Welcome to the NEW DCinB.com!

WELCOME TO THE NEW DanielCraigisnotBond!

James Bond didn’t need a reboot, but this website did. Its origins were as a site arguing that Pierce Brosnan should be kept on as Bond and calling for a boycott of Casino Royale. However, the consensus on our forum was that this no longer reflected our aims as an online community. This site has acquired a new function. Casino Royale created a sort of herd mentality on other Bond fansites. Those critical of the current orthodoxy on Craig have been made to feel unwelcome on the traditional James Bond forums and most have either left, had their account deleted, or stopped posting altogether. The Daniel Craig is not Bond forum provides a haven where people are free to debate the current direction of the Bond franchise in a democratic fashion.

THIS IS NOT A DANIEL CRAIG HATE SITE. Daniel Craig is not the devil, merely a talented actor who we feel was miscast as James Bond. For some of us, the issue is the fact that he looks so unlike any of the previous actors to play the role or any general conception of James Bond. Others feel that he appears too uncouth compared to the suave Bond we know and love. This was a widespread view when his name was first linked to the part, even from those who mysteriously fell into line when he was cast in November 2005.

Many of us are also unhappy at the decision to “reboot” the series, ignoring the previous 20 Bond films and starting the series again from scratch. We feel this was an unnecessary and cynical move, aimed at expanding the fanbase by disparaging a series of films that we love. Whilst few of us would object to the series changing to reflect audience tastes, Casino Royale and its attendant publicity seemed to send out the message to long term Bond fans that the previous films were all rubbish and you were idiots for enjoying them. Casino Royale set out to be a Bond film for people who don’t like Bond films. Well, that ain’t us! If this is Bond 2.1, then we preferred Bond 1.0.

  25 comments for “Welcome to the NEW DCinB.com!

    • Please go back to casting the way Ian Fleming described such as: Felix Leiter a tall lanky Texan with sandy colored hair ( best casting was Rick Van Nutter 2nd Jack Lord ). I haven’t seen all actors to put forth a name but when Craig was miscast Eric Bana would have been a better choice. Anybody out there that is 6ft.2in. Black hair blue eyes that resembles a cross of Connery and Lazenby, and has the temperament of Lazenby or Connery’s “DR. NO” performance ? Please give us real Bond. Craig is only popular by the average looking shlub who thinks this guy is not good looking so maybe I could be Bond too. I personally don’t know any women who like him.

    • The problem is the now Babs has taken over and DC was a success then the boundaries are free to push
      Now this concerns me
      The general public DONT give a ####
      Nor does Babs or Mike as long as they make their $$$$$

      • Absolutely right James, so long as they can make money on the lowest common denominator they’ll keep turning out trash.

        Fortunately if the rumors about No Time To Die are true and the film gets released without extensive rewrites, EON will have crossed a bridge too far and maybe, just maybe there’ll be some sort of a return to form.

  1. I have been collecting Bond ephemora since the early 1960’s. I raed all of Ian Flemings books long before I saw Sean Connery’s interpretation of Bond. For me, Sean Connery was never Bond! Even Fleming himself had misgivings about his casting as Bond. George Lazenby at least did his own stunts and was given bad advice as to whether he should continue as 007. Roger Moore… the less said about him the better. Timothy Dalton brought a harder edge to Bond which pierce Brosnan borrowed as his own. Finally we come to Daniel Craig who has done what some deemed impossible he brought new life to the James Bond films. Yes… he has blonde hair (while Connery sported a not so great toupee) Yes, he does his own stunts and is more capable than any other actor who has aspired to be Bond. I fully support Craig as the most talented gifted and most of all believable actor to take on the role of Ian Fleming’s cold blooded assassin known as “Bond… James Bond.”

