Daniel Craig backlash - Why?

P

polk-dotz

New member
Does anyone else think that the treatment Daniel Craig is recieving from the media in general is grossly unfair? The Mirror, in particular, seems to knock him down at any opportunity, and now there is this ridiculous website calling for fans to boycott Casino Royale as a protest at his casting as Bond.

They seem to be forgetting a few rather important points:

1) Daniel Craig is a superb actor. Watch Our FrienRAB In The North, Layer Cake, Archangel, Enduring Love, The Mother and Road to Perdition for confirmation of this. He is at least as good as, if not better, than Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan. Therefore, passing judgement on his ability to convincingly play Bond without even having seen a scrap of footage seems to be a tad illogical to me.

2) Craig's demeanour and appearance ( apart from the blond hair ) are actually quite close to the Bond of the novel. He is meant to be a hard faced, cold and brutal man. Brosnan was excellent in the role, I grant you, but was not a close approximation of the literary character. Craig could potentially be a terrific Bond.

3) Brosnan is 52. It was clearly time for him to move on to other roles before his age became a joke, as it did with Roger Moore. And Die Another Day was an absolute mess of a film. It is time Bond was taken back to basics, remodelled and retooled, and not just given a temporary re-spray.

Anyone agree? Or disagree?
 
I can't think of anyone else I would want to play Bond. Daniel Craig does seem like an odd choice though but, hopefully he'll be able to rbing something new to the role.

Why judge him as Bond when he hasn't even played him yet?
 
I agree people should lay off him, I think he's going to make one of the best BonRAB, most of the other actors have been really cheesy but Craig will be perfect for playing a cold blooded killer, it's like in layer cake he was calm and wise until things went wrong but bang shot the guy who crossed him straight in the head. I think people should wait to the films out before criticising him, I bet afterwarRAB everyone's gonna be praising him like they always do, two faced-back stabbing journos! :)
 
I cannot understand the backlash to Daniel Craig, I mean give the guy a chance to show what he can do as Bond first then moan about him if he does not meet expectations. I honestly think he could be an excellent Bond - I find him to be a great actor who has a presence about him that makes him stand out from the others. Good luck to Craig and I look forward to watching Casino Royale when it is released :)
 
Hi - interesting - i agree that all this flak is too harsh on craig and rather pathetic - you cant judge someone on his looks - its a wait and see game = who knows he may send bond into the 21st century. However is there anyone else who people feel may have been their choice of bond? Personally i liked the look of James Purefoy.
 
These people should really get a grip on themselves!!

They should be delighted an actor of his calibre would take on the role which could potentially typecast him when it comes to more meaningful roles.

The Digspy report suggests their gripe is with his hair colour (pathetic) and the fact he has previously appeared s different types of characters to that of Bond. He's an actor for god sake!

Each actor has brought their on personality to the role- Moore's Bond was very different to Connery's etc. From what I have read the new film will have a darker, grittier edge to the recent over-blown, blockbuster movies- this sounRAB like an improvement to me!
 
I completely agree with what people are saying here.

Daniel is a great actor and to say that you will boycott a film just because the actor you wanted isn't playing a part you wanted them to, is throwing your toys out of a pram and just infantile.

Watch him in the film first..then make your mind up..but before he has even filmed a scene? :(

For Daniel fans, you might like to sign your name to this website....it is in retalience(sp?) to the boycott one. It is for those of us who think he might actually do a good job but until we actually see him in the film, it is a bit hard to judge, is it not? :D

http://www.craigisbond.com/
 
I feel sorry for the guy after reading some of the things I've seen. There's even a website (craigisnotbond.com or something like that)... just digging into him, really harsh.

And nobody's seen him in a Bond film yet. So how can anyone know either way?
 
I have to agree with the thinking behind craignotbond.com - I just can't see Craig David in the role !!!

Although maybe if he sang "I met this girl on Monday, took her for a drink on Tuesday. We were making love by Wednesday and on Thursday & Friday & Saturday - we killed on Sunday"
 
Agree with all of the above. It annoys me so much when people judge something they haven't seen.

I think Daniel Craig's CV looks a lot more impressive than Pierce Brosnan's did pre-Goldeneye, and Pierce made a fantastic Bond. But it's time to move on and a darker, grittier back-to-basics Bond would be very welcome (invisible car, anyone?).

If these people's worst fears came true and Craig totally sucked in the role, which I think is unlikely, it wouldn't kill the franchise. Look at On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Lazenby was slated for being 'wooden' compared to Connery, but the film itself was one of the best in my opinion, and the franchise moved on.
 
I feel, like the vast majority of people, completely indifferent about the casting of Daniel Craig in the role of Bond. The 'backlash' does seem to be coming from a very particular sector of the media if you know what I mean ;)

I think the greatest problem that the series faces is the script and direction; I fear that, as it stanRAB, the next film will do nothing to stem the series' ever increasingly downward spiral into the realms of parody and nonsensical comedy :(
 
The backlash has come from several areas - The tabloid press in general, who basically think Bond should be the Milk Tray man, and some so-called hardcore fans who think Brosnan should be re-instated, despite the fact that is now completely out of the question. Any real 'hardcore' fans eg fans of the novels will at least give Craig the benefit of the doubt as an actor.

I agree that the script and direction could potentially be the biggest threats to the film, not Craig. An actor is only as good as the material he is given to work with, and although Casino Royale is much more scaled down and reality-based, the fact that Martin Campbell is directing is not an inspired choice. Couldn't they have taken a bit more of a risk and gone for an edgier director, the way Warner did with Chris Nolan for Batman Begins?
 
I think he'll make a great Bond, and if there promise of making it more grittier and realistic is fullfilled I'd like to see it with a spooks/24/bourne identity edge, rather than the direction it was going in that being "cartoon superhero" territory! :D
 
Goldeneye was ok, but hardly earth-shatteringly different. It was about as formulaic and standard-issue Bond as any of the previous movies. Only the casting was inspired - Brosnan, Dench and Bean. Campbell also directed that last Zorro film, which was shite. Casting Craig is a big risk which I think will pay off, but I think they should be braver than that and ditch Campbell, Purvis and Wade, and bring in some more fresh blood.
 
Daniel Craig would not have been my choice of the new Bond. That doesn't mean to say that I don't think he's a superb actor; far from it because I think he's great in Layer Cake and even better in The Mother. But, to me, he just isn't Bond. That said, of course, it's all subjective; after all, Ian Fleming himself was scathing of Sean Connery in private (although largely supportive in public). When Connery was cast, he told his family: "That was a thousand miles away from my idea of James Bond. Everything is wrong the face, the accent, the hair."

But the backlash against Craig is infantile. I'm happy to sit on the fence and judge Craig and Casino Royale when the time comes. I'm hoping - wanting - to be blown away by both, but am still unsure if I will.

There's no doubt that Pierce Brosnan had another Bond film in him and I disagree that Die Another Day was a mess. As someone old enough to have been brought up on the so-called Connery classics when they were playing in cinemas and who likes the literary Bond more than the cinematic Bond, you might expect me to loathe DAD. But, actually, I enjoyed it enormously. I'm also opposed to the news that the producers are doing a Batman Begins-type reboot on Casino Royale, as it's unnecessary and self-indulgent. But this isn't Daniel Craig's fault; nor was the unceremonious dumping of Brosnan. As for the Mirror's campaign against him, it's no more than one would expect from such a publication whose glory days are many years behind it.
 
Back
Top