Defending Daniel Craig's BOND ARC
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 сен 2024
- Daniel Craig's five Bond movie arc has it's supporters and it's detractors, but in this video I put a positive spin on his journey and discuss the overall result.
#jamesbond #007 #danielcraig #thebondexperience
_________________________________________________________________________________
When David is not running an advertising and marketing company, his hobby is The Bond Experience which is primarily a video blog where he discusses Bond experiences and the people and brands that help to create those experiences...
The mantra of living like Bond, one moment at a time emanates from a concept of experiencing the joy of collecting small moments in life that add up to amazing journeys and stories....whether it's through style, locations, literature, fitness, and the movies themselves the world of Bond is explored through its people and their stories.
Ultimately though, The Bond Experience channel is a celebration of the James Bond franchise and the many people that form a true community. Our core mission is to create a strong connection in the Bond community amongst all the fans, regardless of interest or demographic.
_
The Bond Experience is not affiliated with any James Bond copyright holder and is an unofficial entity.
One thing I’d like to add as to his personality in No Time to Die. He had been retired for 5 years after being that hard-edged assassin. People change over 5 years, especially after all that he went through. It wouldn’t make sense if he was the exact same person in NTTD that he was in Spectre
It's just sentimental crap.
NTTD is the Bond what The Phantom Menace is to Star Wars and Daniel Craig is Jar Jar Binks
@@sandersson2813 Well I liked it lol. I didn’t think it was sentimental crap at all
@@sethdavis459 Most Bond fans rate it incredibly low in their list.
@@sandersson2813 Okay? Good for those fans. I still like it, and I’m still gonna like it
@@sethdavis459 Good for you.
Craig had 2 brilliant films and 3 poor ones imo.
I never disliked him as James Bond but I feel his films are the least rewatchable. If I want to kick back and relax with a 007 movie I'll stick on a Connery/Moore/Brosnan film.
The 2 brilliant films for me were Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, earning the top spots in my most-watched list. It was all downhill after that! 🤨
@@rohanauroraReally? Imo Skyfall was phenomenal while QS was a drag.
@@oliverdevries5688 I found the action scenes in QoS enjoyable, particularly Bond going rogue added a suspense!
The "hero's journey" depicted in Skyfall failed to captivate me due to pacing problems. The villain Raoul Silva's character felt underdeveloped, his plans were complex and had plot holes. From a sartorial standpoint, Skyfall also fell short as the Bond's clothing was excessively tight!
@@rohanaurora Quantum of Solace a brilliant film?
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. It is atrocious.
@@sandersson2813You seem to have an issue with people having a different opinion to you
For me it’s an arc of convenience at best, that merely plays out the same dynamics from the first two films and stretches those same established concepts laboriously over a handful of films beyond (all of which took far too many years to make) all leading to an unrewarding ending and a ridiculous dick move by the film makers. Killing off a character so beloved and making it all about Daniel Craig like only his Bond mattered is unforgivable. The fact that the character had been around for fifty years and will continue beyond him makes an utter farce of the idea and the feeling of ‘aren’t we clever to reverse the end to OHMSS and even steal its iconic song’ is wrong on so many levels. I’m with Danny Boyle. It was an ending that should never have happened, very basic stupid and quite self indulgent immature storytelling which says more about the actor and those making the films than the fictional character or world he inhabited.
The Craig films are what brought my wife and I to fully embrace the Bond world. I grew up with the Pierce Brosnan films and I liked those films and I still do, but Daniel Craig’s portrayal and arc is what got us to really buy into Bond. I’ve now gone back and seen all the films and now Craig’s and Connery’s are my favorite films. I am reading the books now. Fleming’s writing is fantastic. I have that Bond inspiration to dress better, to be better prepared (CCW, fitness, gentlemanlike appearance and mindset) all due to the Craig Bond movies first and foremost. All five of them.
Craig is by far the least gentlemanly Bond. All the others are far more elegant and stylish men who carry themselves with much more decorum.
@@sandersson2813 And Roger Moore, for example, while perhaps more gentlemanly is the goofiest silliest Bond. That doesn’t mean he’s a bad Bond or that people who favor Moore must be silly. Every era and actor brought something new and different and great. Different strokes for different folks.
@@bpetey5970 My point was that if you're trying to use Bond as an influence or a marker for being gentlemanly, then Craig is the Bond that is least likely to epitomise being gentlemanly. His Bond lacks style, grace and everything you associate with being a Gentleman.
Good discussion (if you can have a discussion with yourself!?) I like the arc on the whole. I think part of the issue is that the arc was being made up as it went along. I know plenty of people aren't keen on the idea of Christopher Nolan directing the next film, but I think he'd do something special if he was signed up for a trilogy and could plan out an arc.
I LOVE QoS, but sometimes when I’m in the mood for a rough & tumble Bond, I go for Licence to Kill, instead. Also one of my favorites!
The only good Craig film was Casino Royale. It was based on source material, and followed it decently with modernization. Then they went on their own, and Bond became a sad, mopey guy with a lot of family problems who was on a doomer path to the su..cide he eventually commits, and has no emotional resilience. Wow, not my James Bond. The saddest thing about NTTD was the weak attempt to reference You Only Live Twice with the unknown pregnancy and the poison garden like a person trying to cram cliffs notes into the last chapter because THEY FORGOT TO MAKE HIM JAMES BOND in the three preceeding films. Next Bond, with less depression and more zest for life, please.
I'm also 56 and a big Sean Connery fan, but I got to witness Casino Royale at the Odeon at Leichester Square in London one week after the premiere and I was hooked.
Good topic, David. I am not a fan of the Daniel arc especially, mainly as I don’t think any actor is important enough to have an “arc”. Barbara loves Daniel so gave him free rein which was unprecedented. In my opinion his films were a very mixed bag.
Casino - wonderful, one of the best Bond films. I credit everyone involved, particularly Martin Campbell and Paul Haggis. If they do another Bond film in our lifetimes, I’d love to see them brought back. Casting, story, action all fantastic.
Quantum - not a good film. Daniel was great, the style of course great but the story terrible, the villain weak and the direction a mess. I actually give it half credit just for what Daniel brings to the game as well as Steve McQueen-esque style. Also, not a fan of Bond sequels.
