Could Craig destroy the Bond franchise?

[Skywalker]

Daniel Craig has been hailed by many as the man to revitalise/revolutionalise the Bond franchise. After the general disappointment of DAD, Casino Royale did a complete U-turn and gave us something we had never witnessed before in 20 other Bond films - A Bond film without Bond, as we knew him.

The big question is -Will Craig deliver for his new fans, or will people be turned off this Rambo wannabe. Only time will tell.

[Kristatos]

The big question is -Will Craig deliver for his new fans, or will people be turned off this Rambo wannabe. Only time will tell.

Sadly, the admissions seem to show that people like the new direction. Doesn't mean that I have to go along with the majority opinion, though.

[Robert Stirling]

It depends on what you mean by destroing the franchise. If the point is whether it'll remain profitable for EON to make another Bond films I'm sure it will. James Bond is so iconic character that there always will be people willing to see him in a film. No matter how his incarnation will look or act.
But if your question concerns the franchise as a ceartain formula of films, certain image of Bond formed over all those years I'm afraid it already have been destroyed.

[Captain Nash]

It's only your opinion and a small minority who think that Daniel Craig is not James Bond.
Just because you think so, doesn't make it correct.
And where do you get this 'Rambo' comparisson from?
He's nothing like 'Rambo'
As per usual it's the same old tripe that has no real substance.

[stockslivevan]

Could Craig destroy the Bond franchise?

Doubtful. Brosnan's performance almost destroyed it with Die Another Day, how could Craig do worse? Like you said, he's getting a lot of praise for revitalizing the series. Hardly sounds like Craig will cause destruction.

[Harvey Wallbanger]

I draw the line at blaming pb for DAD -throw your darts at the Broccolis . PB's performance was above and beyond the call.

Will Craig wreck the franchise – He has the ability to- It could happen in theory.
IMO the franchise is stronger than one man. –If B22 does bad at the BO then the formula will change to the traditional JB or DC will leave and a new actor who can do the traditional Jb will be brought in.

Althou DC didn't become Bond in CR if it is drawn out too long –beyond B22- then that could hurt the franchise.

[stockslivevan]

I draw the line at blaming pb for DAD -throw your darts at the Broccolis . PB's performance was above and beyond the call.

Brosnan's performance is just as vital as the rest and I don't mean just on DAD, but the rest of his work Post-GoldenEye when he just started to change Bond's overall personality. You can write a character in different ways but the actor can be able to blend those gripes but Brosnan didn't even bother to, esspecially in Tomorrow Never Dies.

It wasn't just Brosnan. You Only Live Twice might have been a little more well regarded if Connery put effort into his performance without looking extremely bored throughout the whole film.

I rather have an ethusiastic actor playing a role than someone acting like it's just another job. It's what seperates the good actors from the bad ones. Craig has been enthusiastic about playing Bond from day one despite all the negative press. Ever since CR leaped 100 million from DAD's grossing and Craig got a lot of great feedback, he has been on interviews saying how he would love to just jump onto the set and start shooting. Now he is more enthusiastic since the majority have accepted him as Bond and his enthusiasm will show in Bond 22. Same thing happened with Connery in the three films after Dr. No, he looked like he was having the time of his life and there is nothing better than being engaged with the performances in theaters.

[The Sweeney]

I draw the line at blaming pb for DAD -throw your darts at the Broccolis . PB's performance was above and beyond the call.

Will Craig wreck the franchise – He has the ability to- It could happen in theory.
IMO the franchise is stronger than one man. –If B22 does bad at the BO then the formula will change to the traditional JB or DC will leave and a new actor who can do the traditional Jb will be brought in.

Althou DC didn't become Bond in CR if it is drawn out too long –beyond B22- then that could hurt the franchise.

It all depends on how well Bond 22 does. If it exceeds CR at the BO (which looks more than likely, judging on DVD sales of CR in the US alone) then this new Bond is proving more of a hit with audiences and critics worldwide than the old Bond.

So how is this wrecking the franchise financially? It may be wrecking the Bond image of unrealistic storylines, OTT gadgets, invisible cars, embarrassing one-liners, naff humour - but it looks as though the people who prefer Bond like that have all ended up on here (ie. a handful).

[Skywalker]

It's only your opinion and a small minority who think that Daniel Craig is not James Bond.
Just because you think so, doesn't make it correct.
And where do you get this 'Rambo' comparisson from?
He's nothing like 'Rambo'
As per usual it's the same old tripe that has no real substance.

Easy tiger.

It was an open question. You replied as normal with a feeble closed riposte. I was highlighting a point that DC's portrayal is different from the previous cinematic Bonds. The hype and marketing surrounding CR was the main reason for its success (IMO). When the dust has settled and clarity has prevailed, will Joe public (who are responsible for the high turnout) want another Rambo/terminator/Bauer character or will the suave, sophisticated, highly cultured, humorous Bond be high on the agenda for EON to bring back.

The Rambo similarities stem from the chaos and destruction caused By DC when crane jumping and Embassy destroying.

