katied wrote:Jude Law is definitely attractive..in a "who would you do?" situation ,given the choice of Craig or Jude Law, I'd take Jude.Every time.
Oh hell yeah. Without thinking twice and no doubt. Jude is attractive. He's not my type but I can see the charm and attractiveness at least. Craig? No thanks. (And I say this with the utmost respect to him, he's got nice eyes. He's just not my cup of tea, just like I'm sure I'm not his.)
Just seen a list for the top ten Hits of 2010, Listing Toy Story 3, Harry Potter, Ironman 2, Inception. all Great movies but strangely no Gritty reboots This Time. And absolutely Nothing with D Craig. Which I do find strange as I'm always reading what a Huge fan base he has with the Ladies.Pitty he can't turn that into Decent Box office.
When I hear people going on about the returns of CR and QoS it drives me absolutely insane. People DID NOT GO SEE CR FOR DANIEL CRAIG. THEY WENT BECAUSE IT WAS THE NEW BOND MOVIE.

Sorry for the all caps but this is just the sort of argument that drives me crazy. If an artichoke had been the protagonist, they would have gone to the movies to see CR just the same. Not to mention, had they had Cavill or someone much more fitting for the part than Craig, I think they would have had even bigger returns. And nobody can say that wouldn't have been the case. Nobody knew who Craig was, so the vast majority of those who did go to see CR went to see it because it was the new James Bond, it's as simple as that.
And as far as QoS A)lots were disappointed and B)most went under premise that it was going to be a more traditional Bond movie... which it wasn't at all. And again, they didn't go for Daniel Craig. They went because it was BOND and supposed to actually be more like it, not like CR. Too bad it wasn't.
His other movies are more than enough proof he isn't the one who draws in the cash.