The Fans On Craig:
|Bond Fans Furious Over Craig as Bond!
Never in the history of the Bond films has there been a more negative reaction to an
actor cast in the role of 007 as Daniel Craig. Fans have been flooding Sony and EON
with negative letters and emails, and the Bond fan sites have been inundated with
negative criticisms above firing Pierce, and casting Daniel Craig as Bond.
Below you will read some of the scathing commentary from lifelong fans, as well as
some homemade fan art that leaves no doubt where they stand on actor Daniel Craig
in the role of Bond.
|A Critique by John Towers
Nothing irks a fan more than having a favorite character redone. It didn’t go over that
well for the restart of Tom Clancy’s Jack Ryan, a second movie featuring the
renewed Ryan still has yet to be made.
When the announcement was made in 2003 there would be a 5th Pierce Brosnan
film, people were eagerly awaiting the release date. Rumors surfaced that Peirce
would not return were unconfirmed and largely dismissed, otherwise the fan fervor
would have started years earlier. I for one was looking forward to the next
installment, wondering if Valentin Zukovsky (Robbie Coltrane) had survived the
World is not Enough (this was purposely left ambiguous), and what would happen
with Bill Tanner (Michael Kitchen) described by Ian Fleming as “Bond’s only friend
in the service”, also how the death of the original “Q” would affect James.
Its about expectations, the audience had expectations of another classic James
Bond story, featuring the same tried and true formula that has somehow worked for
all these years. Not an entire rework of the series, ruining the continuity and the feel
fans had for the stories and the characters. For example, it is well known that Bond
tragically lost his wife, now erasing that history to retell it is one thing, but having
Vesper Lynd ,a traitor in the book, taking the place of Tracy Bond is just plain wrong.
The heavy handed tact currently being used by EON, I would have expected from a
rival production company starting its own independent James Bond movie line.
“New Coke/New Bond, you love it, you just don’t know it yet.”
When every actor from the production past or present has to come out to defend
your new choice as leading role, chastising those who dared to criticize, then you
either have a very large public relations problem, hugely miscast the role, or
production problems that even the Ford Pinto couldn’t have imagined.
Come to think of it I have never heard an actor say anything pertaining to another
actor other than “fine actor they’ll do well in the role” or similar meaningless platitude.
Will actors even publicly criticize each other?
Somehow I doubt Sir Sean Connery made time to obtain a copy of Layer Cake let
alone watch it.
I never before gave consideration to an independent production James Bond. I know
Sony and a few others had wanted to start one. One idea had been to remake
Thunderball for the umpteenth time, as was done in Never Say Never Again.
Alas Never Say Never Again only has merit because of Sean Connery’s return to a
role that he alone defined, the other independent attempts don’t even seem worth
We all have sat through our of favorite actor’s leaves turning, becoming a little too
old to get away with playing Bond and talked amongst our selves about who could
possibly be the next James Bond eventually agreeing there is nobody who stands
out. (Ironically that’s exactly what EON went with.)
Pierce had at least one maybe two more Bond movies in him, before the general
consensus would have been “Hey! That could be your granddaughter, back off a
I almost wish there had been a movie line independent of EON set up, you can bet
that Pierce Brosnan would have been snapped up to continue on as James Bond
once he was released from EONs maniacal grasp.. Sadly we all now look to Sony for
some common sense and common ground.
Perhaps the monopoly EON fought to maintain was a bad thing after all. One need
only look as far as George Lucas to see how a good thing can be ruined, and how a
new thing created by the same people is not always better, nor as good.
|London Daily Telegraph Readers
It's a shame that the one iconic English character which we can feel genuinely proud
of, and which makes the rest of the world slightly upset they weren't born an
Englishman looks like a charmless big-issue vendor. Surely there are English actors
who combine strength and sex appeal? No doubt he was 'fantastic' in Our Friends in
the North and 'smoldering' in some BBC Mr Darcy role, but any self respecting Bond
Girl would die laughing if our Shrek-a-like hero tried his luck in an obviously
out-of-character monkey suit. The toughest job filming Casino Royale goes to Miss
Moneypenny - having to pretend she wants a piece of that face!
Nick P, Washington DC, USA
Simply put, it should have been Hugh Jackman. Daniel Craig will be another George
Oliver, Shanghai, China
I'm sure a blond could play James Bond, but not somebody who's so ugly and
uncharismatic as Daniel Craig. I remember him playing Ted Hughes in Sylvia, and
that was a really awful performance. My suspicion is that he is just not a very good
actor. So, if you're not very good looking not a good actor, you shouldn't be the new
Margie Appleton, Frankfurt, Germany
|MI6.co.uk, Bond Fan Site Forum (from a MI6 user, who wishes to remain
Note: we have received threats from MI6 in regards to the below comments.
We stand by our content.
"NOOOOOO!!!! I finally get on the forums after the excessive demand stuff and now
all this about Daniel Craig as Bond!!! He just looks so weird, why did EON have to
screw over Pierce and Owen!!!"
"This film had all that it needed for a Brosnan swan song but now I am fearing the
worst for the future of series with Craig as Bond. I just saw Layer Cake and that
made me dislike him as Bond more."
"somebody tell me how you get from one to the other... this is BIZARRE! WHAT THE
HECK?!?!?!?!?! it just ain't right, i tell ya!"
"If it's true, it's not the news I was hoping for. I wanted a return for pierce, or either
Clive Owen or Christian Bale (yes, I know he's Batman)."
