Did Bond loses his pedigree?

Blowfeld · Post by **Blowfeld** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:06 pm

I've heard some comments in my travels far and wide along the lines that Bond has lost his pedigree with the "reboot".
What say you?

BondFan007 · Post by **BondFan007** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:06 pm

Nope, still the same high life loving Bond, who drinks expensive champagne, vintage wine eats caviar and knows how to order a high class drink (Vesper).

Captain Nash · Post by **Captain Nash** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:14 pm

In what way has he lost his pedigree?
I found the character to be much the same as he's always been. It's just a different actor in the role. For some reason people don't like change. There loss I guess.

ID · Post by ID » Wed Feb 28, 2007 12:19 am

If by pedigree you mean the staples and style that made him unique amongst the action crowd I'd say yes.

Post by **The Sweeney** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 7:40 am

I'd say he lost his pedigree during DAD, but gained it back, only moreso, with CR.

Post by **carl stromberg** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 11:27 am

I do think that people will tire a little of the Craig "Bond" character and there will be a return to the stereotype Bond sooner rather than later.

Bond was radically different here: I thought that's why many people liked him. It's a bit difficult to suddenly suggest he is "much the same as he's always been".

Post by **Dr. No** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 7:14 pm

Yes. He lost he pedigree then forged himself a set of Bourne papers.
DC’s Bond has nothing the previous Bonds do.
and I strongly disagree with the Fleming’s Bond BS, he’s not. he’s a thug

Post by **The Sweeney** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 8:38 pm

Dr. No wrote:Yes. He lost he pedigree then forged himself a set of Bourne papers.
DC’s Bond has nothing the previous Bonds do.
and I strongly disagree with the Fleming’s Bond BS, he’s not. he’s a thug

I could not disagree more.....

Post by **Skywalker** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 8:55 pm

The term pedigree is generally used as an ancestral line linking certain traits.

In this case DC's performance lacks the Bond pedigree.

Blowfeld · Post by **Blowfeld** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 3:19 am

Thank you young Skywalker!

Especially traveling abroad I've talked with people who think the new Bond has forsaken the oo7 heritage. Of course overseas is where more people have the idea of pedigree, here it's brand of dog food

kidding of course.

IMO there is a decent case to be made for this. CR strips away all of the what we know as Bond and goes from there. Remembering in Ian Fleming's Casino Royale, Bond is already an experienced agent.

Daniel did little to become the known Bond through out his first excursion. For many he has taken his heritage from recent action movies instead of Bond.
A good question to ask yourself is: if CR was not produced by Eon and was not billed as Bond 21 would you have recognized the character?

I'm sure our pro-Craig friends here will say “Yes, absolutely”, however I found more in common with other action movies rather than 007.

Captain Nash · Post by **Captain Nash** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:51 am

So what would you have done?
Keep Brosnan? Well truth be known he could've played Bond once more, but then what? He's got to be replaced and of all the names that were mooted as Bond most were terrible.
As for the ones that many seemed to like ie Clive Owen and Hugh Jackman neither were screentested and Owen has gone on record saying he didn't want the role.
As for the many other names well these are just people suggestions. As for Dainel Craig I was unsure at first, but I gave him a chance, a fair go, and to my delight he worked. So for me it's thanks Pierce for all you did, but goodbye. And welcome Daniel Craig, so far so good, keep up the good work.
I may bash Brosnan, but I don't hate him. Most of the time it's because some people take all this too seriously and actually believe they can change any of it.

Post by **carl stromberg** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:37 am

Blowfeld wrote
CR was not produced by Eon and was not billed as Bond 21 would you have recognized the character?

I agree; CR was a generic action/spy film and certainly not a "James Bond" film.

I think Owen and Jackman are too big for Bond. Bale is Batman so is not available and is probably also too big for Bond. Does that leave Daniel Craig as the only other alternative to play James Bond? I don't think so!

Captain Nash · Post by **Captain Nash** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 11:19 am

carl stromberg wrote:
Blowfeld wrote
CR was not produced by Eon and was not billed as Bond 21 would you have recognized the character?
I agree; CR was a generic action/spy film and certainly not a "James Bond" film.

I think Owen and Jackman are too big for Bond. Bale is Batman so is not available and is probably also too big for Bond. Does that leave Daniel Craig as the only other alternative to play James Bond? I don't think so!

Well unless you're the casting director for the Bond films it does.
Daniel Craig IS James Bond and there's really not alot that anyone can do about it.
Of the people that were shortlisted he was deemed the best, and I think he was an excellent choice out of those that were screentested. Second choice would've been Sam Worthington, who I think will be able to take the role after Daniel Craig finishes.