New producers don't have Bond choosing skill

[Red Grant]

I think the core problem is that Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson simply don't have the skills of picking a Bond actor like the original producers, Cubby Broccoli and Harry Saltzman, since Craig was the first actor picked solely on their decision.

Brosnan was the last to be chosen by Cubby, first picked in 1986 but still dedicated to Remington Steele at the time. Finally he's chosen, then Mr. Broccoli consults on GoldenEye before his death, his daughter Barbara truly takes over the James Bond series along with Wilson. Cubby Broccoli along with Harry Saltzman knew how to pick the Bonds never failing in any of them, even if the movies were of questionable quality, the actors were right. Now i'm afraid the new producers simply don't have that eye and have no idea what they're doing in picking Craig.

[stockslivevan]

I can tell you that a lot of people would disagree with you when it comes to Craig cast as Bond.

[Kristatos]

I think the core problem is that Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson simply don't have the skills of picking a Bond actor like the original producers, Cubby Broccoli and Harry Saltzman, since Craig was the first actor picked solely on their decision.

Yes, don't forget that Babs wanted Sean Bean for Goldeneye, and I don't mean as the villain. I liked him as Alec Trevelyan, but I couldn't really see him as Bond.

[Mazer Rackham]

I can tell you a lot of people disagree with you when it comes to Craig.

You do not speak for everybody! How many are waiting for the next one to see if they will even consider thinking of him as Bond?

The Broccoli children do not have good casting sense. Since GE they made more bad choices than good ones.

[stockslivevan]

You do not speak for everybody!

But of course I do.

How many are waiting for the next one to see if they will even consider thinking of him as Bond?

A lot. Don't believe me? Do some research and you will find Craig to be very well received. There is a clear vast majority of Bond fans casual movie goers who have accepted Craig as Bond since the release of CR, to say otherwise you'd only be fooling yourself. I will acknowledge those who were not pleased but they are small numbers, if otherwise this site would be a lot more popular.

[Mazer Rackham]

But you don't and you d**n well know it!
Everyone loves Craig is crap. Speaking for everyone is crap too.

The majority of Bond fans online are not the majority of Bond fans in the world. Online Bond fan boy are a narrow group to to to wrangle and there the number are not so unanimous. All I need is one fan in every forum to prove my point and I can find a d**n sight more than that.

Craig first outing is a failure as a first movie for new Bond actor. The goal used to be being accepted as Bond. Hundred of reviews that go as far to praise Craig also admit he wasn't convincing as Bond.
Bond exist as more than a idea, every one know what he looks like, sounds like and how he should act. Dalton was Bond before the intro titles so was Brosnan, Craig has a lot of people scratching their head unsure of what they just saw, it wasn't Bond and it wasn't Bourne.

You'll get more praise for the change up in formula just because its a shock to the system. Other movies do it beter than Bond and the first time shock value are gone the rest of CR fall apart as 3rd rate copy of better action movies that had more engaging actors and better thought through plots.

[stockslivevan]

But you don't and you d**n well know it!
Everyone loves Craig is crap. Speaking for everyone is crap too.

Then why was there a lot of positive feedback? Craig won and you d**n well know it.

[Skywalker]

But you don't and you d**n well know it!
Everyone loves Craig is crap. Speaking for everyone is crap too.

Then why was there a lot of positive feedback? Craig won and you d**n well know it.

There is also a lot of negative feedback coming through now.

[Commander 0077]

[quote="Mazer Rackham"]But you don't and you d**n well know it!
Everyone loves Craig is crap. Speaking for everyone is crap too.

The majority of Bond fans online are not the majority of Bond fans in the world. Online Bond fan boy are a narrow group to to to wrangle and there the number are not so unanimous. All I need is one fan in every forum to prove my point and I can find a d**n sight more than that.

Craig first outing is a failure as a first movie for new Bond actor. The goal used to be being accepted as Bond. Hundred of reviews that go as far to praise Craig also admit he wasn't convincing as Bond.
Bond exist as more than a idea, every one know what he looks like, sounds like and how he should act. Dalton was Bond before the intro titles so was Brosnan, Craig has a lot of people scratching their head unsure of what they just saw, it wasn't Bond and it wasn't Bourne.

I commented on this in my other post today...
but yes, when the other Bonds came on the screen, the audience acceptance was practically unanimous. Bondologists will have to research this, but I doubt very much if there were any Bond fans or general audience who were 'scratching their heads' when Connery, Brosnan, Moore, Dalton and Lazenby made their first appearances as Bond. It was instant 'yeah, this is Bond alright.' To make this point obvious, just ask Bond fans and general audience! Anyone who views the other Bonds on DVD don't say, no way is this guy Bond, because all of the others had at least something close to 'classical good looks'. Instead, everyone says, I may like Dalton better, or Moore better, but I like the others too. (well there may be a few who don't like Lazenby because of his inexperience .... but I don't think many opine that he doesn't resemble Bond). There is none of this enemy camp biz that the casting of Craig has created.