Skyfall - arguably my favorite of the Daniel films and most enjoyable. The only thing I didn’t like was how Bond already considered washed up. If the first two are moments apart and Bond is a new agent, how is he decrepit by Skyfall? The introduction of Moneypenny and Q terrific and Silva is one of the greatest Bond villains of all. Note that is apparent to most - your film generally as good as your villain. See a trend here with Casino and Skyfall?
Spectre - similar to Quantum, watered down all around. Blofeld appears and is misused and poorly portrayed by a great actor. It shows the script is bad that Waltz can’t save it. Boring car chase, ridiculous brother angle, retcon of “all this is related”, absurd escape from crater lair. We should have known when Daniel missed the opportunity to come back to the hotel room in Mexico City with Stephanie Sigman waiting for him, this was going to be a turkey. More weak villains including Max Denbigh.
No Time to Die - watch for Madera and then stop. I have done this many times. Madeleine a boring Bond woman and to assume she is the one for him is a stretch. While better in NTTD than Spectre, it’s asking a lot to assume based on the previous film Bond would be interested in her at all, and vice-versa. More terrible villains and a terrible idea to kill Bond due to Daniel and Barbara deeming it necessary. Just a pity. Madera portion is terrific.
Additional mention that the title songs were not strong for 3 of the films which may sound nitpicky but Bond songs are a big part of the fun. Also, please no more Italy. Just too much.
Overall I would say there are 2 superior films, and the other 3 have fleeting moments at best. Barbara, should she consider continuing, should not think about arcs again. Just make amazing standalone Bond films. Doesn’t need to be overly complicated. In fact the more clever you are, the more likely you are to fail. Strong villains, three full acts in your screenplay, that tends to get the job done.
Thanks for all you do. Have a great weekend. Spring forward!
Right there with you on the whole "killing Bond" thing. What a terrible mistake. After all the crap Craig's Bond goes through in the five movies, he deserved a happy ending. Instead, they turn him into Rasputin (he gets shot, infected and then blown to bits). He deserved better. WE deserved better.
Deserve?
12:00 I totally agree. It makes his entire era feel like a waste of time you know? I loved Quantum of Solace and Casino Royal. After those 2 Craig's outing as Bond i didnt much care for it as much as I did. Maybe it was Craig getting physically old noticeably :/ and when I saw that they killed him off, it felt like Broccoli betrayed me haha
For me, and I think many will agree with me, the real Bond began with Craig.
Hopefully the new actor will follow his heritage.
NTTD was an unsatisfactory poor conclusion to an already derailed Bond arc imo. Whilst at the same time seemingly scuppering the entire Bond franchise too.
Agreed. The weakest era of Bond.
Craig's crucial mistake was being a Bond that was unlikable and a character you simply didn't care about.
If Roger or Sean had been killed at the end of any of their tenures I would have been devastated (as much as you can be for a fictional character) but I simply couldn't have cared less about Craig's Bond.
@@sandersson2813Yeah...he's portraial of the character was at best inconsistent. Quantum is totally humourless....While NTTD they purposely squeezed in humour that didn't work because from Craigs Bond it seemed forced.
@@dtuk22 Craig is worse than Dalton for delivering humour
@@sandersson2813 True neither are comedy actors. But Dalton was more convincing in the role imo. Quantum & LTK are both Bond out for revenge movies....I know which I prefer.
@@dtuk22 Dalton was far better and more importantly likeable in the role.
He also didn't look like a Slavic henchman
The life expectancy of a 00 isn't long. At least he went out protecting his loved ones still a damn shame though.
Shame the film didn't blow up after that ridiculous opening scene when Maddie age 4 was approached by a baddie who never aged a day whilst she ended up 35.
Truly preposterous film, one of the worst films I've ever seen in my life.
I always thought that Daniel Craig looked the part of a hard edged assassin. But NTTD was so bad that I wanted to leave the movie about 20 minutes in. The only reason I stayed to the end was to see if they would pull the crappy movie off at the end. They didn’t. I have been a Bond fan for over 50 years and watched all of the movies multiple times in spite of the smirking foppishness of Roger Moore. I will never watch NTTD again, and it will take something special to get me into the theater for a new Bond movie.
They could have made it look like he had died but then gave the viewer a glimpse of he could still be alive like they did with batman in the dark knight rises
I agree that we tend to overemphasize the bad. I mean the slide whistle almost overshadowed Brit Ekland’s bikini. OK that’s a lie.
My favourite bond has always been Sean in goldfinger and my favourite danniel in skyfall or casino royale
But my guilty pleasure is OHMSS
I also enjoy the spoof of casino royale
But my true guilty pleasure is watching then all in 4k on blue Ray for I got the collectors steel tin book of all the James Bond films
In my opinion Daniel Craig is the best Bond, next to Sean Connery. We don’t want comic Bond’s aka Moore,
After no time to die i can't stand craigs bond. He can piss off
Did not mind the overall arc but the execution of it is terrible. They didn't have a clear vision from the beginning of Casino Royale. It all feels very forced. Casino Royale is Daniel Craig's On Her Majesty's Secret Service, not No Time To Die ( the use of music from OHMSS is also out of place...) and the way they implemented Spectre/ Blofeld is not the way. Casino and Skyfall can be watched as stand alone movies and are the better for it.
I'll say this: Because apparently he wanted Bond to die since the beginning. Producers do NOT give so much power to your actors to the point that they can ruin a movie. Bond should never die. NEVER. He can suffer. He can go through situations. BUT, never die. Producers give in to their actors way too much. The whole Blofeld Daddy issue plot is pathetic. I'm sorry. Bond and Blofeld are not meant to be related. Waltz was not given the right script for an epic Blofeld.
The producer's shouldn't of given in to Daniel Graig and have Bond killed off! It would of been better, if he just drove off into the sunset with his lady and their daughter! Killing Bond off ,was a bad move, a terrible decision. You don't kill a pivotal, powerful presence like,BOND off, then bring him back from the dead for the next film.. that's highly problematic!😮
Spot on
We never needed an arc. The whole series felt either self indulgent or a reaction to the wider movie trends where everything has to exist in "a universe". Whatever they do next, I just want them to go back to individual stories that have no reliance on what has come before or what will happen after.