"I'm not going to boycot the movie by any means, but I'm not excited by the choice.
maybe Craig should have a long chat with lazenby after the conference tomorrow."
"I have my suspicions that this is a smokescreen. Craig as Bond? This would be a
horrible, horrible prospect. As someone noted elsewhere, that means on a 3 picture
deal we are stuck with him until at least 2012!"
"Ugh. Well at least it isn't Luke Malby..."
the literary forums, but you can have CR if this casting is right. There are really only
three actors I've seen mentioned who were totally unsuitable -- Cavill, Stewart, and
the one we've apparently got. I hope Sony's stockholders weren't expecting any
dividends for Christmas."
"Let's face it, Craig does not look like Bond, does not act like him (good actor as Mr
Craig might be), does not have the gravitas, and fans and the public will not accept
him as Bond. That I guarantee you. Thus, I hope, no, I *pray* that this is a
smokescreen. If people do go and see Casino Royale with Craig, you can sure forget
the two films after that. People went to see the first XxX, but look what happened to
the sequel. I predict the same for a 'Craig as Bond' if it is a reality. Kiss goodbye to
the franchise EON."
"71 percent of british polled reject Craig. 78 percent of AOL subscribers polled reject
Craig. He received 1 percent, do you hear me Barbara, 1 percent of individual internet
voters polled as their choice for Bond. Why can't EON heads see what the viewing
public sees? Craig is NOT Bond. I know many others who agree with me as well.
With Brosnan, Purefoy, and Paul out there, why choose this PUTRIDLY ugly face to
play Bond? He is too short, too ugly, and too blond to be Bond. I will skip this film as
will millions others. Casino Royale will go down in Bond history as being a farce, not
once, but twice! Where have you gone Cubby Broccoli, our nation turns it's lonely
eyes to you. As Blofeld said in You Only Live Twice:"Good bye, Mr. Bond". The end
of the Bond era, from sea to shining sea. I give up, we have tried, but the powers that
be have spoken: comes October 2006, we, the viewing public, will have our say!!!!!"
A big let down. Not to take away anything from Craig's acting abilities but he simply
is not James Bond. The look, hair, height are all wrong. Bond has survived for 40+
years as a suave, polished gentleman who can be rough when the occasion
demands. Clive Owen or Hugh Jackman would have clearly been a better choice, but
it seems they must have been out the studio's budget.
Raghav Gajanan, London
Terrible news. Why change something that isn't broken? I'd take older-man Brosnan
over Craig any day.
Mandy, New York, NY
Rough and gritty is just something I have never associated with James Bond. When I
think of James Bond, the adjectives that come to mind are suave, sophisticated,
cool, cultured, and debonair. But rough and gritty? No way. I hate to see Pierce
Brosnan leave the series. Goldeneye is the best Bond movie ever!
Bruce Hammer, Blackwell, OK, USA
I am not a James Bond fan but even still surely there are better actors than Daniel
Craig. Apart from having more money and being more famous than myself - who is
Ryan Newell, Southampton
Wow what a shock and a waste, this is not the right guy; he does not have the look
of 007 nor is he debonair either. We'll see how he does.
Lloyd E. Scott, San Antonio, TX, US
Oh come on! Bring back Pierce! Daniel looks like a villain in a Bond movie that gets
killed by 007 in the opening sequence.
Sako G, Los Angeles, CA - USA
Missed the mark, Pierce lives in Hawaii and is still competent, McGregor and Law
would have been better choices...
Ericson, Honolulu, Hawaii
Daniel Craig doesn't exude the class of Connery, Brosnan or even Moore. Our
choice would have been Hugh Jackman or someone providing more of a transition.
The last Bond movie was great up to the point where they abandoned a darker story
with better acting and the addition of a strong female character, and fell back on the
comic book styling. If they had just kept it up through the end it would have been
much better. Gadgets can be cool if not overused or ludicrous, like they were in the
early Connery films.
Goldeneye, Durango, Colorado USA
Daniel Craig, although a good actor isn't quite right. Jude Law would not be right
either, he couldn't look licensed to kill. The part should have gone to James Purefoy,
dark, distinguished, and with that edge of the unknown and danger.
I predict Craig's signing spells the demise of the Bond franchise. Everyone I know
thinks he is stone ugly, and although he would make a great Bond villain, he doesn't
come close to personifying the handsome, intriguing, super-human good guy of all
time. I own all the Bond DVDs, soundtracks, games, etc. I won't pay a farthing for a
ticket to see the new Casino Royale. My friends and family feel the same. How sad!
Annette Johnson, New York, USA
Blond and Blue-eyed! What more can I say? Regardless of his acting skills, he is just
no Bond. And although Bond was more 'gritty' in the books, he still had a certain
suaveness and sex appeal that Daniel Graig just does not have.
Daniel Craig does not have the handsome, dashing looks of previous James Bonds.
I didn't like any of the choices. I was hoping that Pierce Brosnan would one more
Bond movie. What a lousy choice.
Sue May, Justin, Texas USA
I'm sorry, but Daniel Craig just doesn't have the right looks. James Bond to me is an
ice cool, smooth, sophisticated and slightly eccentric gent - for this reason Pierce
Brosnan is my favourite Bond, followed closely by Roger Moore. Craig just looks too
rough to be all these things, so therefore the character will inevitably change, which I
am not convinced is always a good thing.