From the day he was chosen to be 007 there has been a concerted slag off campaign against Craig ,only since reading this thread have I realised that he was in "Layer Cake "Wow what a movie ! if you havent seen it do your self a treat and do so !Though I knew nothing at all ,and cared less about him the strange way he was getting attacked in the press when the bloody film was only even being THOUGHT about aroused my suspicions .I would not faint away with astonishment if its sour grapes from the person who didn
t get the part or simply somebody who doesn`t like him !
Perhaps its an attempt to make Bond more realistic,I would suspect that a Secret Intelligence Service agent might look more rugged then good looking .Female undercover British soldiers working in Ulster during "the troubles " were instructed if too pretty ,to "put a few pounds on ,"cos we want you looking at the terrorists and not the terrorists looking at you !"I qoute.
The fact that people are even arguing about it at all proves my point. Nobody, NOBODY, argued that Pierce Brosnan wasn’t handsome enough to play James Bond. A few people maybe thought he was too “pretty.” There was nobody calling him ugly.
I personally think that whoever plays James Bond should be unquestionably handsome. With Craig, there is a huge question over whether he’s handsome enough. Sure, there a lot of people here saying that he’s sexy, and that’s understandable because I can absolutely see how he is sexy. He has a rough around the edges look, and plenty of women like it.
But why not have someone rough around the edges AND classically handsome? Why not have someone with a creased, grizzled, stubbly face, AND thick black hair and a strong chin? Why not have the best of both worlds?
Has anyone seen the Irish movie Dead Man’s Shoes? Remember Gary Stretch, who played the gangster Sonny? THERE is someone who looks like James Bond. Thick, black hair in a perfect widow’s peak, a strong, chin, grizzled stubbly face, slightly graying, and an incredible vitality and energy in his eyes. He looks like a combination of George Clooney and Tom Selleck. Yes, folks, it’s possible for someone to be classically handsome and rough-around-the-edges at the same time. Why have only the latter when you could have both?
Having read all of the orignal Bond books as a kid, I can agree with this. James Bond is an angry, focused, sociopathic ( sociopathological ?? ) killer who happens to be rather patriotic.
His cool comes from his anger, which is honed and crisp not distorting and blurry rage. He’s been hurt, lost love and has no problem dispatching anyone he is told to dispatch.
Seems to me that this new bloke may be spot-on, as they say.
Cartooniverse
This is all fine and dandy. My point is that a cold, focused, sociopathic killer can also be classically handsome.
Totally pedantic nitpick, but if they’re agents working in Northern Ireland, they’re probably members of the Security Service (MI5) rather than the Bond’s employer (MI6). ("'Six" hasn’t officially gone by the name of “Secret Service” since WWI, though the name was and probably still is used colloquially. It is, however, not “Her Majesty’s Secret Service” as described in Bond canon, but “Her Majesty’s Special Intelligence Service,” which admittedly doesn’t have quite the same ring to it.)
The idea of Bond being played by Tom Selleck, or even someone who remotely looks like Tom Selleck, is enough to make me shudder.
Again, EON is going for something other than “pretty face, absurd gagdets, and outlandish (and often vaguely swishy) villians.” If you take issue with that, perhaps you’d just best avoid the film entirely, 'cause I don’t think it’s going to live up to the standards set by that great cinematic milestone, Moonraker, must less aspire to the thespian heights of The World Is Not Enough. It’s possible that it might even produce a plot and a few scenes that will actually remain in memory for longer than it takes to reach the cinema door, a quality not shared by any Brosnan film. (I remember something about an orbiting satellite and a stealth ship, and the term “African Conflict Diamonds” is wafting around in my head, but I have a hard time seperating the recent films from each other.)
My money’s still on Craig to be the first to walk out of the bar with a woman on his arm, Putin resemblance or no.
Stranger
Everything about Casino Royale looks great. The locations look great, the story looks great, the other actors are great choices. I will definitely see the movie.
Also, I’m totally supportive of the idea of Bond being more rugged, more dangerous, more menacing, and less pretty. 100%. I hate the stupid gadgets as much as you do. And except for Goldeneye (which was a great movie,) the rest of the Pierce Brosnan movies did suck. I will freely admit this.
My only issue is with the casting of Craig. I think they could have found someone who was more traditionally handsome, as well as being rugged and rough looking.
Well, we’ll see how he pans out. You ought to check out Layer Cake, if you haven’t already. While the film’s a bit of a muddle in bits, he’s fantastic in it (as others have mentioned) and I can definitely see him playing Bond with the kind of intensity that Roger Moore or Pierce Brosnan never dreamed of, and even Connery would have a hard time holding a candle to. Plus it has Colm Meaney and George Harris in great scenery-chewing roles as Craig’s henchmen; watching Meaney emotionlessly dispatch a couple of wannabe gangsters and Harris beat the living crap out of a former mate who betrayed to the strains of “Ordinary World” are almost Scorsese-like scenes. It ain’t Goodfellas, and Meaney and Harris aren’t quite DeNiro and Pesci, but they’re a fair approximation.)
Stranger
You know who I think is currently the most “classically” handsome man on TV? Ed Quinn who is currently on the show Eureka. To me, the guy looks like a Greek statue come to life. But I have a feeling he doesn’t look as good in a bathing suit. Daniel Craig does.
I saw Layer Cake as soon as it came out on DVD. It was a great movie. I think Craig’s acting was good. It’s just his look that I don’t like.
Word.
‘Classically handsome’, to me, just means thick hair and symmetrical features, maybe a smidgen of botox. Yawn. I just can’t figure out why so many men are offended by an ‘ugly’ Bond, especially when he’s the first one I know of that’s gotten my ladyfriends hot and bothered.
I never thought Jeff Goldblum was bad looking.
Someone who had his facial features would be much better suited to play James Bond than someone who looked like Craig.
Oh, is this still going on? OK, Argent Towers, how about this? Should I, every time you resurrect this thread, come on & post,
Daniel Craig is made of SEX,
or what?
Oh, wait, it wasn’t Argent Towers who necro’d the thread. Never mind.
But there’s a quality that Craig has, which he shares with Paul Gulacy’s drawings of Bond, & to some degree with Timothy Dalton. A slighty dirty, craggy, somewhat imperfect, somewhat aged, masculinity. It’s not a prettiness, it’s a slightly melted not-quite-handsomeness. And it works for the character.
I would jump over my own dear mum to get at him. He may not be “handsome” but he oozes sexiness out of every pore.
He looks like the kind of guy that could convince you to try all sorts of kinky stuff anywhere, which just a raised eyebrow.
Thanks a lot, now how am i going to get through my day?
I can help you with your question about Jeff Goldblum. Guys don’t like other guys who have self-confidence when they have it for no damn good reason, or they’re simply conceited.
Daniel Craig is like Steve McQueen. Mediocre in still photos, mesmerizing in motion.
This is the first time I’ve been excited by a Bond movie since Sean Connery stopping playing the role.
Well, at least according to co-star Judi Dench, the H word that best describes Craig isn’t “handsome”:
I think you got it there.
The Bond franchise has been going downhill with every new “tall, dark, and handsome” actor they’ve brought in. And I’ve skipped them all.
You want “Bond” looking they might as well bring in Ben Afleck, Alec Baldwin, or Tom Cruise (shudder).
Bringing in Craig is like a breath of fresh air. Kind of like “okay, we know what your used to seeing, Hollywood Mr. Suave. But here’s what Bond really looks like!” More emphasis on undercover licensed to kill government agent, less emphasis on womanizing prettyboy.
:eek: Oh my.