Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: Bond 23

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Future Films >> RE: Bond 23 Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Bond 23 - 9/11/2010 6:34:28 PM   
darth silas


Posts: 4949
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: My living room
Problem is Craigs portrayal of the character from the outset was that of an unlikeable prick who is extremely bloodthirsty.The appeal of James Bond for many years is that he is a charming man.Witty,debonair,but well able to kick ass when needed to,with a touch of panache.Craigs lunkheaded portrayal belongs more in a Jason Statham flick.

If they do go back to a more traditional approach with Bond 23,then they need an actor who can bring charm and class to the role.Craig cant do that.


_____________________________

Star Wars:Episodes 1,2,3,4,5,6.Taken together they are one giant movie and it is the greatest movie EVER.

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 211
RE: Bond 23 - 9/11/2010 6:50:16 PM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1886
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
he can show more finesse because the experiences he has been through since being promoted (with M not being sure he was ready, and M not wanting him to take part in the casino royale tournament) will have taught him to not trust anyone, not get to close to people and fend people off with humour/charm.

Craig was different in QOS to CR because of the events that happened and would be different in the next one because QOS resolved (as well as they can be resolved) the issues driving it.

There's no reason Craig can't be more charming and debonair in the next Bond film, in fact, it makes total sense for that to be exactly what happens, as part of a series of films showing a raw agent who's a rough diamond to going through the experiences that shape him into the more nuanced figure.

But I know you wont give a toss about any reasons I suggest why Craig should continue, so wont bang on, and hope you took the 'hernia' thing in good sport!

_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to darth silas)
Post #: 212
RE: Bond 23 - 9/11/2010 6:56:14 PM   
rich


Posts: 4658
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Neo Kobe
I think that's a ..... oh wait it's you Silas _


Hopefully this is back on track soon, they need to sort out a decent story this time and make sure no popstars step in a spoil David Armstrong's work again. To be honest I think they should just get Martin Campbell back instead of waiting for the series to drown itself and getting him to save it for a third time. QOS is unfairly slated, it's not that good but there are a lot of much shittier entries.


_____________________________

Weekend write-ups

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 213
RE: Bond 23 - 10/11/2010 1:00:36 PM   
Marwood

 

Posts: 2617
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows
Yeah, Craig's body of non-Bond work shows he can quite easily embody other characteristics that Bond is better known for (either in book or film) and as Job pointed out his portrayal of the character did change between Casino and Quantum - keep in mind he's going to have input from the director and producers as well so he'll end up having to take on board what they want to see their Bond be as well as how he personally interprets the character. Besides, it all starts with how he's written in the scripts.

Silas your Craig as Bond hate is well known by now but at some point you're going to have to try and be objective about it. He's not up the Connery standard sure but to be honest it's unlikely anyone else will be either as the two are now too linked to be separated.

Anyway as for the new film I think the 2012 thing sounds optimistic unless a significant amount of development (and script?) has been done while the MGM fiasco has been sorted out. It's not impossible but after QOS being a disappointment and feeling rushed/unfocused I'd rather they take their time with this one and deliver on Casino Royale's promising start to the new era.

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to rich)
Post #: 214
RE: Bond 23 - 11/11/2010 1:06:53 PM   
The Hooded Man


Posts: 2770
Joined: 12/7/2006
I don't see anything in Craig's protrayal that Timothy Dalton didn't do, all this talk of the character being more ruthless than ever before isn't exactly true. After all Dalton's 007 set a guy on fire and watched him burn. Craig's a really good actor though, I don't want him to turn 007 into a cheesy one-liner machine, but he could have a little more swagger rather than just be a robot like killing machine. Craig's performance in Casino Royale was outstanding, I thought he might have been up for an Oscar actually, but then they went too one-dimensional with QOS, which isn't as bad as many claim but could have done with a director who could have handled the action sequences better. As stated above though Solace will work better if Bond emerges more like the Bond we all know and love without becoming a cliche.

_____________________________

Counting the minutes until the over zealous mods lock this thread too.