SO MUCH THIS. The very fact there was an arc sucked the life out of the series. I'm okay with QoS breaking with tradition and being a straight sequel, and Skyfall being essentially a prequel to all Bond movies that came before Craig. The new generation's demand for "canon" is, I'm sorry, just infantile and limiting. The series learned this back when they dropped the spectacular Sylvia Trench after FRwL, and completely muddled the Blofeld timeline. I love those decisions because every movie can now seek excellence on its own, without audience members demanding continuity.
I'll only recognise his first 3 films.
Yes. The first 3 films were okay/tolerable but the last 2 were just terrible...
@@renekauts8323 QOS is hysterically bad.
@@sandersson2813 QOS had awful editing, but I still liked it. Many Bond films are seen as terrible compared to ordinary films. They're ironic, almost. I don't think they're all terrible, they're just not as good as those incredible one off's like Casino Royale and Skyfall.
@@ManForToday I don't think Casino Royale or Skyfall were incredible either.
@@sandersson2813 Well, who says what's incredible? People thought the avengers were incredible. I don't think it needs to be a critically acclaimed film for a lot of people to find something great.
I'm just saying, as the Bond franchise goes, for itself and compared to other franchise films, Casino Royale and Skyfall were brilliant. Don't think any one denies they were the best of Craig's saga.
I enjoyed the Craig era, but it has caused me to appreciate the Brosnan era a lot more than I did before. And for the next era of Bond I want more Brosnan Bond and less Craig Bond. In other words, more fun (but not campy--I'm looking at you Roger Moore).
Definitely needs more fun. Bond should enjoy himself a bit. Pierce was a great composite of Sean and Roger. Daniel is a great actor but was a downer.
For me the Brosnan era always feltlike films that wanted to be more ambitious and risky with their concepts, but never actually explores said concepts as they always resort to "playing it safe". For me, you simply can't just tease risky and interesting idea and play it safe, that is a contradiction and results in films with an identity crisis. The Craig films in many ways are films that actually take chances and in many ways what the Brosnan films wish they were....
For me, one is more serious and other is more fun, both should coexist from time to time :
Lazenby - Dalton - Craig (serious)
Connery - Moore - Brosnan
(Fun)
It was fairly obvious that Barbara Brocolli and Ion changed the arc after Quantum of Solace failed. Spectre should have been the mystery organization instead of Quantum (they even put out a contest if I recall as to what Quantum means). NTTD was one of the worst Bond movies period. I rewatch all other Bond movies multiple times…have zero interest in rewatching NTTD ever. Out of the Craig Bond movies, Casino Royale was the best and is one of the best Bond movies overall. So Craig has one of the best and one of the worse Bond movies in his holster!
It's the only complete arc for a James Bond-both actor, and character-that we've ever had... or may likely *EVER* have. Daniel's turn is incredibly unique, if just for that.
Here are my reviews of the Daniel Craig 007 movies, in miniature (NOTE: BIG SPOILER about No Time To Die below):
1. Casino Royale: Brilliant! I’m glad Dave that you & I agree that Casino Royale is a masterpiece (it’s your #1, my #2). Craig couldn’t have asked for a better debut. Brilliantly acted, written, directed, edited, it’s a total James Bond package, and it saved the James Bond franchise from becoming a cartoon series, which the previous film Die Another Day came dangerously close to doing. And Daniel Craig….phenomenal James Bond.
2. Quantum Of Solace: WTF? They follow up one of the greatest Bond films of all-time with this? The script wasn’t even finished yet when they started shooting Solace….big mistake. The movie also makes Bond extremely unlikeable, he’s just a thug in this one. And the directing and editing on this film is sloppy. It’s just a joyless, unpleasant Bond film.
3. Skyfall: Now this is more like it! Craig’s Bond is back on track! Like Casino Royale, Skyfall is brilliantly written, acted, and directed. A terrific, exciting adventure for Craig’s Bond, and it makes Bond a likeable agent that audiences can root for once again. A brilliant 50th anniversary celebration of James Bond.
4. Spectre: Count me as a fan of Spectre. Why it gets the ridiculous amount of criticism that it gets is baffling to me. It’s not Craig’s best Bond film, but that’s fine. I think Spectre is great! It’s a more back to basics approach to making a Bond movie, and it also loosened up Craig a bit in the role of Bond and gave him a little bit more humor, and I liked that. And it kicks ass over Quantum Of Solace, which was really all I wanted from Spectre when I first saw it in theaters. I like Spectre a lot, and I’m not going to apologize for liking it. It’s a great Bond film in my opinion….and I wish it had remained Craig’s final Bond film, considering what would come next.
5. No Time To Die: The movie was doing fine…..until that stupid, infuriating, unforgivable ending. JAMES BOND DOESN’T DIE IN HIS MOVIES. A big, huge F-K YOU from me to the producers for doing Craig’s Bond -and the audience- dirty with that horrible ending. It’s a terrible ending to Craig’s era as Bond, and all the more so because most of what happened in the movie *before* the ending I thought was really good. It’s definitely a better made Bond film than Quantum Of Solace, but that ending….that ending….it totally invalidates the whole movie for me. I will never forgive them for it, and I will never watch No Time To Die ever again. As far as I’m concerned, Spectre is Daniel Craig’s last James Bond movie for me, and No Time To Die is a fraud. I haven’t bought No Time To Die on home video, and I never will. Spectre is Craig’s last Bond movie for me. At least Craig’s 007 got a much happier ending in Spectre.
So….in my opinion, Craig has 3 great Bond films, and 2 bad ones. A mixed bag. But I will always appreciate his 3 great ones. 👍
I agree with you on Spectre. I've never understood why many Bond fans hate it. I also agree with you to a point on NTTD. But I think it went off the rails a little earlier--when they got to the island. Everything after that was very WTF.
The sad part of the Craig arc is how the whole “ James Bond character arc” ended.
You are correct - this is the one and only Bond actor who had an actual character arc that absolutely makes sense when you line the films all up.