    • As he’s undeniably a great actor he’s got absolutely no charisma
      And he Also this emotional wreck
      Don’t get me started on those suits!
      Not a fan…….
      He’s more of a kgb thug than James Bond
      I’m disillusioned with the films

  2. I agree, Craig is a good actor, but alas… he’s no Bond! What next, being an American I have always lamented Sherlock Holmes being taken over by a non-brit, and in many ways Craig is as out of place as Bond, as Downey is as Holmes. I do enjoy the new Holmes movies, and the new kick-started Bond movies are better than no bond at all. I rememebr watching Moore, and Pierce, before their 007 debues… and said to myself… “Indeed… there’s the next Bond!”

  3. i was quite disappointed to find out that Daniel craig would be bond.but i thought it would be okay if they dyed his hair and eyebrows that would at least show off his blue eyes or something.but apparently that what martin Campbell suggested but craig refused.So a 5ft 10 blond actor was cast as bond who should be at least 183 and with dark hair and eye brows.I was very disappointed.
    i did stick with it but in the end I came to the conclusion,i just don’t like him in the role.he has none of the style panache or looks for Bond.So I cannot wait for him to go.

    Barbara broccoli has other ideas however…………

  4. I remember being very curious of this website back when it was conceived and the press attention it received as a cause page against the desision to recast bond who is now Daniel Craig. I’ve always enjoyed reading the views of those who feel so admiment against DC due to him being an inch too short, his eyebrows not being central and all the other characteristics that seem to take the enjoyment away for a minority. Looking forward to more daily mail style bashing from the N64 generation on Idris Elba have fun with your 20 films and don’t have nightmares.

    • C.auzins – yes Daniel Craig’s casting has taken away the enjoyment of Bond because he is so wrong for the part. It’s his look (i.e. he is not very good looking!). charmless, humourless and wooden. Throw in the reboot of the Bond series to turn them into tedious pretentious spy films making up aspects of Bond’s childhood, character etc then you have a ruined series.

      Also most Craig fans hate Moore, Brosnan and most of the Connery series so they don’t enjoy the series anyway!


    What we have now, is not Bond. The DC charcater is very much  Matt Damon's Bourne Identity, with varying sprinklings of Tom Cruise's MI, presented on a MI6 back drop. Fine actually, if they called it a spin off , and the character 004 or 009 .  

    But, James Bond 007,   this is not.

    Eon have rebooted the series by making it a parody of these american action fims, and ignoring what went before.

    If you always loved James Bond,  Connery to Brosnan, then the DC era is not aimed at you. 

    If you were never really into any Bond,  but love an American action blockbuster, the DC reboot is written for you. 

     Like many, I wait in increasingly diminishing hope of  Bond  21 ever really being made. 




  6. Salutations on your new direction. I was a huge champion of Craig…for Casino Royale only. But the honeymoon ended with Quantum…about as entertaining as having a tooth yanked without anesthetic. And each of the next two films lessened my interest in him as James Bond. Like your rebooted site, I'm much less interested in trashing Daniel Craig than in getting back the edgy, classy, classic fun that that Bond films have given in the past. Hoping for Tom Hiddleston…and a change in screenwriters.

  7. How can you argue against the need for a reboot? There can be no logical continuity for a franchise that lasted this long. Imagine if Sean Connery (still my all-time favorite Bond, by the way) had remained in the part for every movie… He would’ve played a 70 year old Bond in the last decade! On top of that, let’s not forget the end of the cold war. If you’re going to set Bond’s adventures in contemporary times, you HAVE to reset the clock.
    In other words, you have to choose between:
    1) keep the continuity and have a very old Bond live in the 21st century
    2) have a young Bond but set every movie in the 20th century
    3) have a young Bond but lose the continuity if you want him to evolve in the 21st century
    You can’t have it all.
    Whatever people feel about Craig’s choice as Bond, the need for a reboot was a no-brainer.

  8. I never joined up to the original site, but I should have. While Skyfall is indeed excellent, Craig is by far the weakest link in that film. There’s absolutely no charisma, energy or interest in the role by the lead actor. CR, QOS and SP are hugely disappointing entries, particularly the ’06 and ’15 films.