(in reply to Marwood)
Post #: 215
RE: Bond 23 - 11/11/2010 6:20:26 PM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1886
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere

quote:

ORIGINAL: The Hooded Man

I don't see anything in Craig's protrayal that Timothy Dalton didn't do, all this talk of the character being more ruthless than ever before isn't exactly true. After all Dalton's 007 set a guy on fire and watched him burn. Craig's a really good actor though, I don't want him to turn 007 into a cheesy one-liner machine, but he could have a little more swagger rather than just be a robot like killing machine. Craig's performance in Casino Royale was outstanding, I thought he might have been up for an Oscar actually, but then they went too one-dimensional with QOS, which isn't as bad as many claim but could have done with a director who could have handled the action sequences better. As stated above though Solace will work better if Bond emerges more like the Bond we all know and love without becoming a cliche.



See, what I got from QOS was 'Bond is still a work in progress as far as his employers feel, even the people he works for don't really know what kind of character he is when the chips are down, or what to make of him, but by the end they trust him'

Good to have you back/I never went away.

This final exchange confirms for me Bond knows himself,he has been through the wringer, gone through his personal hell and survived, with enough Bond arrogance to deny he went off the rails in any way. Yes its the Bond film where people didn't get the Bond they wanted. But in story terms, it's the experience Bond survived in order to forge his character in fire, set it forever, and he'll never be so near to being almost totally broken man of QOS again.

Hell, the opening credits totally explain the 'purpose' of QOS and why it 'feels different' to other Bond films: Bond falls. And falls. And falls. He hit's the ground hard. Then he gets up again, without a scratch. This is the story the film sets out to tell, and no other, and it is an 'outburst of rage' after the love/betrayal/want to kill her/got to save her/she's dead and it's my fault because I shot out the floating supports of the building she's in' experience he had with Vespa.

That's what he's got inside him the whole time, that is what is written all over his face for almost the whole of QOS, and never more than in the opening shots, with Bond, a shattered man, with the camera work reflecting that by showing little glimpses of bond before it settles down and lets us see the look on his face (reflecting the 'whatever else happened, I literally caused her death' feelings).

Watched with that in mind, QOS is a tale of a broken man who can never get over what happened, and he's pretty much an unguided missile. But saving the girl at the end (even being prepared to put a bullet in her head to spare her the pain of perishing in fire when he sees how terrified she is of that prospect), in that moment he forgets his pain and wants to save someone else. That's his QOS, and now, doing his duty will come before personal feelings.

Not what many wanted from a Bond film, not even accepted as being what the film tells by some who read this, no doubt. But I for one am happy to have seen Bond treated with some degree of psychological realism, because no matter how escapist it now goes on to get, it can get real to the same degree as required (to stop the films getting too silly from one film to the next) and bury the angst as required to emphasise the thrills. So, I do believe the old style Bond elements can be foregrounded, but without them becoming stupid as they try to trump the previous movie.

Bonds been tested to the point of destruction, and didn't get destroyed, now he can go back to being the dedicated, slighlty piss taking agent who'll do stuff like set off the car alarms to create an inventive distraction so he can go after intel. I believe that was the game plan for QOS, and I believe it's possible that Craig, etc didn't talk about that sort of thing in the wake of some reaction to the film because the reaction might have got worse, with him and others considered as pretentious as some might think I have just been.

Whatever, though, you can have a dark Bond film, or a light one, or one that changes tone as events dictate. And I also believe the 'trick' pulled off with CR/QOS that would allow this is more or less the same trick pulled off By Nolan's Batfilms, which are themselves, coincidentally the result of seeking to reinvigorate/add credibility ot an ailing franchise to rescue it from its own earlier excesses.