However…
That ending literally ruined his entire arc for me.
Because now that you see the tragic end of his character, it actually makes the previous films seem almost kind of bittersweet.
Which is perfectly fine for lots of movies -
but not for James Bond Movies.
And as we’ve talked about many times -
Now that we know that the ending was not just for Craig’s Bond but pretty much the end of the entire franchise for now it makes NTTD very difficult to watch.
In fact I tried to watch it a couple weeks back and turned it off because it just seemed too sad.
I’ve talked to other fans who feel the same way.
Unlike OHMSS, time is NOT being kind to NTTD.
In fact - it’s getting much worse the more time goes by.
Shame too -
Because
If they had tweaked the editing a bit and left the finale just a little bit open and just a little questionable as to what happened,
it would have really been the perfect end to a historic and great run.
But as it stands -
I don’t want ANY more “ Arcs” for James Bond in the future!
Just fun spy adventure movies!
NTTD literally relegated his run to alternate universe fan fiction. Such a silly move.
He's my favorite Bond. He provided a grittiness and vulnerability to the character that I liked. I liked the physicality of these movies more than relying on gadgets. There is also a character evolution; you have to watch the Craig's movies in order. That was less so with the other Bond movies.
Can you explain what Craig's evolution was?
@@EthanKnight97 my only point is you can appreciate his character more if you watch his movies in order. With the other Bond movies, you can generally jump in.
Indefensible!
The Craig era was such a missed opportunity.
After beginning with the truly magnificent Casino Royale, it really should have carried on with the trajectory set up by QoS with the Quantum organisation being (as MGW himself put it at the time) the new more deadlier organisation for the 21st century, with Mr White as the head of this new more deadlier organisation.
They really should have shelved using Spectre and Blofeld after EON gained the full rights at the time until the next Bond after Craig.
It was a big mistake connecting Silvia with Spectre, who should have really been a lone wolf out for revenge for being betrayed by MI6.
It was a mistake by connecting Skyfall with Spectre. Skyfall (contrived as it is) really should have been Craig's standalone Bond film.
It was a bigger mistake with Brofeld. Something I can never imagine Fleming would have every done with his hero and arch nemesis.
To top it all off killing the goose which laid the golden egg was the final insult to the direction the Craig era concluded.
Bond should always be saving the day along with all the great heroes, not ending on a downer.
To repeat, such a missed opportunity.
I am not convinced Eon realised how much the ending of NTTD would devalue their own golden goose. How can they use the regular hyperbole to promote Bond from now on?
'The World's Greatest Secret Agent! (apart from that time he was blown to bits)
James Bond's All Time High! (although some of him went pretty high when he was blown to bits)
You Can Still Depend On One Man... to get blown to bits.
You were expecting someone else? Yes I was expecting someone who hasn't been blown to bits.
Yeah!.... i agree.
A friend told me, she actually cried the first time she saw him getting blown to bits. My reaction was more like... praise the Lord, it's definitely his last Bond movie. Deconstructing the old heroes has become a cliche of the 2020s and Craig so desperately wanted his own "Logan". He got his wish and we can finally move on. I'm more than ready for a fresh start.
The best part was they basically made him Tracy and had his fan fiction wife drive off with his car and do a reverse gunbarrel while one of the series' most well known songs played. It was pure mockery.
@@patstahl6849 Yeah!... I agree with that too
@@JDoe-gf5oz Blimey! Yes... such a good point. I hadn't thought of it like that. Exactly what it is. The more analysis NTTD gets the more apparent it is the movie is awful.
The Craig era just leaves me feeling cold. I've never taken to him as Bond. There's no joy in it and I find him monotonous. His portrayal never really developed. He finished as the moody expletive that he started as. Did any of the other Bonds develop as characters in their tenures? Not really, but Bond doesn't need to develop with one actor. He evolves between them. Yet Craig and the producers tried to convince us that he was on a meaningful arc that dissected him as a character. How did his performance really change from CR to NTTD though? Don't pretend that what you're putting on screen is something that it's not Babs and Mick...
Casino Royale left me cold when it came out and I wouldn't say that I'm completely warmed to it now, but I look at it more favourably now than I ever did.
The rest of them though are just a slog. QoS has no redeemable qualities. Skyfall is, by far, the most overrated Bond film. I see Skyfall as that friend who thinks everyone loves him but nobody misses him when he stays at home on a night out. Spectre is boring and stupid. NTTD is too long, tries too much and the ending is like an anchovy on what's trying (and failing) to be a ruinously expensive soufflé.
I'm not against a serious Bond. LTK is my favourite. Do I see it as the epitome of Bond? No. Do I enjoy it the most though? Yes.
I really wish i enjoyed Craig's tenure. But I simply don't. And over a decade of something I don't enjoy with a character I love doesn't fill me with hope for the next one.
End of rant 😅
I appreciate that some do like Craig's Bond and if he managed to get some new fans on board, that's a good thing. Can we now have a more traditional Bond again? Please and thank you 😊
At the end of the day, the very future of this franchise depends upon the Bond Community’s rejection of the Daniel Craig Era. If that rebuke is not emphatic, we will never have Bond again. There’s really no grey area, from him pulling a Honey Rider in Casino, Brofeld, waffles with the kid, the lack of jokes, killing Bond, the sexlessness, the affirmative action hires, etc.
No it doesn’t, that’s just you throwing a strop because you didn’t get what you wanted.
@@Wut3225 you’re in an abusive relationship with a film franchise. They kicked you in the balls repeatedly, emasculated and desecrated the legacy of the series, then they literally killed Bond after making him a father for no reason other than to make you look stupid. Yes, I wanted Bond films like Goldeneye, OHMSS, the Spy Who Loved Me, From Russia with Love, TWINE, Dr. No, and I didn’t get what I wanted.
I love Craig’s run and I really enjoyed NTTD. The end works for me. I prefer the tougher slightly more grounded Bond overall. The early Connery, and Dalton, but I don’t hate any of them. Always a special place for Brosnan who was my first Bond. Hope for plenty more Bond films for us all to enjoy, one way or another.