    CR was a wasted opportunity, stripping Bond back so much that he doesn’t register as the character at all. That may have been the intention, but totally unnecessary, not only from a cultural POV, but also in terms of narrative and story. Bond would never be a “rookie” in the OO section, nor was it Bond’s first mission. It’s an over bloated mess. A poorly written love story is exacerbated by the lack of chemistry between the leads. The characterisation of Vesper fails too. Makes me long for the Brosnan and rumoured Catherine Zeta Jones pairing which would have delivered in spades, in part because of the charismatic leads, but also because more focus would be given to the story and less to ensuring we witness a pointless first hour that serves to show Bond as something he isn’t in sensationalised parkour chases (despite great stunt work) or extremely dull airport sequences that would bore even in generic Hollywood blockbusters.

    • Welcome Hero, I wholeheartedly agree with your criticisms of CR, I hope you join the forum and look forward to hearing from you further in future!

  9. Really surprised this site still exists as I’d have thought Daniel Craig has more than proved his critics wrong. Casino Royale was magnificent – as was the much maligned QOS. Craig channels the best of Sean Connery, avoids the ridiculous high camp of Roger Moore (if there is a weak Bond than RM is prime suspect), is suitably coldly violent (like the best of Sean Connery) and delivers some wonderfully deadpan lines. His female companions are actually believable and age appropriate for once and any relationships not as cruel and misogynistic as in the worst of the RM era (see “Live and Let Die” for the worst of those..). The gadgets are toned down – again giving an air of credibility to proceedings. That being said, I haven’t a clue what the hell “Spectre” was all about – but every Bond has to have at least one stinker. I wasn’t sure when DC was poised to take over the role but am now thoroughly convinced of his suitability. It’s a thumbs up from me.

  10. Some of you DC haters just look silly by this point. Craig has been Bond for almost 15 years. Craig is now the LONGEST tenured Bond in terms of time in the role ( Not counting Connery’s turn in the non eon NSNA ). The guy is great in , so what if he is not quite tall enough or has dark blonde hair. He has made the role his own and is a great Bond. News flash , Roger more was a dark blonde , sandy brown. Defiantly golden hair highlights in many a scenes as Bond. Hell Moore doesn’t look anything like Connery and Dalton doesn’t look anything like Moore. None of the actors reminds me completely of Bond when I read Fleming. I certainly don’t picture Sean Connery when I read Fleming , though Connery is still the true #1 Bond , James Bond to me. Fleming called him a snorting lorry driver when he first got the part , but later Fleming said he was great in it. The single MOST important thing about Bond is that he is BRITISH and DC is most certainly British. Another thing , do any of you have the remotest idea what Hoagy Charmicheal looks like ? Well his face structure looks a hell of a lot like DC. As for the complaint about the reboot , HOW else were they going to do Casino Royale ? They have put all the Bond elements back in now and no Bond could work the DB 5 like Craig. Ok enough , if you don’t like Craig that is fine , but you are obviously in the very small minority. I also wonder how many of you are just too stubborn to admit you were wrong.

    • “if you don’t like Craig that is fine , but you are obviously in the very small minority”

      You have something against minorities, Jake?

  11. Late to the party, but yeah: Daniel Craig is not James Bond!


    James Bond is supposed to be a spy (yes, he has some fighting scenes and sometimes goes for the Rambo approach if he thinks it justified!), not a generic Bourne-Style action hero!

    James Bond supposedly has a refined taste (he can mingle with the rich and powerful and not stand out, because he knows his drinks and food etc.), but he is also a tad arrogant and a womanizer, so basically:

    Pierce Brosnan! That guy is a dick with great taste and that fits the role, just like Connery, Moore, Lazenby, Dalton etc. did!

    Also: Craig mocked the catchphrase – “Shaken! Not stirred!” – which is heresy IMHO! That should have never been in a Bond-Movie and the person who put that in should be thrown out!

    Also: Craig-Movies lack the cool gadgets, which IMHO sucks (if I want a regular spy-action-movie I’ll go watch the Bourne-Series or Mission Impossible!)!

    • Hello Tom, late or not welcome to the party, we’re just getting into high swing! Excellent points, I couldn’t agree more! I hope you stick around, we should have some enjoyable conversations!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.