< Message edited by jobloffski -- 11/11/2010 6:44:49 PM >


_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to The Hooded Man)
Post #: 216
RE: Bond 23 - 4/12/2010 11:54:45 AM   
rich


Posts: 4658
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Neo Kobe
Some news:

David Arnold confirmed
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=72066

Sam Mendes still involved
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=72094


_____________________________

Weekend write-ups

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 217
RE: Bond 23 - 6/12/2010 1:04:35 AM   
Emyr Thy King


Posts: 2174
Joined: 13/4/2006
From: The Grid
I have to say I do get tired of people berating "QoS", it was at least bold, different and thrilling. I didn't want an facsimile copy of the first film but one which was more frenetic and actio-packed. Even though the first film is excellent it's still relatively a slow-burner and so requires patience when watching. I thought the second film was the perfect accompaniment to its predecessor. Many complained it was a confused film, which was either rushed or ill-conceived and that it was even story-lite. Complete and utter rubbish, it was a direct continuation of the first film and so it needed very little exposition. In fact it's my favourite film of the two and it made me greatly appreciate the first film much more. Now that it seems Sam Mendes is on-board we'll have a director who'll offer a more steady approach than Marc Forster. Not that I dislike Forster's effort, not at all. However, many didn't like it and again as I don't like one style to be dominant with this incarnation of Bond, a change of pace for me is welcome. I think the gun-barrel sequence at the end of "QoS" was their way of saying: "Bond is finally here, here comes the charm, suaveness and the debonair character". You gradually build those things into a character, you don't just throw them in. Daniel Craig did say that he felt the franchise should only include such characters as 'Q' and 'Miss Moneypenny' when it has earned them. I.e. the story has to be good enough and Bond needs to earn his stripes for such things. We will see Craig as a far more charming and suave Bond, he can easily do it and I look forward to see him stamp his own brand of savoir-faire to the proceedings.

_____________________________

"This whole imbroglio is epiphenomenal"...."demigogic faux egalitarianism" - Will Self

(in reply to rich)
Post #: 218
RE: Bond 23 - 6/12/2010 12:38:06 PM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1886
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
After QOS presumably Q branch will be introduced to focus on combating Quantum, meaning that aspect of 'traditional Bond' (him going after superbaddies with big egos and bigger wallets is covered. And since in both CR and QOS keeping track of what Bond was up to was a headache for M he may be required to report in personally to M for assignments so he doesn't keep buggering off to do things his own way (but will do that too anyway). So there would then be a reason for him to encounter Moneypenny (as well as the newly inbuilt potential reason for Bond to flirt with her but no more: M being very angry with Bond and his effect on women and the lethal consequences for them if he has his way with them, and note this for a 'set up for future expansion' clue: Atherton's character in QOS was basically an admin worker, so it's easy to imagine M warning Bond off any other such unsuspecting 'low level' employees).

In fact I'd write a specific scene between M and B where she tells him to keep his distance from Moneypenny and responding to his cocky reply with something like 'I expect to have to go to funerals in this line of work, Bond, but...(uncharacteristically lip quivery M momentarily) if you ever become the reason I have to go to hers..." Bond softens for as moment and promises M that will never happen and thus there is a story reason for the Bond/Moneypenny flirtation and acting work for the Moneypenny actress showing her character really wanting Bond, never knowing why he'll do no more than flirt, and pursuing him all the harder, to no avail, with Bond actually having to work very hard to keep his mind on his promise to M, as well as actually agreeing with M that Moneypenny deserves better than she'd get from him, because for all the charm, he's exactly as described in QOS, "Damaged goods" ).

My usual blah, blah, blah I know, but it would flow from what's been established and bridge the gap between old and new Bond, with the expected stuff happening, but with significantly more character detail than in the past.

(in reply to Emyr Thy King)
Post #: 219
RE: Bond 23 - 7/12/2010 1:12:10 PM   
spark1

 

Posts: 6826
Joined: 18/11/2006
note to barbara and michael-

just make them as fun as the early connery bond films.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/foreignc/2010/12/the-james-bond-template.html

< Message edited by spark1 -- 9/12/2010 11:26:56 AM >

(in reply to darth silas)
Post #: 220
RE: Bond 23 - 9/12/2010 9:17:36 AM   
Timon


Posts: 14584
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Bristol
http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/691924/10_things_we_want_from_the_new_james_bond_film.html

_____________________________

"I put no stock in religion. By the word 'religion', I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called 'The Will of God'. Holiness is in right action and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves."