The issue I have with Craig's tenure is the continuous deconstruction of the character. It worked for the first film, but it became an issue in the later entries. Furthermore, It's apparent that the producers are not very creative. Thus, each film is a lackluster continuation of its predecessor. The theme songs are a great representation of this very issue - for every good one, its followed by one or two poor copies.
CR : Bond quits
QOS : Bond goes rogue
SF : Bond quits
SP : Bond goes rogue and quits
NTTD Bond quits and dies
Mysterious audience applause
@@EthanKnight97Nailed it. Also Bond has none of the characteristics of Bond. Yay!
The fact that his movies even have an "arc" is a major problem. The beauty of the Bond franchise was that literally any movie could be someone's entry point into the series, yet this changed in the Craig era.
Agreed. The first Bond film I saw in the theaters was Diamonds are Forever with my folks. The (then) end of the Connery era. But I got hooked, going forward with Roger on the big screen and getting caught up with Sean on ABC or some rare re-releases at the Bantam theaters. If Connery had that “arc” I would probably have been lost forever.
Agreed. I love QoS but I feel even that was pushing it a bit much with the Vesper ending.
I was apprehensive of his casting, but Casino Royale was amazing. I enjoyed all of his Bond movies... except that last one. It felt like the wrong way to go about it, it felt pretentious. My wife bought me the complete James Bond Blu Ray collection and Daniel Craig is the Bond my wife recognizes as James Bond. She loved that run and she refuses to watch the last one again.
"It doesn't count. It doesn't exist."
To me the Craig era doesn't exist.
I used to a huge defender of the Craig Bond arc. Then No Time To Die came out...
Okay 😂. I am Dalton fan still loved craig film's throughout except spectre.
@@monsieurchadster6309 You liked QOS?
@@sandersson2813 I like every single bond film including quantum of solace. Some bond films are ranked higher than lower, QOS is 16th in my ranking while NTTD is 12th out of 25 films.
@@monsieurchadster6309 Fair enough. I can't find a single redeeming thing about QOS or NTTD. I was so bored throughout and eye rolling for much of it.
I've pretty much disowned 3.5 of Craig's films as just shit.
@@sandersson2813 QOS has editing and writing issues but action scenes are top notch for me.
My bottom Bond films:
26. Quantum of Solace
25. No Time to Die
24: Spectre
23: Skyfall
22: Casino Royal
21. Never Say Never Again
That's how bad Craig's films are.
NSNA(1983) is a pretty good movie! Better than: 1971, 1973, 1974, 2002, and of course 2006-----2021.
@@renekauts8323 It I really isn't a good movie at all. It's truly terrible.
LET ME GUESS LIVE AND LET DIE ARE YOUR NUMBER ONE
@@andersboisen9179 No.
Your passion is beautiful to see. Can't wait to know about the live action future of this character, but for me, Daniel Craig as defined the role forever
I grew up with Bond at an early age. My Dad shared with me at the age of 4 these great action filled entertaining, and sometimes humourous films. The first I was shown was For your eyes only, followed by A view to a kill. So I took to the Moore era very quickly and those two films are always in my t op two.It took time to appreciate some of the other Bonds. For realism I think Dalton has Craig beat. As Dalton films follow the Bond formula, and he is still charming as Bond should be. David mentioned the one line in Spectre at the clinic. The line in Licence to kill is way more impactful. Dalton " I help ppl with problems". Sanchez " Ah, problem solver". Dalton " More like problem eliminator". I look for 5 things in a Bond film : Character, story, chemistry, music, entertainment value. Connery, Lazenby,Moore,Dalton I found there was a general consistency to the films. Brosnan era first two hit the mark, but lost their way in his last two. Craig era was like a polygraph test done by a compulsive liar all over the place.
I rank Casino Royale as Craig's 2 nd best. It was largely entertaining, and ticked all the boxes. It was a good origin story.
Quantum of solace, I enjoyed as I view it as the proper revenge follow up we never got in Diamonds are forever after OHMSS. Where QOS lost some marks music was meh, and the villain best scenes was swinging the axe in the hotel at the climax.
Skyfall is where Craig hit his mark. Silva is by a country mile the best villain in Craig's era, and I loved it's the true to form "Bond formula" film and reintroduces an over the top villain and fun for the first time in Craig's tenure, peak time to bow out. Also the only Craig one I've viewed more than 5 times.
Spectre much like Brosnan's final two, wasn't a performance issue but a written one. I detested Purvis and Wade giving a nod to Austin Powers in the script, Blofeld isn't an evil genius but a jealous child, the film also commits the #1 sin of being boring, the highlight was a decent song from Sam Smith.
No time to die, for me could have stayed collecting dust on a shelf. It contains action but nothing memorable, it's overlong, and really not a fun film, killing off characters, and seemed to be Disney box checking, with let's make Q gay, let's make a black female 007, let's give Bond a daughter. I never bought the chemistry between Madeline and Bond, Safin is a weak villain, and contained the two most anti climatic deaths of villains. It tried to recreate some past integral scenes, one being where Bond rolls the car on a henchman, the original scene from For your eyes only with kicking the car off the cliff more tense, cold, finished off with a great Moore quip "He had no head for heights". They did try that in NTTD with Cyclops, but Craig doesn't have Moore's comedic timing. I originally cried at the end of OHMSS when I first saw it, as I really believed the love between Lazenby and Rigg. At the ending of NTTD I was more bewildered and angered. Let's hope Bond 26 brings back the fun escapism we as fans love and deserve from this franchise. Here are my ⭐ ratings for the Craig era.
Casino Royale ⭐⭐⭐⭐/5
QOS ⭐⭐⭐⭐/5
Skyfall ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Spectre⭐⭐/5
NTTD ⭐⭐.5/5
I grew up on Dalton/Brosnan Bond, but Craig in the role made me a FAN of the franchise. I only watch the other Bond actors for nostalgia sake, but I thoroughly enjoy the Craig era films(and own all 5 of them).
Started off with the excellent Casino Royale followed by the un-written disaster of QOS. 2 mediocre films followed then the franchise killer NTTD.
So what started with him shooting a bloke in his office whilst discussing killing another in a Pakistani cricket club, it ended with him being killed by his own side carrying a wet teddy bear. It was absolute toss and Eon should be ashamed of themselves.