[carl stromberg]

stockslivevan
Doubtful. Brosnan's performance almost destroyed it with Die Another Day, how could Craig do worse?

Die Another Day did nicely at the box office and on DVD. I'm not sure you can blame Brosnan for any personal perceived shortcomings in DAD: Brosnan did not write or direct Die Another Day.

Can any Bond destroy the franchise? If Craig was a disaster in Bond 22 (I'm not saying he will be before people start attacking me) then he would leave and Bond would be relaunched with in a different style with a different type of Bond three or four years afterwards (i.e. one with James Bond in it! ).

Who knows: people may tire of Craig's dour muscleman performance...!

[Captain Nash]

Why would he leave?
Roger Moore didn't leave after TMWTGG, that didn't perform as well as LALD.
Nope your stuck with Craig for the time being.
Bond 22 will be yet another winner. Craig is not going to quit Bond.

[Kristatos]

When the dust has settled and clarity has prevailed, will Joe public (who are responsible for the high turnout) want another Rambo/terminator/Bauer character or will the suave, sophisticated, highly cultured, humorous Bond be high on the agenda for EON to bring back.

I'm a natural pessimist, so I say the Bondinator.

[Max Taffey]

The Rambo similarities stem from the chaos and destruction caused By DC when crane jumping and Embassy destroying.

That's funny, when I think of Rambo, I think of a guy running around with a machine gun, blowing up entire facilities, driving tanks and bungee jumping off 220-metre high dams. Now where have I seen that before? Hmmm.

What's this "Embassy" destroying? He shot a hole in a steam pipe, guards blew out some windows, and he shot a propane tank in the courtyard that caused an awning to collapse. That's "destroying" an Embassy?

[stockslivevan]

stockslivevan
Doubtful. Brosnan's performance almost destroyed it with Die Another Day, how could Craig do worse?

Die Another Day did nicely at the box office and on DVD.

I wasn't talking financially, I was talking about the quality.

I'm not sure you can blame Brosnan for any personal perceived shortcomings in DAD: Brosnan did not write or direct Die Another Day.

Of course not, he is an actor and as an actor he should give a performance that makes it believeable. Roger Moore had crappy scripts but pulled it off professionally like an actor should. Brosnan either wasn't up for it or he was just being lazy. I tend to think both. And this is coming from someone who thought anyone after Brosnan would be a mess and after seeing Casino Royale those Brosnan days are long gone for me, I never thought I would feel that way before and I'm sure the majority of the world feels that way with me.

[Harvey Wallbanger]

Why wouldn't DC quit he got the all the publicity any actor could want -He is paid peanuts –when the honeymoon period is over he'l be fighting with the Broccolis for control. –who needs the headaches. –In not likely he will be treated better than PB by the end.

TMWGG split up the partnership that had been and changed the kind of Bond movie being made with spy who loved me. –its not like it can’t happen again.

The swipes at PB are not only uncalled for they are off the mark.
Crapy defense IMHO. –Blaming PB for what ever you imagine was wrong is off the mark as blamin DC for what is wrong with CR.

PB IMO skillfully built his Bond under extreme limitations placed on him by the Broccolis –and it was unique refreshing and well liked.

Can DC destroy the franchise –no but the Broccolis can.

[The Sweeney]

PB IMO skillfully built his Bond under extreme limitations placed on him by the Broccolis –and it was unique refreshing and well liked.

Have to disagree with you on this point Harvey.

Unique? Hell no! Brosnan gave us a greatest hits Bond - bits from Connery, Dalton and Moore, leaving the overall impression that we had seen all this before. He didn't bring anything new to the table.

Refreshing? Only in GE, because we hadn't seen Bond for quite a few years. But TND, TWINE and DAD were just rehashes.

Well-liked? Brosnan had his fan base, but it seems on the Bond forum community as a whole that it is now customary to give Brosnan a bit of a bashing, more than any other actor. Brosnan bashing seems to be the fashion these days, so I'm really not that sure any more on how this reflects with audiences in general. Do audiences now feel turned off too after seeing a different interpretation with Craig's Bond? Who knows? It's happening on the Bond forums, so maybe this is giving us an indication of what is happening wordwide.

Having said all that, I actually quite like old Brozza as a person, and sometimes think the criticism levelled at him is a tad too much, especially when EON were pulling all the strings, not Brosnan.

[Skywalker]

PB IMO skillfully built his Bond under extreme limitations placed on him by the Broccolis –and it was unique refreshing and well liked.

Have to disagree with you on this point Harvey.

Unique? Hell no! Brosnan gave us a greatest hits Bond - bits from Connery, Dalton and Moore, leaving the overall impression that we had seen all this before. He didn't bring anything new to the table.

Refreshing? Only in GE, because we hadn't seen Bond for quite a few years. But TND, TWINE and DAD were just rehashes.