Twitter: @timonsingh

(in reply to spark1)
Post #: 221
RE: Bond 23 - 18/12/2010 1:16:35 PM   
spark1

 

Posts: 6826
Joined: 18/11/2006
forget about q or moneypenny-make him a commander again.

(in reply to darth silas)
Post #: 222
RE: Bond 23 - 11/1/2011 11:02:01 PM   
musht


Posts: 1811
Joined: 21/1/2009
From: Oireland
Confirmed and Mendes still on board

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=73150

_____________________________

"SAVE ME, BARRY!!"

"What the hell are Regionals!?"

"color=#F1F1F1" Spoiler text "/color"

(in reply to spark1)
Post #: 223
RE: Bond 23 - 12/1/2011 7:01:35 AM   
Drew_231

 

Posts: 847
Joined: 7/5/2008
quote:

ORIGINAL: Timon

http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/691924/10_things_we_want_from_the_new_james_bond_film.html


A nice quote from Craig in that article

"Craig has already said of the new film, "We've finished this story as far as I'm concerned. We've got a great set of bad guys. There is an organization that we can use whenever we want to. The relationship between Bond and M is secure and Felix is secure. Let's try and find where Moneypenny came from and where Q comes from. Let's do all that and have some fun with it."



(in reply to Timon)
Post #: 224
RE: Bond 23 - 12/1/2011 11:08:45 AM   
The Hooded Man


Posts: 2770
Joined: 12/7/2006
That quote was taken from Craig shortly after Quantum of Solace was released to a tepid reception from critics, even though it's the most successful entry to date. Looking forward to Bond being back, hopefully Craig won't end up like Brosnan and Moore and seem too old for the role.

_____________________________

Counting the minutes until the over zealous mods lock this thread too.

(in reply to Drew_231)
Post #: 225
RE: Bond 23 - 12/1/2011 1:27:12 PM   
Drew_231

 

Posts: 847
Joined: 7/5/2008
Unless I'm mistaken, the mid forties age bracket is where the character is meant to be, and Craig is about 43. Id be happy to see him in one more film after this one coming up

Then they may go back to the Roger Moore style of films and cast David Tenant in the role. Ah well

(in reply to The Hooded Man)
Post #: 226
RE: Bond 23 - 17/1/2011 1:15:34 PM   
spark1

 

Posts: 6826
Joined: 18/11/2006
2012 also the 50th anniversary of the series-

http://commanderbond.net/12799/mgm-planning-year-long-007-celebration-in-2012.html

< Message edited by spark1 -- 17/1/2011 1:16:17 PM >

(in reply to darth silas)
Post #: 227
RE: Bond 23 - 17/1/2011 1:23:36 PM   
The Hooded Man


Posts: 2770
Joined: 12/7/2006
I'd like to see Clive Owen or Christian Bale in the role.

_____________________________

Counting the minutes until the over zealous mods lock this thread too.

(in reply to spark1)
Post #: 228
RE: Bond 23 - 17/1/2011 4:24:56 PM   
Marwood

 

Posts: 2617
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows

quote:

ORIGINAL: The Hooded Man

I'd like to see Clive Owen or Christian Bale in the role.


Before Craig was cast I think Owen was a fan favourite and I agree that he could have made a good Bond, think he's a bit old for it now though.

As much as I'm a fan though I really struggle to see Bale in the role, I think he'd be more effective as an enemy agent - like 006 in Goldeneye being almost like an evil Bond.

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to The Hooded Man)
Post #: 229
RE: Bond 23 - 17/1/2011 8:32:26 PM   
JIm R

 

Posts: 9185
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Surrey
Said it earlier in thread, for this one, get Michael Sheen in as Blofeld as Head of Quantum, have this film finish off the 'trilogy' and start afresh next time. 