The “arc” was that bad they are stuck what do do with it now they’ve sucked all the joy from the series. Well, the’ve got their whiskey to sell
If Daniel Craig had stopped at skyfall … his legacy would have been (dare I say) equal to Sir Sean. But…but…but…he continued … and the movies declined tremendously … and eventually worked with the franchise killer (aka Phoebe Waller bridge ) to destroy the brand that we all love. Coulda … woulda… shoulda ….
Craig era movies was among the worst in the series, for me. Arc? There was no intention for prior movies to have an arc. They were meant to be all standalone movies, with minor references to prior films because of multiple actors portraying the role. And Craig's movies are the least repeat watchable for me. The title songs, soundtrack, style, dialogue, Bond girls, gadgets, relationships, Black woman 007, etc. all weak and pandering, in comparison to the others. Although, action was never a problem in any Bond movie. Casino Royale, for was a real borefest, seems like 90 mins of Texas Hold'em poker, and the Vespa relationship was forced at best. And don't get me started with half-bro Blofeld and daughter stuff.
The ultimately, for me, Craig will be the man who killed James Bond . As a result, producers are in a pickle on where to take the franchise now, as they have created there own self inflicted debacle. Craig's involvement in the direction of the franchise, beyond his acting role, has a lot to do with that. Now he's gone, and the producers are left with a mess.
Daniel Craig, had a great run as Bond. I immensely enjoyed the first four films. However, he came back for that wokefest of No Time To Die, which for me pretty torpedoed his legacy in one film. It was not the case, that Bond was killed off, it was ruined by an # agenda laced script, along with the director who was certainly not a fan of the Connery films. I was so annoyed by this film (after seeing it), I placed OHMSS on at home to bring me back to reality.
I didn't mind Spectre, but Skyfall is probably my favourite Bond film, it just really got me into it.
"Casino Royale" is definitely one of my top 3 Bond-movies. But I don't feel all that passionate about the rest of Craig's so called arc. How many times do you want to see your hero failing and being deconstructed? A few years from now we'll probably look back and say: oh dear, that was so 2020s.
This is a good topic because my least favourite bits of the Craig films are all related to this attempt to make it a chronological series rather than just individual movies. To me all the 5 films are fairly equally watchable, each with parts I absolutely love and some I hate. I even thought Spectre was good on first viewing unlike the rest of the planet apparently. Things like making Blofeld his 'brother', forcing plot points like fatherhood, and being 'over the hill' in 3/5 movies just takes away from the enjoyment of a good action movie. To me Casino Royal is absolutely perfect right up until the Casino part, then I find it quite dull from then on. Similarly with No Time to Die, right up until the car chase near the end its incredible, but it just fails at the last hurdle.
The arc wasn't the best and Craig wasn't the best. Casino looked optimistic, but Quantum was absolutely the worst. Further movies were average at best. Even the Brosnan ones are more interesting now.
If Spectre was his last film, then it would have been defendable
No way to defend No Time to Die
I agree with about 90% of everything you just said.....and thank you for what you do.
I Also think that overall, the input that they allowed Daniel Craig to have over the films was not for the best. Remember that Casino was his best and that was written by Paul Hagis. not a committee of Craig, a director and Pervis and Wade.
I love the Craig movies and his arc! I think it was a great and worthy experiment for the franchise. Casino Royale brought me back into the Fandom after Brosnan's last two movies left me cold, so I'll always love these movies for that. Not perfect, certainly, but felt the closest to Fleming in tone than anything since early Connery.
Love this video David,it's almost a celebration of your channel which I also get nostalgic about I remember a young David introducing himself to us for James bond lifestyle with some random rock music playing in the background love it ,at least you've outlived James bond.
He only did one good Bond film - Casino Royale
The producers think that the end of NTTD will have an OHMSS-like future renaissance. It can not be defended - until in 30 years when it is accepted.
It was shameful associating OHMSS with the "separate" Craig era. Cynical nostalgia bait and theft of Lazenby's and Rigg's theme.
No time to die was such an upset to the spirit of Fleming’s creation that I don’t believe it will ever be the same. Brand damage is real, look at Star Wars & Marvel.
I feel the only way to save it is if they bring back Daniel Craig for 1 more (Bond Lives) or cast Henry Cavil but even that isn’t certain
@@rossmccay absolutely, & to think it was done to appease those people that don’t watch Bond or ever have watched a Bond movie 💥💥🔫
Daniel Craig was terrible. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
He commited the cardinal sin of making Bond a character you don't care about.
@@sandersson2813 totally agree 💯 Lot of the comments here are forgetting how much of the blame for this should be set firmly at the feet of Daniel Craig and his toys out the pram ‘I’m too good for this role’ attitude
@@garyniven946 Bourne blew it out of the water.
The issue with Craig's Bond films is they don't run to their own tune. Too much influence from what is around them. Bourne films, Marvel and Nolan TDK trilogy.
Casino Royale and Skyfall are fantastic films. The other three are shit.
I'm done with it. I call it the Craig Cryfest.
What Arc? The only continuous trope was being a terrible agent and going to be being an old miserable loser and gives up. The Craig era was a slow character assassination.
For me, Craig's Bond was too serious and depressing. Was he a great Bond? I'd say so. I put Craig right behind Brosnan, Connery, and Moore respectively. I was introduced to 007 during the Brosnan era as a child, so I came to know Bond as this serious, yet campy spy with all sorts of gadgets and cars. Craig had basically no gadgets, barely any cars, and virtually no puns. James Bond is supposed to be EXCITING, not a drama flick with the occasional high octane action.
I'm sure its been suggested many times before but considering the troubles they are having setting up the next phase of the series they should do a one off old man Bond movie with Brosnan riding off into the sunset at the end. Showing that the end of Bond's story is not necessarly a lame death that few see as the great romantic sacrifice they wanted.
Yes, Spectre got better with time. I think my dislike for No Time To Die actually elevated it. Quantum has some of my favorite scenes in the franchise, I actually put it ahead of Spectre and NTTD. As for No Time To Die, it took a big bite out of my future interest in Bond movies. I've gone from superfan to a nostalgic fan for the past. I hope arcs disappear. Let's just see missions.
