That is not James Bond.

[Masut]

Everyone I've shown the trailer to has had a completely negative reaction to Craig's appearance. I look forward to seeing his version of Bond and the new style he'll bring to the movie. But no one can say he looks like Bond, because it's quite obvious he doesn't.

Pro-Craig fans are looking forward to seeing his talent on the screen and what he will bring to the Bond character. If they try and tell you he looks the part they are quite dillusional. He does have his 'Bond looking moments' but even then, he seems a bit out of place. He is a fine actor and his Bond will be good, but he doesn't have the look and that's well known by now.

Craig bashers on the other hand can't get past his looks and can't envision the rest of what he will bring to the character. This will be a good movie no matter how Craig looks in it, so just enjoy it or visualise someone elses face on Bond for the time being.

Craig wasn't cast by his looks. He was cast because he's a diverse actor who can bring new life to Bond on the big screen.

 

[Agentsands77]

Cuz your new for future reference that is not a good post. You basically said his argument is bad simply because he has a different opinion. Many people, myself included think Micheal Keaton did a good job as Batman. This is a good post,

I'm not attacking his opinion on Keaton, rather I was merely pointing out the inconsistency between liking Keaton as Batman when he clearly neither visually nor physically matches the role and then attacking Craig for allegedly failing in the same areas that Keaton ultimately does.

For the record, I like Keaton as Batman and think he fulfilled the role pretty well. I also think Craig fills the physical aspect of Bond. He's cool, sexy, masculine, and intimidating. He gets a solid thumbs up for me. Is he different from what we're used to in 007? Yeah. He definitely is. But that doesn't mean I think he's inappropriate for the role.

 

[Oldguy]

Please tell me you're not serious.

About Flemming prefering a Moore-type over Connery? He did. Was he right? Matter of opinion, I guess.

 

[Oldguy]

...Pro-Craig fans are looking forward to seeing his talent on the screen and what he will bring to the Bond character. If they try and tell you he looks the part they are quite dillusional. He does have his 'Bond looking moments' but even then, he seems a bit out of place. He is a fine actor and his Bond will be good, but he doesn't have the look and that's well known by now...

I feel the same way about Pro-Brandon fans.

 

[the gael]

To me, there's a great difference between craig and connery or dalton. Connery ( the best bond ) or dalton were cold and ruthless killers ( and it was a good thing I agree ), but they also had phlegm and sophistication. That's the addition of both which make a great Bond.

Moore lacked the killer side but to my mind craig is even worst : he lack the british style of a guy who came from the famous Eton college.

I don't say that craig is a bad actor. He looked a very credible killer. He just doesn't look a british agent.

The british style has nothing to do with the experience inside MI6. I think Bond is a sophisticated guy that had to armour himself as a killer in casino royale, not a killer that has to become sophisticated ( if a guy who came from Eton isn't british enough then... )

And it has nothing to do with craig look even if a blond guy with such a face doesn't say " james bond ". The only bondish thing he has are his blue eyes. fleming book bond has blue eyes and I liked dalton green eyes. They gave him such a dangerous look.

 

[Don Corleone]

for all those who arer STILL not sure about craig...ust wait unitl the movie come out, I'm confident that he won't dissappoint

 

[James"007"Bond]

To me, there's a great difference between craig and connery or dalton. Connery ( the best bond ) or dalton were cold and ruthless killers ( and it was a good thing I agree ), but they also had phlegm and sophistication. That's the addition of both which make a great Bond.

Moore lacked the killer side but to my mind craig is even worst : he lack the british style of a guy who came from the famous Eton college.

I don't say that craig is a bad actor. He looked a very credible killer. He just doesn't look a british agent.

The british style has nothing to do with the experience inside MI6. I think Bond is a sophisticated guy that had to armour himself as a killer in casino royale, not a killer that has to become sophisticated ( if a guy who came from Eton isn't british enough then... )

And it has nothing to do with craig look even if a blond guy with such a face doesn't say " james bond ". The only bondish thing he has are his blue eyes. fleming book bond has blue eyes and I liked dalton green eyes. They gave him such a dangerous look.

Its evident you've lost the plot.

This movie is supposed to be the genesis of Bond's career as a 00 agent. Bond has just come out of military and navy duties, so its only natural he looks and acts the way he does. Over time, he progresses once he becomes a 00 agent, then, we'll get the more suave and calmer Bond. Craig's Bond will be inexperienced and most likely the most reckless because he's a rookie. Saying he lacks the British style and not looking as though he went to Eton is pure ignorance, joining the navy and gaining military training will harden anyone who want the skills and Bond has the skills. Do you know what a ficticious British secret agent is supposed to look like? I dont think you do, its all subjective.

Imo Craig is perfect because he's captured the look of what Bond would and should look like before becomming a 00 agent for MI6. Also to his credit, we see that he has great taste for the finer things in life, all in all, this movie as Kevin said is about a smoothe yet rugged loking Bond....in his preliminary stage of being a 00 agent, this new series of Bond movies will evolve craig's character into the "more familiar" Bond that you seek.

 

[user123456789]

I have a question...

The shot of him shooting into the screen, WHY DOES IT LOOK LIKE A DAMN BATHROOM?

 

[Masut]

I have a question...

The shot of him shooting into the screen, WHY DOES IT LOOK LIKE A DAMN BATHROOM?

It is a bathroom.

Bond had to make pee pee.

 

[Johnny Drama]

You make a good point man, I've read alot about Flemings thoughts on the film Dr.No and to be honest I think his idea of Bond would not be as successful or memorable as the man is today.

That is BS. Sean Connery is not what Flemming had in mind because Connery is not Bond. Roger More is.

