.

    In Moonraker there's a great moment where Bond is hearing about his fellow agents in the field, one who disappeared under dark circumstances and another who is being sent back shaken and stirred. In this moment I think Bond realizes what he knew not long before during Casino, that the job wasn't pleasant and really put you in a position to ruin yourself in the name of patriotism. We can tell he has sympathy for the agent recovering from whatever horrors he faced, as that was him just months prior in France where he was so broken following Le Chiffre's torture that he wanted a way out; his creation of a villain in SMERSH was the only chance for him to repress his feelings and go on. After Bond hears these accounts from Ponsonby, he states quite ominously that he didn't want to have too many hard jobs again, another sign that he doesn't enjoy the feelings the work can give him and what he's put through.

    So in the early books there's definitely a part of Bond that despises aspects of the job, especially their effect on his mind and body. By the time Diamonds comes around Bond seems willing to spend much of his time with Tiffany in place of the job, again showing that maybe it's not everything to him anymore, if it ever was. The only major sign I think we get that Bond needs some of the job is in From Russia with Love, where he can't handle the "soft life" and is willing to face danger just to stop being torpid and bored. This is the hot part of the hot and cold situation, where, despite knowing the parts of the job that make him want to avoid rough missions, he will sometimes crave anything of the sort just to escape a banal existence. This relationship he has with the work goes on to Dr. No as well, where, after his brush with death via Klebb, he is furious with how M is coddling him and giving him a "holiday" job, feeling he can do more. When the job turns out to in some ways be his most brutal yet (for the sheer brutality of the torture course at the end) Bond wishes M was there to share his pain and see how foolish he was to put him on it. This negative view of M and the work is signaled even in the short stories, as in The Living Daylights where Bond famous admits to not caring if M fires him or not.

    So, while I don't think it's fair to say Bond hates the job or wants out, I definitely think there's a balance there where depending on his mood and experiences, he will either dislike it or need it. Usually, after he's faced brutality or the minds of evil men, he'll be disillusioned and crave an escape (CR/LALD/MR) but at other times (FRWL/DN) the job is what he needs because life is too boring without it. It's actually quite tragic, as Bond knows the dangers he puts himself through and hates it, but in the same breath also needs it to function. I see some of this in Craig's Bond at times, where he's hot and cold about the job for the same reasons, out of disillusionment and questioning if he can live without it or not. But as with Fleming's Bond, he's always drawn back to it, no matter the pain he faces.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    Well, as far as I recall Flemings bond loved his job. To him there was nothing else that gave him that excitement and edge he so desperately missed in normal life.

    He did and he didn't. He knew he could never settle for a normal life because he'd miss the excitement, but still came across as quite jaded and conflicted a lot of the time and he really hated having to kill people. GF is the best example I can think of with the little subplot of him "going soft".

    I think there's a bit of that in Craig. He knows he's expendable and doesn't enjoy having to kill people, hence the snarky comments to M in CR and his navel gazing after he kills Obanno. But he carries on anyway out of patriotism and out of knowing that he couldn't walk away from it even if he tried (like in SF, he can't stay away from the action). In SP they finally seemed to resolve this conflict he's had going on by giving him the perfect way out (Madeline, a woman who's lived in his world all her life and also wants to escape) so it'll be interesting to see how he comes back from that imo.

    In YOLT he's in a shed with terror running through him. Fleming's Bond also showed cagey and nervous characteristics in the MWTGG novel. He was a bag of all sorts.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Well, as far as I recall Flemings bond loved his job. To him there was nothing else that gave him that excitement and edge he so desperately missed in normal life.

    He did and he didn't. He knew he could never settle for a normal life because he'd miss the excitement, but still came across as quite jaded and conflicted a lot of the time and he really hated having to kill people. GF is the best example I can think of with the little subplot of him "going soft".

    I think there's a bit of that in Craig. He knows he's expendable and doesn't enjoy having to kill people, hence the snarky comments to M in CR and his navel gazing after he kills Obanno. But he carries on anyway out of patriotism and out of knowing that he couldn't walk away from it even if he tried (like in SF, he can't stay away from the action). In SP they finally seemed to resolve this conflict he's had going on by giving him the perfect way out (Madeline, a woman who's lived in his world all her life and also wants to escape) so it'll be interesting to see how he comes back from that imo.

    In YOLT he's in a shed with terror running through him. Fleming's Bond also showed cagey and nervous characteristics in the MWTGG novel. He was a bag of all sorts.

    Definitely a bag of all sorts.

    And thanks for including the GF example, @thelivingroyale; meant to include it but didn't want to write more of a novel.
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    @thelivingroyale and @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 excellent character analysis of Bond, well done both of you.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,496
    'Kings' will screen at the 35th Torino Film Festival from 24 Nov - 2 Dec, 2017.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,554
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    'Kings' will screen at the 35th Torino Film Festival from 24 Nov - 2 Dec, 2017.

    I wonder if it will be re-edited. It received horrible reviews at Toronto.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Kicking: Impossible
    Posts: 6,733
    I feel the Craig era is like a train or something. It passed Casino Royale station, and I shouted at the driver to stop right there, but he didn't listen and continued onto the Quantum of Solace, Skyfall and Spectre stations. And I couldn't get off.