It was awesome! Doesn't need defending...and I've watched every Bond movie. IMO, the two best Bond movies are Daniel Craig ones.
😂😂😂😂😂😂
It doesn't deserve defending.
Meh. I still only enjoyed two films of his time as Bond. Casino Royale and Skyfall. Both Spectre and No Time To Die were mid to me, and I just can't stand Quantom Of Solace.
The Producer's shouldn't of allowed Daniel Graig to have Bond killed off. It would of been better to have his Bond , just drive away into the sunset with his woman and their daughter to reconnect and enjoy his family. The killing Bond off in a explosion, was a bad move. You don't kill off the Pivotal, major , important character James Bond, Period! Then bring him back from the dead in the next film. That's Bonker's! You may lose a major part of your audience with that decision and damage the franchise !😮
Interesting video. For me, the Craig films and Craig's Bond have lost their charm and potency as time has gone on. They're all too po-faced and self-regarding ultimately, with only Casino Royale really landing for me in that vein (and is that the kind of trick you call only pull once?). I used to love "Skyfall" but now the plot inconsistencies and contrivances makes a bit wince making.
I don't know where they will go from here, especially given how febrile the real world is right now.
Unlikely due to business pressure I know, but artistically Bond needs to rested for a decade or so and then brought back, probably as a period piece. The character needs to be in the right context to both work and not immediately become a lightning rod for current sensitivities.
I can accept his arc’s ending. We saw in Spectre from his apartment that he wasn’t really living. By the time we got to NTTD he was going through the motions of living with nothing to lose. By the end he had something to live for but a reason to die for. It was cliched and not a favorite movie by any means but I got it. It doesn’t sour me on the franchise.
But I consider his Bond to be in its own universe the second they reintroduced Blofeld. Also let’s be honest when it comes to Bond being a dad. You know Matilde(?) is probably not the first, there’s got to be a lot of little Bond’s everywhere.
At the same time I’m sure OHMSS had similar reactions when released. Bond falling in love and getting married probably wasn’t well received. Look at that movie now, it’s in the top ten of a lot of fans.
It wasn’t even really start to form an “arc” until Skyfall, and then it felt like a clumsy afterthought (Oh…let’s try to tie those movies together). Casino Royale was the perfect reboot. QoS dropped the ball a bit and was horribly directed by Marc (let’s make a Bourne movie, shaky-cam) Forster. Skyfall was a 50th anniversary film for the fans, and maybe the producers listened a bit too much to people calling for the return of the Bond tropes (which Casino Royale had very effectively jettisoned), but it wasn’t bad. Spectre was downhill. Chistolph Waltz, who should have been a brilliant Blofeld, was criminally wasted with a cringe worthy screenplay (Cuckoo?). And the less said about the last one, the better. I thought Casino Royale showed tremendous promise, but to me, the Craig Arc wound up being a disappointment.
My main issue with the Daniel Craig era is outside of Casino Royale (my #2 Bond film), Bond doesn’t look like he’s having much fun. James Bond is supposed to have fun being Bond. I think individually they’re all fantastic action movies, but they don’t necessarily feel like “Bond” movies. Often times Bond felt like simply another Jason Bourne or Ethan Hunt with just a gun barrel and opening song to differentiate. Also, I felt that there was inconsistency in the tone of his arc. Quantum of Solace was the 2nd movie and basically picks up immediately after Casino Royale so you could argue Skyfall was just his second adventure, but we’re supposed to buy into him already being old and washed up? Tonally speaking, the way it was presented to us would suggest that Skyfall should’ve been the final Craig film, with 4 films before it instead of 2 after it. I still love them as individual action films, though, and I watch them regularly, but I hope the series returns to more of a fun tone and an embracing of the ridiculous. That’s what separates Bond from other spy franchises.
I went to 007 elements and it gave me the motivation to watch it again with a "new perspective". Still, spectre and NTTD stay action movies with Bond elements...it seems like a spoof, because the marble you mentioned, for me, is that Bond got lucky in spectre. So watching Bond in NTTD get lucky again with all the explosions I think it is safe to say that EON lost its touch.
Up untill now I just talked about that lucky part. Take the big budget, shitty plot, mix it with having a girl with a child etc etc and you will get a sad arc after a pretty solid trilogy. Period
Dalton was the best Bond. Dalton and Connery were leagues away from any other actor. They have natural presence on and off screen where Craig and Brosnan had to act it. They don't naturally exude the same mojo. You can not fake that in real life. Lazenby also has the swagger. Moore oozed relaxed charm and didn't want to play a mean Bond. You see it when all these guys are interviewed. Some have it, some don't.. Great video though David. Good exploration of the Craig area. I think they should stop he Bind films before they become a parody of themselves. NTTD was appalling. The Fleming material has been well mined but no doubt EON will want io keep the money rolling in.
I think NTTD just didn’t hit for me. I was so against the idea of killing off Bond and I just felt the rest just didn’t matter and I can’t rewatch it.
QoS is probably one of my least rewatchable films. The movie was just weak around him. I didn’t like the plot of basically “water rights”. Seemed odd.
Great topic. I think my problem with the arc is that it exists at all. That's the problem with TV/film writers of a certain era, they must have an arc, they want a certain kind of conflict, and they consider any other form of storytelling as inferior or unintelligent. This does Craig a great disservice because he's a Layer Cake kind of actor. Skyfall and Spectre forced him into being Brosnan more than a little, which was just daft. I also hated that the arc tricked us into thinking it'll be different from other Bonds, only to reassemble the team of M/Q/Moneypenny at the end of Skyfall. That was incredibly lame.
I have all of the Daniel Craig, James Bond movies, I'm going to miss seeing him as 007, the one they picked out to replace him, I don't think I'll be watching any of those movies, Pierce Bronson and Timothy Dalton are my favorite one's too, but Daniel Craig is what I started getting interested in James Bond!
I enjoyed them all for different reasons.
There’s no need to defend Craig’s films, nor anyone else’s versions really. It’s sad that adults can’t simply just accept they don’t like something and just ignore it, rather than having to constantly go on about it.
