Is Craig a lame duck Bond?

[Capt. Sir Dominic Flandry]

I believe that Daniel Craig has nowhere to go with his Bond. He did something a little different with Casino Royale and was praised. He tried to recapture the spirit of Casino Royale in Quantum of Solace and it was a disaster. The critics and the general public wanted the old style Bond back. The old style Bond will probably return. Craig cannot play the old Bond, so Bond 23 will be as odd as Quantum of Solace.

Brosnan and Dalton each could have made another interesting Bond movie if they had stayed on. Craig has nowhere to go now. I'm just waiting for him to be replaced so the series can be relaunched again, this time with the classic Bond character and the aspects of the cinematic Bond that made the series famous. Craig is a lame duck Bond.

[JackWade CIA]

You might be on to something here. From all that has been said by everybody involved after Quantum the reboot is done and they want to go back to the old days. I don't see how it is possible. Maybe they will surprise us with good script and some how make the world forget Casino Royale and Quantum came before this third movie. Because I don't see how else they can accomplish a merging of Daniel Craig with the Bond linage of George Lazenby or his predecessor. In many ways Craig's Bond will probably be looked back on a fluke and perhaps a missed opportunity to really do something new and start off set a new set of movies in completly new direction. If all they have to fallback on is the old formula then Cirag's days as Bond may have been colossal waste of everyone's time. That is how I feel if all they had was 2 years of a different motif, then it all was for naught because they throw all the blood sweat and turmoil of the reboot in to the dumpster and pulling out the suit their grandfather was married in. That to me is not worth it. Before the end I may wind up wishing we never met Daniel Craig or his Bond.

[FormerBondFan]

I can't see Craig doing a traditional Bond movie.

[carl stromberg]

I've added a poll Capt!

Now that the reboot concept has collapsed after QOS I think Craig is a lame duck Bond.

[Kristatos]

I had to vote no, much as I would have liked to vote yes. He's already signed on for the next film, so any talk of him being replaced is just wishful thinking.

[Goldeneye]

I don't know much it is about him being replaced as much as it is about him being a lame duck. Like a President in their second term.

[carl stromberg]

I don't know much it is about him being replaced as much as it is about him being a lame duck. Like a President in their second term.

Unlike a President in their second term, Craig has not stated when he is leaving the role. He did say he wants to make three and then "get on with his life". Let's hope he keeps to that!

I don't think he can do anything interesting with the role now.

[FormerBondFan]

I don't think he can do anything interesting with the role now.

Star Trek will always be there for him since he is passionate about being in either the TV series or movies. After all, he is a big fan.

[Mazer Rackham]

If the reboot is done with then he is a Lame Duck. Although the rumors make it sound like they will finish the trilogy Craig said he wouldn't do.

[Dr. No]

How do you mean lame duck?
You could say roger moore was a lame duck for 5 movies

[oscartheman]

Nope.He is done.Nothing new to offer.Reboot is finished.He might hope to get a academy award or something by hiring the guy who wrote the script that robbed him of the Bafta.Maybe they will kill off Bond to mark the end of Craig's ugly stint.

[stockslivevan]

Nope.He is done.Nothing new to offer.Reboot is finished.He might hope to get a academy award or something by hiring the guy who wrote the script that robbed him of the Bafta.Maybe they will kill off Bond to mark the end of Craig's ugly stint.

Doubtful.

[Capt. Sir Dominic Flandry]

How do you mean lame duck?
You could say roger moore was a lame duck for 5 movies

It's probably a rathr loose definition of the term, but I feel a lame duck is someone who has lost power and influence and everyone is waiting for them to be replaced. Craig is going to leave Bond at some point in the future (hopefully ). I feel he has nothing to offer Bond for the rest of his tenure as his new Bond character is not very popular now. I'm waiting for a new Bond to refresh the series again.

Which 5 movies was Roger a lame duck for Dr? Roger could always make a traditional Roger movie, which he did with Octopussy and A View To A Kill. Craig cannot make another Bond like Casino Royale or Quantum of Solace.

[Dr. No]

I Gotcha. For doing something new then maybe Craigis out of luck. Everyone says they are not making a trilogy and are going back to the old formula which I can't see Craig doing well with then he maybe be killing time and collecting the next paycheck before heading off. makes him a bit of a hypocrite after all that talk of changing Bond and changing the stories talk.