    What I mean is they hit upon something very special with Casino Royale but then drifted away from it. The other stations were nice to look at in their own way, but couldn't compare with Royale Station.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    mattjoes wrote: »
    I feel the Craig era is like a train or something. It passed Casino Royale station, and I shouted at the driver to stop right there, but he didn't listen and continued onto the Quantum of Solace, Skyfall and Spectre stations. And I couldn't get off.

    What I mean is they hit upon something very special with Casino Royale but then drifted away from it. The other stations were nice to look at in their own way, but couldn't compare with Royale Station.

    The preceding twenty stations leading to Royale Station often can't compare with said station either, so I'm a happy passenger. With few exceptions, like the Russia or Her Majesty's Stations, I think we'll be blessed if we ever get another Bond film as perfect as Casino. Dan peaked right out of the gate, but that's still a peak not many before him had reached to such a height or ever.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,474
    Finally saw Logan Lucky. It was enjoyable, but damn was it slow and prodding at times. However, Craig was excellent in it, was refreshing seeing him so elevated and lively in a role.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Another one I will wait for Sky Cinema to put on early next year.
  • edited November 2017 Posts: 44
    Craig is a better bond than Brosnan no doubt even though i grew up on Brosnan and still loved broz, that being said most of daniel craig movies when he has a major/leading role are failures. outside of bond he's not a powerful presence and isn't that big of a movie star to do well like a cruise or pitt.

    for crying out loud even brosnan has a better off-bond filmography!
  • Posts: 12,270


    Forgive me if this was posted somewhere in this thread, but this is an absolutely awesome tribute video to Craig and his era as Bond.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,570
    I do like a good compilation vid.

    More than any other actor Craig's tenure very much has the feel of us dropping in at odd points in his career, due to the longer time span between films.
    Whereas it felt like we followed Connery and Moore through all of their adventures, with Craig it feels like there are several missing missions.
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    Posts: 1,984
    NicNac wrote: »
    I do like a good compilation vid.

    More than any other actor Craig's tenure very much has the feel of us dropping in at odd points in his career, due to the longer time span between films.
    Whereas it felt like we followed Connery and Moore through all of their adventures, with Craig it feels like there are several missing missions.

    Agreed.
  • Posts: 12,270
    Room for a prequel if they decide to go that route (probably a good idea honestly). Despite its flaws, I really enjoy the Craig era; it's only second to the Connery/Lazenby era of the 60s IMO.
  • FoxRox wrote: »


    Forgive me if this was posted somewhere in this thread, but this is an absolutely awesome tribute video to Craig and his era as Bond.

    Really excellent. And what a pity they couldn't conserve his looks and style from QoS.
  • FoxRox wrote: »
    Room for a prequel if they decide to go that route (probably a good idea honestly). Despite its flaws, I really enjoy the Craig era; it's only second to the Connery/Lazenby era of the 60s IMO.

    The way Craig has aged from QoS to SP would make that an embarrassing feat.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Room for a prequel if they decide to go that route (probably a good idea honestly). Despite its flaws, I really enjoy the Craig era; it's only second to the Connery/Lazenby era of the 60s IMO.

    The way Craig has aged from QoS to SP would make that an embarrassing feat.
    Indeed, a prequel is out of the question on those grounds alone. They will be much better off advancing the timeline forward.

    That's a very good video. One can see that there was far more action in the earlier two entries, which is what I hope to see a return to for with the next one.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,554
    bondjames wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Room for a prequel if they decide to go that route (probably a good idea honestly). Despite its flaws, I really enjoy the Craig era; it's only second to the Connery/Lazenby era of the 60s IMO.

    The way Craig has aged from QoS to SP would make that an embarrassing feat.
    Indeed, a prequel is out of the question on those grounds alone. They will be much better off advancing the timeline forward.

    That's a very good video. One can see that there was far more action in the earlier two entries, which is what I hope to see a return to for with the next one.


    These days, DC doesn't even have to be in the movie. They can use a digital replica...from, say, his Tomb Raider days. LOL

    That said...a prequel wouldn't have to have Craig in the lead role. Furthermore, would it count as Bond 26? Would EON ever go the route of Star Wars: Solstice: A James Bond Story. ????? errrr
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    TripAces wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Room for a prequel if they decide to go that route (probably a good idea honestly). Despite its flaws, I really enjoy the Craig era; it's only second to the Connery/Lazenby era of the 60s IMO.

    The way Craig has aged from QoS to SP would make that an embarrassing feat.
    Indeed, a prequel is out of the question on those grounds alone. They will be much better off advancing the timeline forward.

    That's a very good video. One can see that there was far more action in the earlier two entries, which is what I hope to see a return to for with the next one.


    These days, DC doesn't even have to be in the movie. They can use a digital replica...from, say, his Tomb Raider days. LOL

    That said...a prequel wouldn't have to have Craig in the lead role. Furthermore, would it count as Bond 26? Would EON ever go the route of Star Wars: Solstice: A James Bond Story. ????? errrr
    Arguably the entire DC reboot era shows they can go there. I wouldn't be surprised if we get another origin story down the road (not with B26) eventually.
  • Posts: 12,270
    I fail to see how Craig doing a prequel would look any more ridiculous than Roger Moore in OP and AVTAK.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    CR was the prequel. What are we on about?
Sign In or Register to comment.