Well-liked? Brosnan had his fan base, but it seems on the Bond forum community as a whole that it is now customary to give Brosnan a bit of a bashing, more than any other actor. Brosnan bashing seems to be the fashion these days, so I'm really not that sure any more on how this reflects with audiences in general. Do audiences now feel turned off too after seeing a different interpretation with Craig's Bond? Who knows? It's happening on the Bond forums, so maybe this is giving us an indication of what is happening wordwide.

Having said all that, I actually quite like old Brozza as a person, and sometimes think the criticism levelled at him is a tad too much, especially when EON were pulling all the strings, not Brosnan.

I don't think the General public go with what happens on a Bond forum. PB is far more popular with Joe public than he is on the forums. Yet GL is generally highly rated on the fan forum's yet is loathed by the general public.

[Max Taffey]

Why wouldn't DC quit he got the all the publicity any actor could want -He is paid peanuts –when the honeymoon period is over he'l be fighting with the Broccolis for control. –who needs the headaches. –In not likely he will be treated better than PB by the end.

I'm new to the forum, so forgive me if this has been covered ad nauseum elsewhere, but I'd like to understand the whole "PB was treated badly" thing. From my perspective, you have a 53 year old actor demanding $22 million to play Bond. It's been demonstrated that the series can continue successfully with different actors at the helm, so why wouldn't the producers make the decision to replace him? I don't see how this endangers the franchise at all. Craig actually strikes me as the type who will commit to 2 more films and decline a fourth even if the offer was made, which is how it should be. I don't think anyone is anxious to have a repeat of a Moore-type finale.

[Harvey Wallbanger]

PB IMO skillfully built his Bond under extreme limitations placed on him by the Broccolis –and it was unique refreshing and well liked.

Have to disagree with you on this point Harvey.

Unique? Hell no! Brosnan gave us a greatest hits Bond - bits from Connery, Dalton and Moore, leaving the overall impression that we had seen all this before. He didn't bring anything new to the table.

Refreshing? Only in GE, because we hadn't seen Bond for quite a few years. But TND, TWINE and DAD were just rehashes.

Well-liked? Brosnan had his fan base, but it seems on the Bond forum community as a whole that it is now customary to give Brosnan a bit of a bashing, more than any other actor. Brosnan bashing seems to be the fashion these days, so I'm really not that sure any more on how this reflects with audiences in general. Do audiences now feel turned off too after seeing a different interpretation with Craig's Bond? Who knows? It's happening on the Bond forums, so maybe this is giving us an indication of what is happening wordwide.

Having said all that, I actually quite like old Brozza as a person, and sometimes think the criticism levelled at him is a tad too much, especially when EON were pulling all the strings, not Brosnan.

PB was refreshing/unique because after Moore and Dalton he was a Bond closer to Connery. -not exactly like SC but he wasn't the brooding humorless TD and wasn't the foppish Moore.
-the jokes the gadgets and coolness started with SC and PB pick up on it -carried it forward.
GE was written more generic mixing elements all of them – the worst disgrace is the Broccolis never backed PB letting him make JB his. Cubby would've managed the talent better.


The DAD Bond was very differnt. –grasping for the word here. –Wild. From capture to M's secret hiding place he was more animal like. –fatally desperate. Fatal for whoever got in his way. – very different from the previous JBs. –including LTK- in DAD JB was out in the cold from the get go never deciding to go there.

GE-TND-TWINE had plenty of cold blooded scenes more with Fleming in mind –if that who you want to compare it to. Everyones got different standards.

Now I didn't care for some of the sappy crap PB was saddled with–cr was full of it too by the way. –but it's the Broccolis not PB,TD,RM,GL,SC or DC.


When PB was hired he was at the top of the public polls. -In 2002 nobody said one word about him leaving –there was no doubt about the audience wanting to see him the next movie. What you are going on about is after the fact BS. Like the white house going on about 9/11 changing everything.
-The day Dc was hired changed everything and the "loyal" fanboys spout the company line like the white house press secretary talkin about Iraq.
The day after DC the Broccolis were suddenly ashamed of DAD –and the past 20 movies
Its all spin supporting DC. I don't hate him but I need him to be Bond he didn't do it in CR. Cant blame him –or any actor- because of the crap given to work with.

I don't believe that the fan forum communities –here or anywhere else- show the general opinion worldwide. We're all JB geeks of one form or another.
–the simple test is already passed –Do you post to fan forum? Then you may be a fan geek.
Over 80 million have seen the last 2 moveis how many belong to a forum? -any-all-forums
10-20 thousand?

DC & PB are likely better people in person than either side wants to believe. –both would never go on ripping down the each others movies.
IMO PB did a d**n good job and DC has potential I'm concerned will be wasted on gimmicky story arc.

[carl stromberg]

Harvey Wallbanger
The day after DC the Broccolis were suddenly ashamed of DAD –and the past 20 movies

That annoyed me Harvey. Eon and the CR/Craig enthusiasts (that's the best phrase I can come up with!) seemed to be saying "all other Bond films are terrible so we are gong to make some radical changes". Bond was popular. Brosnan was popular - he also had the now familiar "best Bond since Connery" nickname. Some people suggest that Bond was dead and Craig saved it. Nonsense!