[Roger Devereau]

I Gotcha. For doing something new then maybe Craigis out of luck. Everyone says they are not making a trilogy and are going back to the old formula which I can't see Craig doing well with then he maybe be killing time and collecting the next paycheck before heading off. makes him a bit of a hypocrite after all that talk of changing Bond and changing the stories talk.

Great post. Daniel Craig presents himself as a serious actor who took on the Bond role because it was a challenge to do something very different with the role. I have heard the origin trilogy has ended and Bond 23 will be like the old Bond. So as Dr. No stated Daniel is a hypocrite to continue in the role after stating that he is in it for the acting challenge it gives.

[Dr. No]

I Gotcha. For doing something new then maybe Craigis out of luck. Everyone says they are not making a trilogy and are going back to the old formula which I can't see Craig doing well with then he maybe be killing time and collecting the next paycheck before heading off. makes him a bit of a hypocrite after all that talk of changing Bond and changing the stories talk.

Great post. Daniel Craig presents himself as a serious actor who took on the Bond role because it was a challenge to do something very different with the role. I have heard the origin trilogy has ended and Bond 23 will be like the old Bond. So as Dr. No stated Daniel is a hypocrite to continue in the role after stating that he is in it for the acting challenge it gives.

I mean his whole proposition was Bond had to change, and it had to be different kind of movies. Doesn't sound like too many like it in Qos. Cr seems more and more like fluke. Whic I found a depressing movie over all.
For Craig to want to go back tot eh old formula seems very two faced,

[mcbride007]

He is taking the money and has sold out now.

[JackWade CIA]

I should be clear Daniel Craig did something bold and fresh with Casino Royale. Another actor might have done as well or better, however another actor didn’t make Casino Royale.

I feel that the invigoration from Casino Royale was squandered in Quantum of Solace. Now the notion of dismissing the whole concept behind Casino Royale makes the Craig Bond completely impotent. Literally no point to Casino Royale and the immediate sequel with the third outing expunging itself from Royale timeline and stories. In some ways we as Bond fans would be better served by Casino Royale and then a reboot. Quantum is souring the taste of Royale better to sever the connection and have one good movie than one good movie and two as a casualty.

[stockslivevan]

Maybe my memory is fuzzy, but did Craig really say that he wanted to play "Recruited Bond" in all his films? Last I recall that was originally for CR then the next film would be standard business until EON changed their minds and expanded CR with QOS, and now again they're starting clean again with Bond 23. I've always assumed that Craig would play a straight Bond film after CR along the road, it seemed inevitable. Moneypenny and Q were always said to be brought back in the future. Bond elements have been brought back in QOS one way or another, now they're going full on. Just because Craig is enthusiastic about a more relaxed film after QOS I don't think we should take it as in he wants to do it Roger Moore style. Now I'd complain about that. I think the best tone to go for is similar Connery's early films (the Terence Young ones), albeit a more modern interpretation. A mix of spy thriller and adventure.

[carl stromberg]

Maybe my memory is fuzzy, but did Craig really say that he wanted to play "Recruited Bond" in all his films? Last I recall that was originally for CR then the next film would be standard business until EON changed their minds and expanded CR with QOS, and now again they're starting clean again with Bond 23. I've always assumed that Craig would play a straight Bond film after CR along the road, it seemed inevitable. Moneypenny and Q were always said to be brought back in the future. Bond elements have been brought back in QOS one way or another, now they're going full on. Just because Craig is enthusiastic about a more relaxed film after QOS I don't think we should take it as in he wants to do it Roger Moore style. Now I'd complain about that. I think the best tone to go for is similar Connery's early films (the Terence Young ones), albeit a more modern interpretation. A mix of spy thriller and adventure.

In 2005/6 everyone admitted that Craig looked nothing like Bond and could not make a Bond film like Connery or Moore. It was argued that this was a good thing as it meant a fresh approach to Bond, something a bit different. Craig said that he took on the role because it was a different take on Bond. Bond 23 will probably see a typical by-the-numbers post-Cubby Eon Bond. Brosnan can carry that off, but Craig cannot. Does he want to make such a film? Does anyone want to watch it?