[stockslivevan]

But you don't and you d**n well know it!
Everyone loves Craig is crap. Speaking for everyone is crap too.

Then why was there a lot of positive feedback? Craig won and you d**n well know it.

There is also a lot of negative feedback coming through now.

Which I acknowledged on this very thread. But like I said, small numbers and it seems as if those who say "Craig was an utter failure" as if they are referencing a universal agreement are living in la la land. I will not say Craig won many hearts universally but I'll acknowledge by 90%. No? Well almost making 600 sounds like a success? Curiosity factor? Ha, if this film relied on that aspect it would have done a pretty poor job. You don't get repeated viewings by "curiosity factor".

The old days when every media outlet bashed on Craig and this site being referenced on CNN are over. I think some have been living too much in the past like Net Geek (aka Bond_Fan). Don't get me wrong, I am not generalizing the anti-Craig camp, just certain folks who I will not name names (you know who you are). So far most of the anti-Craig camp on this site these days have been more balanced with their views, more respectable with others' and have the senses to acknowledge that CR was a "considerate success" in many ways except for their own personal opinion to make things clear.

[English Agent]

But you don't and you d**n well know it!
Everyone loves Craig is crap. Speaking for everyone is crap too.

Then why was there a lot of positive feedback? Craig won and you d**n well know it.

There is also a lot of negative feedback coming through now.

Eh!!!!!!!

What NEGATIVE feedback?????????

Only from this website

EA

[007]

I doubt very much if there were any Bond fans or general audience who were 'scratching their heads' when Connery, Brosnan, Moore, Dalton and Lazenby made their first appearances as Bond. It was instant 'yeah, this is Bond alright.'

That's a good point. And there were plenty of people saying Craig didn't have the right look for Bond who had to join the fold when he was (much to their suprise) cast.

[stockslivevan]

I doubt very much if there were any Bond fans or general audience who were 'scratching their heads' when Connery, Brosnan, Moore, Dalton and Lazenby made their first appearances as Bond. It was instant 'yeah, this is Bond alright.'

That's a good point. And there were plenty of people saying Craig didn't have the right look for Bond who had to join the fold when he was (much to their suprise) cast.

And look what happened after the release. One big turnover.

[carl stromberg]

007
That's a good point. And there were plenty of people saying Craig didn't have the right look for Bond who had to join the fold when he was (much to their suprise) cast.

That's true. Moderators, famous figures in the Bond fan world, stalwarts of the forums, they all said Craig was too ugly to be Bond and that he would never be cast......and then stepped into line when he was cast.

Is is that difficult for people to have their own opinion?

[Captain Nash]

007
That's a good point. And there were plenty of people saying Craig didn't have the right look for Bond who had to join the fold when he was (much to their suprise) cast.

That's true. Moderators, famous figures in the Bond fan world, stalwarts of the forums, they all said Craig was too ugly to be Bond and that he would never be cast......and then stepped into line when he was cast.

Is is that difficult for people to have their own opinion?

According to some members of this site, even when you do have YOUR OWN OPINION, you're still bashed for APPARENTLY being wrong.
The pack dogs have arrived here. How sad that the ones doing it, were the ones that accused other sites of doing the same.

[The Sweeney]

But you don't and you d**n well know it!
Everyone loves Craig is crap. Speaking for everyone is crap too.

The majority of Bond fans online are not the majority of Bond fans in the world. Online Bond fan boy are a narrow group to to to wrangle and there the number are not so unanimous. All I need is one fan in every forum to prove my point and I can find a d**n sight more than that.

Perhaps this is a reflection on what has happened globally....

Craig first outing is a failure as a first movie for new Bond actor.

Really? Judging by the high critical acclaim, award nominations, huge BO takings, internet polls, Rotten Tomato reviews, Bond forums, etc. I'd like to know how exactly this was a failure.

You'll get more praise for the change up in formula just because its a shock to the system. Other movies do it beter than Bond and the first time shock value are gone the rest of CR fall apart as 3rd rate copy of better action movies that had more engaging actors and better thought through plots.

Whereas sticking to the formula of DAD, and that would have blown all competition from other actions films right out of the water, right?

[Gary Seven]

CR was a failure for me and lots of other people because it was not very good and not a Bond film.

I think that a well made normal Bond film with Jackman, Bale etc would have done very well, better than CR in the US.

[james stock]

I think a lack of respect to what came before it ruined Royale for me, i have no problem for a grittier meatier story just why the reboot and why have judi dench as M if the intention is to distance itself from the previous films it's hardly a true reboot is it?

[The Sweeney]

CR was a failure for me and lots of other people because it was not very good and not a Bond film.

I think that a well made normal Bond film with Jackman, Bale etc would have done very well, better than CR in the US.

Whereas the rest of the planet, it wouldn't have done so well....?

[Commander 0077]

I have it on good account .... some of the same people who liked Bourne also went to see Bond. They just wanted to see a good action film. They did not necessarily go to see a 'Bond film.'

Don't ask me to give my sources, I shan't talk