(in reply to Marwood)
Post #: 230
RE: Bond 23 - 17/1/2011 9:06:11 PM   
darth silas


Posts: 4949
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: My living room
quote:

ORIGINAL: Marwood


quote:

ORIGINAL: The Hooded Man

I'd like to see Clive Owen or Christian Bale in the role.


Before Craig was cast I think Owen was a fan favourite and I agree that he could have made a good Bond, think he's a bit old for it now though.

As much as I'm a fan though I really struggle to see Bale in the role, I think he'd be more effective as an enemy agent - like 006 in Goldeneye being almost like an evil Bond.


Actually Craig would have been better suited to play an evil 00 agent or henchman rather than Bond.


_____________________________

Star Wars:Episodes 1,2,3,4,5,6.Taken together they are one giant movie and it is the greatest movie EVER.

(in reply to Marwood)
Post #: 231
RE: Bond 23 - 17/1/2011 11:30:49 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19039
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
quote:

ORIGINAL: darth silas

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marwood


quote:

ORIGINAL: The Hooded Man

I'd like to see Clive Owen or Christian Bale in the role.


Before Craig was cast I think Owen was a fan favourite and I agree that he could have made a good Bond, think he's a bit old for it now though.

As much as I'm a fan though I really struggle to see Bale in the role, I think he'd be more effective as an enemy agent - like 006 in Goldeneye being almost like an evil Bond.


Actually Craig would have been better suited to play an evil 00 agent or henchman rather than Bond.



The role is Michael Fassbenders to turn down.

And Dalton is the man who would be an awesome Bond villian and Bond at the same time. Give one a tache.


_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to darth silas)
Post #: 232
RE: Bond 23 - 18/1/2011 4:34:14 PM   
Wild about Wilder


Posts: 1630
Joined: 9/4/2010
From: Hertfordshire
Can't see Bale wanting to go into another franchise after he got burnt on Terminator.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 233
RE: Bond 23 - 19/1/2011 10:55:41 AM   
Marwood

 

Posts: 2617
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows
Hmmm, Fassbender could be an excellent choice actually - great suggestion Rgirvan.

As for Sheen in a role I think he'd be well suited as Q personally.

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to Wild about Wilder)
Post #: 234
RE: Bond 23 - 19/1/2011 1:32:36 PM   
Timon


Posts: 14584
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Bristol
It's going to be Henry Cavill. I will bet large sums of money on that.

_____________________________

"I put no stock in religion. By the word 'religion', I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called 'The Will of God'. Holiness is in right action and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves."

Twitter: @timonsingh

(in reply to Marwood)
Post #: 235
RE: Bond 23 - 19/1/2011 1:56:34 PM   
spark1

 

Posts: 6826
Joined: 18/11/2006
craig just need to have a bit of fun again like in CR.

(in reply to Timon)
Post #: 236
RE: Bond 23 - 19/1/2011 3:10:34 PM   
Marwood

 

Posts: 2617
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Only The Shadow knows

quote:

ORIGINAL: spark1

craig just need to have a bit of fun again like in CR.


Agreed, with the Vesper story resolved I assumed that's something Eon might look into - allowing Bond to move on and get back to enjoying his job.

_____________________________

Bilbo: What about the Ewoks? They were rubbish.

Tim: Yeah but Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like f***ing Shaft!

(in reply to spark1)
Post #: 237
RE: Bond 23 - 19/1/2011 4:30:31 PM   
dreddhead123

 

Posts: 282
Joined: 23/7/2010
quote:

"Problem is Craigs portrayal of the character from the outset was that of an unlikeable prick who is extremely bloodthirsty.The appeal of James Bond for many years is that he is a charming man.Witty,debonair,but well able to kick ass when needed to,with a touch of panache.Craigs lunkheaded portrayal belongs more in a Jason Statham flick.

If they do go back to a more traditional approach with Bond 23,then they need an actor who can bring charm and class to the role.Craig cant do that."


I agree 100 percent.

