I don’t see anything out of character either. Dalton told his M “you have my resignation, sir” after he felt enough wasn’t been done to avenge Felix. Craig’s Felix had just died before the briefing sequence with M, and that subject does get raised. Despite the tension Mallory still respects Bond’s instincts and follows the Belmarsh/Blofeld lead, and soon after they’re working together again.
7 Likes
Maybe it’s just me and I don’t like Craig as Bond to begin with.
He just keeps nagging about the size of the desk and the room, I understand what he’s doing and why, but one remark was for me enough than it just felt overdone. It just irritates me a lot, but what I said: maybe it’s just me.
2 Likes
My feelings about Craig as Bond flip-flopped during and after his era, something which did not happen with the other actors.
Although I now have reversed my feeling about Lazenby: from weak to pretty good.
With Craig it probably was due to him being so different from the mold at first, then him getting all the accolades which diminished the public‘s opinion of the previous ones, even the always revered Connery.
I had no problem with his comment after SP - actors say the dumbest stuff without a proper script. But his hesitating to commit to another Bond and demanding and getting the influence on NTTD, ending up with no result which would have made me think „it’s really good that he got his say in it“ - those things disappointed me.
And they led me to the conclusion that the halo over him is not merited but the result of great marketing power.
I am looking forward to rewatching the Craig era though, just to find out whether my feelings are justified or rather bitterness because his five films were spread over almost two decades.
9 Likes
This is the only point I really tripped over. Was Craig’s marketing all that good?
That first presser was practically a debacle, not in the actual reporting as in the way it’s been slung around the net afterwards*. Admittedly, the foaming tabloids had already made up their mind to tear Craig to shreds, regardless of how the event went. Having him in that speedboat with the life jacket around the suit gave the hacks extra ammunition they gratefully used to snipe at the production.
The film then was promoted along the lines of “Everyone has a past. Every legend has a beginning” but the obvious BATMAN BEGINS parallels apart I don’t think that’s really what made people watch it. The film itself was, a solid entertainment that really went where no other Bond film could up to then.
Afterwards, promo campaigns, ads and posters concentrated on Craig, true. But most were very middling affairs. The ones to pronounce Craig the best, better than all previous Bonds, better than Connery - that’s really been us fans. Okay, around the time of QUANTUM OF SOLACE there had been some covert spin doctor push by those few people who then managed MGM until its final buyout. But that was largely by pied pipers whose brief had been to stir up support for the new administration. None of those characters stuck around long once the paycheques had arrived in the mail.
SKYFALL was probably the film that made the most of its 50 year anniversary - but once again, the judgement by critics and audiences to me seemed largely based on the actual performance and the film itself. Of course, there’s often been that verdict ‘the best since Connery’, even during the Brosnan era. ‘Better than Connery’ though I haven’t heard before. But perhaps that’s likewise a marker of the times, superlatives and hyperbole are now a standard.
Is that perhaps where the whole notion really originates, in our need to pronounce our favourite entertainment supreme, superior to everything that came before? The great marketing power, is that possibly largely made up from our own belief in the product?
*Even the Beeb wondered if the public was ready for a ‘blond Bond’ as if they had forgotten, along with that bunch of trolls, about Roger Moore.
5 Likes
Absolutely agreed that the introduction presser was ill conceived.
But I think at least after SKYFALL the press was fawning over Craig, and that kind of total support can often be achieved by behind the scenes efforts concentrated on the right journalists, leading to a domino chain.
Of course, the generation which grows up with one Bond tends to prefer that guy, so Craig had that going for him as well. In addition to the social change around that time Connery and Moore were easily considered as politically incorrect and ripe for ridicule and scorn.
But even today Craig is still considered THE BEST. And that is a label which might either hurt the next guy or be put in its place.
5 Likes
Yes, fully agreed as well.
4 Likes
Depends on who you ask. im my book THE BEST still is the man who set the standard, Sean Connery 
9 Likes
Agreed, it depends who we ask. Things have become more compartmentalised, happening in different bubbles which often share only a few individuals.
But the media bubble, for all the importance they’ve lost, is still able to set the tone and decide how an individual is perceived. With that set Craig is THE Bond of the 21st century, often also because even basic research isn’t done any more and real Bond experts are far and few in today’s newsrooms and tv stations. And that capital also bought significant interest in the KNIVES OUT franchise and most recently, QUEER.
But it’s a bubble perception, a lot of it confirmation bias and not necessarily in line with how Craig is viewed outside that particular focus group. Just look how QUEER went without any nomination for the Academy Awards.
4 Likes
Here’s the thing with the media, though: when someone’s new and largely an unknown quantity, as Craig was, they’re going to start with skepticism (Why him and not the last guy? Why him and not the one we wanted chosen? Does the world even need another one of these movies? Etc). When he turns out not to look like what James Bond is generally expected to look like (unlike, say, Brosnan who seemed to have been built to specs from a mail order kit), then they’re going to piggy pile (This guy is doomed! What are they thinking? You read it here first; the series ends here!).
When, however, the public ends up taking to his portrayal and the movie makes a boatload of money, that same press will fall over themselves to praise and kiss up to him and Eon, because that’s the route to getting into those little press junket rooms so they can interview him up close and personal and push up their ratings, social media hits and YouTube viewership numbers with their idiotic questions and silly party games. As long as they get that access and they can be seen hanging out with a bonafide star, he will always be “the best Bond since Connery” or even “the best Bond ever” in their stories, but as soon as the next guy comes along it all starts over again: (1) start with doubt, (2) if he fumbles eat him alive and (3) if he triumphs, transition to sycophant mode and claim you believed in him from the start.
