I think the choice of actor and style of film (CR) was so far removed to the conventional cinematic Bond as you could get.
Craig IMO did not work in that style of film. A much younger looking actor should have been chosen. If Craig had have starred in a typical Bond film, then I would be in a position to assess his suitability for the role, which would be based on his performance and gauged against the other Bond actors.
“I'd like to thank the Royal Marines for bringing me in like that and scaring the s--- out of me,” Bond Hardman Daniel Craig.
Favorite Bond Movie: Octopussy From Russia With Love The Living Daylights On Her Majestys Secret Service Doctor No .... Ah heck all of them
Favorite Movies: Lawrence Of Arabia, Forrest Gump, Jaws, The Shawshank Redemption, Vertigo, The Odd Couple, Zoolander, Cool Hand Luke, The Great Escape...many more.
Location: Well here obviously. At the moment of course
Denzel Washington or Colin Salmon were names bandied about by bookmakers in the past. I'm sorry and I am in no way a racist, but I'm not ready for a coloured Bond.
I would also be put off, (though I would wait for the finished result before I passed judgement) but I'm so glad the, far too young Henry Cavill or Goran Visnjic were not picked.
If either of those had become Bond it may have been a different kettle of fish.
Captain Nash wrote:I would also be put off, (though I would wait for the finished result before I passed judgement) but I'm so glad the, far too young Henry Cavill or Goran Visnjic were not picked.
If either of those had become Bond it may have been a different kettle of fish.
I think Visjnic's accent would have been more of an obstacle to my accepting him as Bond than his age. Cavill could have been good in CR, seeing as it was supposed to be his first mission and all. Trouble is, they probably would have signed him on for a three-picture deal, rather than letting CR stand alone as a prequel to the other Bond films.
"He's the one that doesn't smile" - Queen Elizabeth II on Daniel Craig
I think Brandon Routh in Superman showed that a young Bond actor could have worked in CR. Someone like a Cavill would have been easy for me to accept as Bond because I've hardly seen him in anything else. My reaction would have been a lot different to the one I had when Craig was revealed to be the favourite for Casino Royale. Daniel Craig? That tramp bloke from Our Friends In The North? Have Eon moved their headquarters to Crazytown?, I thought.
Captain Nash wrote:Denzel Washington or Colin Salmon were names bandied about by bookmakers in the past. I'm sorry and I am in no way a racist, but I'm not ready for a coloured Bond.
I would also be put off, (though I would wait for the finished result before I passed judgement) but I'm so glad the, far too young Henry Cavill or Goran Visnjic were not picked.
If either of those had become Bond it may have been a different kettle of fish.
I tend to agree with you Captain, for the simple reason that Bond has always had a certain look. Neither DW, CS or DR have this look, regardless of their ethnicity. If Washington had been cast as Bond, I would have said the same thing. He is a good actor and actually much more watchable and charismatic than Craig, but he does not have the physcal attributes of Bond of the books or the 'other' films.
But given a choice between Washington and Craig, I would actually prefer Washington. He would no longer be Bond, of course in my mind.
You move very well for a dead man, Mr Bond
Kill him!
Kill Bond! Now!
2 007
Hugh Jackaman or Gerard Butler should been good Bonds. Or, why not?, even Hugh Grant or Rupert Everett! Craig was the worst choice.
But I think that the person who ruined the Bond formula was also Paul Haggis!
I agree.
Not only did Daniel Craig destroy the Bond franchise, but the horrible writing also deserves much of the blame too. I had expected that Craig would be horrible, which he was. But the writing was even worse than I had ever imagined that it would be. And as much as I liked Martin Campbell's directing in GE I have to say that he blew it this time around. He never got the right emotion out of the actors in the film, and that helped give a very bland and boring feel to the movie as well.
Skywalker wrote:I think the choice of actor and style of film (CR) was so far removed to the conventional cinematic Bond as you could get.
Craig IMO did not work in that style of film. A much younger looking actor should have been chosen. If Craig had have starred in a typical Bond film, then I would be in a position to assess his suitability for the role, which would be based on his performance and gauged against the other Bond actors.
Daniel Craig's age, and the fact that he looks much older than he really is made it all the more impossible to accept him as a rookie double-0.
Every Bond film is going to have some far fetched things about them, but CR takes the cake for being far fetched.
Skywalker wrote:I think the choice of actor and style of film (CR) was so far removed to the conventional cinematic Bond as you could get.
Craig IMO did not work in that style of film. A much younger looking actor should have been chosen. If Craig had have starred in a typical Bond film, then I would be in a position to assess his suitability for the role, which would be based on his performance and gauged against the other Bond actors.
Daniel Craig's age, and the fact that he looks much older than he really is made it all the more impossible to accept him as a rookie double-0.
Every Bond film is going to have some far fetched things about them, but CR takes the cake for being far fetched.