 

[kit1982]

That is BS. Sean Connery is not what Flemming had in mind because Connery is not Bond. Roger More is.

Says who? You? You haven't even spelt the guys name right
notice why Oldguy said he wasn't going to touch this subject? because there is no right or wrong

 

[Oldguy]

Says who? You? You haven't even spelt the guys name right
notice why Oldguy said he wasn't going to touch this subject? because there is no right or wrong

Well, here's a wee bit of clarification. Flemming met Connery on the set of Dr.No. He didn't like him, thought the rough scottsman was a ditch digger. Flemming is Bond, his character is semi auto-biographical. It's extremely ****ing facinating, there's been a few cool documentaries on it. Anyhoo, what Flemming liked about Bond, the qualities he gave him(from himself, really) are much more in line with Moore's interpretation than Connery's. Had Flemming lived long enough to see Moore, he probably would have preferred his Bond.

Was Flemming an infallible writer? I don't think his books ever sold that well without the movies. That being said, the ditch digger Bond is my favourite, but the two interpretations are equally valid, seeing as that has been the tradition of the franchise, to alternate rugged and suave Bonds.

 

[kit1982]

Well, here's a wee bit of clarification. Flemming met Connery on the set of Dr.No. He didn't like him, thought the rough scottsman was a ditch digger. Flemming is Bond, his character is semi auto-biographical. It's extremely ****ing facinating, there's been a few cool documentaries on it. Anyhoo, what Flemming liked about Bond, the qualities he gave him(from himself, really) are much more in line with Moore's interpretation than Connery's. Had Flemming lived long enough to see Moore, he probably would have preferred his Bond.

Was Flemming an infallible writer? I don't think his books ever sold that well without the movies. That being said, the ditch digger Bond is my favourite, but the two interpretations are equally valid, seeing as that has been the tradition of the franchise, to alternate rugged and suave Bonds.

Didn't he want Moore for Dr. No? I understand all that bond was Fleming and all that jazz, but my main point was you can't seriously sum up James Bond by saying Connery isn't and Moore is. Bob Kane prefered Kilmer to Keaton, does that mean Kilmer is Batman? It simply can't be summed up by "thats BS X is Bond Y isn't"

 

[Hunter Rider]

He is not the Bond we are used to,the matinee handsome leading man

Craig is smaller and more rugged looking like a Jack Bauer type but in the books Bond was not this handsome screen god either

So he is Bond,he is the new Bond,a different take on the character in an attempt to freshen things up and after my initial displeasure at the casting he has won me over into giving him a shot at HIS Bond

 

[the gael]

He is not the Bond we are used to,the matinee handsome leading man

Craig is smaller and more rugged looking like a Jack Bauer

that's ( one of ) my concern with the movie. Craig's bond is too rude without any phlegm. He is too... american ( sorry I have nothing against american people but I have an huge grudge against an americanized Bond ) in his style.

for many years, Bond fans were worried by the desire of some producer to americanize the character. here we are, but some ( who previously refused it ) accept it now because " It's a fresh start ". WTF ? I still don't understand and don't accept it.

 

[Mentok]

About Flemming prefering a Moore-type over Connery? He did. Was he right? Matter of opinion, I guess.

I find it hard to believe anyone likes Moore as Bond

Personal taste I guess.

 

[Odin's Lapdog]

haha, you're all realising the light that timmy wasn't so bad after all...

hehehehehhehehehe

 

[Mentok]

I watched his ones recently and for the life of me cant figure out why I didnt like him.

He was quite good as Bond, pitty he didnt stay on for another film or two though.

 

[Odin's Lapdog]

timmy's always been my favourite, straight to the point, no messing and very edgy. just how i would see a spy being.

too bad he started when bond became a charicature of connery and moore.

what can you do, personally i feel the 're-invention' could be a good thing, as long as it keeps it's british roots and doesn't become a blockbuster film like the last batch of bond films.

 

[James"007"Bond]

Bond hasn't been Americanised and Craig's Bond is far from being American from what I've seen. CR is supposed to take place in exotic locations and has been taken back to its roots. These batch of Bond films wont be like DAD, they're going to be grounded and handled more seriously ala the Bourne films.

 

[Jager X]

hmm did anyone complain when christian bale didn't have all that experience and weapons that batman is known for? if this is the very first book then one should expect him not to be very bond like until later in the film if that soon.you can tell by his expressions that he's not comfortable with being a 00 agent just yet.

 

[MaskedManJRK]

I have a question...

The shot of him shooting into the screen, WHY DOES IT LOOK LIKE A DAMN BATHROOM?

From what we've heard, the black/white stuff is the pre-credit/credit sequence, where Bond is just a regular agent. The gun-barrel sequence is his second kill, making him a full-fledged 00 agent, and when that happens, color is introduced for the first time in the movie as the red blood.

 

[Mentok]

Plus its in a bathroom

 

[The Man]

From what we've heard, the black/white stuff is the pre-credit/credit sequence, where Bond is just a regular agent. The gun-barrel sequence is his second kill, making him a full-fledged 00 agent, and when that happens, color is introduced for the first time in the movie as the red blood.

That's a pretty funky idea

 

[The Trainman]

Flemming only lived long enough to meet Sean Connery briefly on the set of Dr. No. Flemming was severly disappointed. He thought Connery was a ditch digger, not the refined gentleman that Bond was(who is based on Flemming.)

**** Flemming, give me a ditch digger over a pansy any day of the week, it's not like it diminishes the character in any way.

True, Fleming didn't approve of Connery at first but brutally loved him as the scenes went along. Go see The James Bond Story and watch Terence Young (director of Dr. No) justify this.