I think there are fans who started with Craig and think he’s the best, which is to be expected. I think there are fans who will like pretty much any Bond they get. I think there is a generation that can’t see anything older than 20 years old for dirt. But I also know there are fans who feel “meh” about Craig (because I’m one of them) and fans who hated his entire run. Just like every other Bond. I don’t think it matters what the press thinks, because their “praise” is for sale, and their “opinion” is whatever it needs to be to improve readership/viewership.
7 Likes
Oh, yes.
And not getting even nominated after doing the awards circle duties thoroughly might also indicate that he has not enough supporters in the industry to push him. Or that - as in any popularity contest, these awards are nothing but - Craig is currently not en vogue enough anymore.
2 Likes
I think Craig is a solid actor who was really out to push his own boundaries and shine. And the film is probably just what might have earned him a nomination (and an award?) five years or 15 years ago. But the AA are also a highly volatile thing and world affairs right at the moment went into an entirely different direction. It’s still debatable whether this year’s event should really go ahead as planned.
Craig has his fans, many of them truly and rightfully impressed by his performance - but in the larger scheme it just wasn’t what the Academy felt earned a nomination. I cannot say whether that’s been a fair snubbing or screaming injustice, I haven’t watched any of the contenders.
2 Likes
In other words: to many potential financial backers (including Eon’s own) currently have their heads stuck up in …erm… certain people’s …erm… you know what I mean… and they fear disadvantages when they lean to much into certain directions. Heaven knows what’s gonna happen within the next few years. Democracy may die in darkness, but integrity usually does in broad daylight.
3 Likes
It’s entirely possible we’re looking at weeks, not years. This train hasn’t got many brakes left - possibly none, depending if ius soli gets trashed - and all of its wheels are just waiting to come off. One cannot even hope for it to happen because the fallout will likely be just as bad as the original train wreck.
That said, I think they wanted to send a message, just not one that QUEER would deliver.
1 Like
Craig was trashed and had to earn the praise, as far as I am concerned. It all started to change when the Madagascar publicity stills appeared, with a headline ‘who are you calling Octopussy?’. From that point on he was being perceived as masculine and in charge.
The reaction to Casino Royale was down to the quality, not exclusively the marketing. People loved it, and that fostered goodwill which lasted a long time - even through the disappointment some felt with Quantum of Solace. I don’t have a problem with any new Bond actor being called the best ever, because it means the franchise is in a healthy place.
6 Likes
I do remember that. It was a welcome relief back in the day when you were with “Team Craig”… 
Silenced some of the naysayers and made moderating CBn a little (but really just a little) bit easier. Tough days back then, one couldn’t leave the site a lone for more than an hour without anything new going on or another fresh hell breaking loose.
Brings me to the conclusion that we might be about to face something similar again – whoever it may be. I’m so looking forward to it… 
This.
But one has to admit that the marketing was better than for some of the others (say, QoS).
5 Likes
My feelings about Daniel Craig have flip-flopped as well. When he was hired, he was not my first choice (Hugh Jackman was my man), but having seen Layer Cake, I did think there was something there and was willing to give him a shot. And then I loved Casino Royale and thought Craig gave the best debut performance of any James Bond actor. As a result, while I liked all six 007 actors, for me there were a clear four (Pierce Brosnan, Roger Moore, Sean Connery, and Craig) above the other two (Timothy Dalton and George Lazenby) with Craig clearly in fourth place.
Then up through SPECTRE, I still believed Craig was fourth. While I didn’t like his slitting the wrists comment, I didn’t hold it against him. But then, after various delays, No Time To Die came out and we soon learned Craig only came back to kill his Bond off and that didn’t, and still doesn’t, sit well with me. Adding to that, his increased say in the films–way more than any other Bond actor got–and Barbara Broccoli’s overt fawning over him has lowered his status and standing in my eyes.
I know the off the screen stuff shouldn’t affect my rankings of what he did onscreen, but it’s hard to ignore. But as for that onscreen stuff, I find NTTD easily the worst film in the series and other than CR and SPECTRE, Craig’s Bond doesn’t seem to be having any fun in the series and that is not Bond–at least movie Bond–and that also hurts his tenure. Now, after all that, I’m wondering if Craig has now dropped to my least favorite 007. I haven’t thought too hard about it, but it is definitely on my mind now, and that is something I never would have thought post-SPECTRE.
3 Likes
This is my main complaint about the Craig films, and I hope it is corrected in the next batch (MAKE BOND FUN AGAIN)
However…
It was NTTD that made me realize this wasn’t Craig’s fault, as I once thought it was.
In NTTD the Jamaica scenes… the Cuba scenes… THAT was closer to what I wanted. Especially Cuba - he had that lighter touch there.
He could have played a lighter Bond just fine, it’s just not what Eon and creative partners wanted.
6 Likes
I agree with the Jamaica scenes and that Daniel Craig could have played a lighter side and that it’s not what EON and the creatives wanted. However, I don’t think he is without blame here either. I think he was fully on board with the direction they were going in, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he also encouraged it. He certainly wanted to kill his Bond off.
4 Likes
Quote of the day. No, year. No, decade. Decades. Eternity.
4 Likes
I must disagree, BB wanted Craig so badly, his success with CR made her open to anything he wanted. And he did say after CR to her that he wanted to kill Bond off. Which is the only reason he returned for NTTD (apart from many more millions in his bank account).
5 Likes