There's also the unwritten rule the 'movie James Bond' is classically handsome. Sean Connery was a very striking looking man in his early years and this is one of the reasons he was cast. George Lazenby was a model, not even a pro-actor before he was cast in the role! I think Bond is the only role where the character is meant to be very handsome. It helps sell the glamour of the character. Okay, perhaps casting a guy based on his good looks may seem a tad superficial in the politically correct 21st century but a charming handsome man as James Bond does make the films seem more glamorous. The whole concept of movie stars is based around that - people (in general) tend to prefer to see better looking people on the big screen.

I'm sure there are many actors out there that could make for a decent, possibly realistic Bond but do they really embody the look of the character? Richard Burton was one of Fleming's choices for the part:

http://www.contactmusic.com/news.nsf/story/burton-was-first-choice-bond_1006449

Burton was a fine well-respected actor but he wasn't Bond material when compared to Connery. Connery had that extra something about him. His Bond is the blueprint by which all potential future Bond actors are compared.

< Message edited by dreddhead123 -- 19/1/2011 4:35:04 PM >

(in reply to Marwood)
Post #: 238
RE: Bond 23 - 19/1/2011 4:37:39 PM   
JIm R

 

Posts: 9185
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Surrey
quote:

ORIGINAL: dreddhead123

quote:

"Problem is Craigs portrayal of the character from the outset was that of an unlikeable prick who is extremely bloodthirsty.The appeal of James Bond for many years is that he is a charming man.Witty,debonair,but well able to kick ass when needed to,with a touch of panache.Craigs lunkheaded portrayal belongs more in a Jason Statham flick.

If they do go back to a more traditional approach with Bond 23,then they need an actor who can bring charm and class to the role.Craig cant do that."


I agree 100 percent.

There's also the unwritten rule the 'movie James Bond' is classically handsome. Sean Connery was a very striking looking man in his early years and this is one of the reasons he was cast. George Lazenby was a model, not even a pro-actor before he was cast in the role! I think Bond is the only role where the character is meant to be very handsome. It helps sell the glamour of the character. Okay, perhaps casting a guy based on his good looks may seem a tad superficial in the politically correct 21st century but a charming handsome man as James Bond does make the films seem more glamorous. The whole concept of movie stars is based around that - people (in general) tend to prefer to see better looking people on the big screen.

I'm sure there are many actors out there that could make for a decent, possibly realistic Bond but do they really embody the look of the character? Richard Burton was one of Fleming's choices for the part:

http://www.cinemaretro.com/index.php?/archives/382-RICHARD-BURTON-THE-MAN-WHO-WOULD-BE-BOND.html

Burton was a fine well-respected actor but he wasn't Bond material when compared to Connery. Connery had that extra something about him.


Totally diagree 100% that Daniel Craig is NOT 'Bond Material'
 
1) Connery is overated at best
 
2) Craig is ideal for the role, the fcat he's not 'drop dead' good looking as is Mr Average means he has the capacity to illicet more 'reality' from the role
 
3) He's an excellent Bond, (particuarly in Casino Royale), played all sides of the character perfectly and IMO he's the best Bond yet. Connery's not even the 2nd best, Dalton is.

(in reply to dreddhead123)
Post #: 239
RE: Bond 23 - 19/1/2011 5:04:28 PM   
crazyben66


Posts: 60
Joined: 27/6/2010
I like Craig as Bond, he has that almost arrogant, slightly posh class to his character and his acting style. However, I think the latest Bond movies have been a little over-produced, my favourite sequence in Quantum of Solace was the creep-out action chase during the opera because it was so different to the normal point-and-shoot action they all seem to be filled with. I'm sure Mendes will stretch Bond to a more dramatic level but I'd truly love to see a Nolan Bond or even a visioning by Edgar Wright. That would make my life.

_____________________________


"HAHA! It's called internal bleeding f**ker! And then you die!"

"SHUT UP, CRIME!"

(in reply to JIm R)
Post #: 240
Page:   <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Future Films >> RE: Bond 23 Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Movie News|Empire Blog|Movie Reviews|Future Films|Features|Video Interviews|Image Gallery|Competitions|Forum|Magazine|Resources
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.203