It does take the cake And look at the recent photos of DC in Alternative Bond. He has a beard and it's completely white! He does not look a young 38, as Bond of the books was. But of course, the pro-Craigers don't see why some fans are up in arms over the new 'Bond's' physical appearance; that the physical appearance of the character is critical. Well, we don't want to repeat ourselves, repeat ourselves, repeat ourselves...............
You move very well for a dead man, Mr Bond
Kill him!
Kill Bond! Now!
2 007
Favorite Movies: Bullitt, The Long Good Friday, The Towering Inferno, Jaws, Rocky, Superman the Movie, McVicar, Goodfellas, Get Carter, Three Days of the Condor, Butch & Sundance, The Sting, All the Presidents Men
Hugh Jackaman or Gerard Butler should been good Bonds. Or, why not?, even Hugh Grant or Rupert Everett! Craig was the worst choice.
But I think that the person who ruined the Bond formula was also Paul Haggis!
I agree.
Not only did Daniel Craig destroy the Bond franchise, but the horrible writing also deserves much of the blame too. I had expected that Craig would be horrible, which he was. But the writing was even worse than I had ever imagined that it would be. And as much as I liked Martin Campbell's directing in GE I have to say that he blew it this time around. He never got the right emotion out of the actors in the film, and that helped give a very bland and boring feel to the movie as well.
As opposed to the writing in the Brosnan flicks, which was perfect, right?
Why does it have to always come down to Brosnan when we are talking against Daniel Craig? Brosnan, along with the other actors, made a good job in portraying 007.
BOND sells, NOT CRAIG
The reboot is a risky area, did Eon need to do it? NO. Did this confuse alot of people? YES.
The Bond character will always be anchored in the values of the 60s
i think that the Bond producers are trying to obviously copy the Bourne franchise without realising that Jason Bourne is absolutly nothing like Bond and in the process they are forgeting the cinematic roots of the character, this will long term be a mistake. How do you feel about the news comming out about the next movie? It does not sound good!
Hugh Jackaman or Gerard Butler should been good Bonds. Or, why not?, even Hugh Grant or Rupert Everett! Craig was the worst choice.
But I think that the person who ruined the Bond formula was also Paul Haggis!
I agree.
Not only did Daniel Craig destroy the Bond franchise, but the horrible writing also deserves much of the blame too. I had expected that Craig would be horrible, which he was. But the writing was even worse than I had ever imagined that it would be. And as much as I liked Martin Campbell's directing in GE I have to say that he blew it this time around. He never got the right emotion out of the actors in the film, and that helped give a very bland and boring feel to the movie as well.
As opposed to the writing in the Brosnan flicks, which was perfect, right?
No, I would never claim that the writing was perfect in Brosnan's Bond films either. I'm not into stupid things like invisible cars.
james stock wrote:i think that the Bond producers are trying to obviously copy the Bourne franchise without realising that Jason Bourne is absolutly nothing like Bond and in the process they are forgeting the cinematic roots of the character, this will long term be a mistake. How do you feel about the news comming out about the next movie? It does not sound good!
And the Bourne films are no-where nearly as good as the majority of past Bond films. I like the Bourne films for what they are. But their not Bond, and Bond should not aspire to be Bourne!
I haven't even bothered to do any research at all on what the next so-called "Bond film" is going to be about. Bond died last year. I'm completely done with "Bond" as long as Daniel Craig or even Paul Haggis are involved.
james stock wrote:i think that the Bond producers are trying to obviously copy the Bourne franchise without realising that Jason Bourne is absolutly nothing like Bond and in the process they are forgeting the cinematic roots of the character, this will long term be a mistake. How do you feel about the news comming out about the next movie? It does not sound good!
And the Bourne films are no-where nearly as good as the majority of past Bond films. I like the Bourne films for what they are. But their not Bond, and Bond should not aspire to be Bourne!
I haven't even bothered to do any research at all on what the next so-called "Bond film" is going to be about. Bond died last year. I'm completely done with "Bond" as long as Daniel Craig or even Paul Haggis are involved.
Bond is on hold for me until Craig is out. His presence with Haggis' view of Bond, is not my taste at all for Bond. EOTT I agree!
james stock wrote:i think that the Bond producers are trying to obviously copy the Bourne franchise without realising that Jason Bourne is absolutly nothing like Bond and in the process they are forgeting the cinematic roots of the character, this will long term be a mistake. How do you feel about the news comming out about the next movie? It does not sound good!
More of the same it appears. Bond 22=CR + 144 more minutes.
And look at the recent photos of DC in Alternative Bond. He has a beard and it's completely white! He does not look a young 38, as Bond of the books was. But of course, the pro-Craigers don't see why some fans are up in arms over the new 'Bond's' physical appearance; that the physical appearance of the character is critical. Well, we don't want to repeat ourselves, repeat ourselves, repeat ourselves............... 