Debating is fun. I want to know exactly what people see in Craig for instance
The best work David does for example are his debates with Calvin on Bond films.
Discussing Bond films and what makes them good (or terrible in the case of Craig) is what makes being a fan of Bond different. I don't really see this diversity of thought in other film franchises for example. People are pretty much in agreement on those as to what is good and bad, eg Phantom Menace, Lord of the Rings, Marvel etc.
I certainly feel the Craig saga is best watched/viewed as a 5 part continuing story due to the character development and larger narrative [which for me helps QOS especially] and reflects tv/films in the modern 'binge watching' era. Serialisation was creeping in Brosnan era as The world is not enough' has a returning Valentine and the development of the Bond-M relationship from the prior two films [and there was plans for Wai Lin to return for Die Another Day].
Daniel Craig has done a great job at keeping the Bond franchise relevant. However, I do feel the last two movies he made were let down by their endings. Spectre was a great Bond film runied by the ending of Blofeld being Bond's "brother" and "author of all your pain". Take those lines out, make Blofeld a standard villian, and the movie holds up. No Time to Die was also a great Bond film, only hindered by killing Bond. The virus aspect was too much like a video game (i.e. Metal Gear Solid), and killing Bond just seemed like emotional manipulation. Bond should have jumped into the water, and see him kick his leg and swim away - a final homage the Bourne influence on the Craig era
Sorry but, unless you understand the theme of his ARC. You can't compare, otherwise I'd say Roger Moore was a comic laughable ARC and Bolton was boring. 🎉
Daniel Craig is only a couple of years older than me so he is 'my Bond' he made me change the way I think about dressing and made me a better version of myself. Spectre and NTTD were awful films, maybe if it was planned better they could have been made into one great film to end the arc (could have ended with them all standing in M office raising a glass to 007 and then M just presses the intercom and says "send in 007" and the new 007 appears).
David my personal opinion is that the producers have pushed it too far. Daddy Day care and killing Bond off sorry its a bridge too far for me. I get the sense that you are trying to stay politically correct and stay on the side of caution with the Daniel Craig films. Especially the last 2 Spectre and No Time To Die. I understand why because your now recognised in the Bond world and in fandom and you have been noticed by Barbara and Michael so much so that you get exclusive interviews and especially you get handed merchandise and original tailored clothing to wear and display and review online etc. Tom Ford Omega etc. So it pays for you to keep it on a level that dosent kill the golden goose. I have been a Bond fan since I was 5 years of age my father allowed me to watch these movies and I've really enjoyed them. I didn't just come into this at the Pierce Brosnan era. I have to say what Barbara and Michael have done with it from about 2 movies in with Brosnan then the Craig era with exception to Casino Royal has made me distance myself from being a fan. They couldn't stuff Casino Royal up because Fleming wrote it just follow the book. It's well documented that Brosnan wanted to go deeper into the emotional side of Bond and they kept throwing these cheesy scripts at him. I also don't think Daniel Craig really hit the mark on the emotional side it could have been done better. Its all in the writing and Purvis and Wade have been past their used by date for about a decade or more. Yet they will probably be writing on the next one. Honestly for me seeing as they killed him off I except he's dead and there cannot be a resurrection. It's just become idiotic. We all know now that the creative differences with director Danny Boyle was over killing the character off he was against it and I agree and I believe Cubby would never had done such a thing let alone think it or take it seriously. Bottom line I don't care for where they have taken these films and honestly I feel they have helped in the demise of big picture cinema as there is alot of better content coming from the small screen streaming services these days that makes Bond look like a over budgeted badly written parody of himself. So when they announce the new guy I won't be lining up to see who it is. There is alot of fans that do feel similar about all of this and it's disappointing because it could have been different very different but history cannot be turned back now. I still can't believe they went with blowing James Bond up. All the films had Bond beating the bad guy and winning the beautiful lady at the end. Daniels Bond left audiences wondering why it was so sad at the ending of his films the whole idea was to have audiences leave the cinema happy saying yes Bond did it again saved the world and got the girl. Not these days we all leave going what the he'll im depressed.
I love his movies I find the Roger Moore movies the least rewatchable. David I gotta say and I see your vids and yes your journey into Bond shape started with Craig and you have a lot of Craig stuff. But you yourself (and you can have that opinion) have been guilty of trashing Craig's arc of Bond as a character. I personally loved it better than 4 actors for me as Bond he ain't number 1 for me but he is up there
They gave him a depressive girlfriend. Then another more depressive girlfriend who became the mother of his child. Eventually, they let him beg for the life of the latter and killed him by utilizing big rockets in a huge explosion. Another person than me, not me but another, less polite person than me, could draw the conclusion that Broccolis daughter may have had a terrible childhood.
Asides from the Title song, I really enjoyed Quantum ( I've sat in the DBS) Spectre is my most watched Bond film, if it's on tv when I walk in the room, I just sit down and watch.
I'm going to hazard a guess you're quite young.
Seems to be a generational difference of opinion on Craig.
@sandersson2813 Young, I wish, I was five years old when I saw Dr. NO on its first run.
@@steveb4012 Wooah. Impressive.
The Craig era would have been improved by ending with Spectre (as Daniel Craig originally wanted). Blofeld defeated and James finally gets out of the spy game with his woman, just as he wanted in Casino Royale. Circle closed. Fini.
The "best" way to get the James Bond movie franchise, is for the start of Bond 26 to show the death of James Bond, following with the new James Bond waking up, saying: "Now that was nasty!"
Films have evolved artistically: music, photography, acting. But the Bond character regressed. I would like to see the end of this arc with a new actor.

Casino Royal and Skyfall where great movies. But the other Craig Bonds where terrible failures. It wasn't Daniel Craig it was the directors, the writers of the story. There was no direction no storyline, it was simply terrible.
To be honest after no time to die i think im done with the franchise. Went a little to far for me with the ending and wokeness. They crossed a line. I can't see them uncrossing it in the next one. Itll probably get worse. If it does im gone for good
Skyfall is the true ending of the craig trilogy spectre and no time to piss are more spin off movies and such a mess .
Casino Royale was excellent. Craig owned the role and it was a great interpretation of Flemings first novel. Unfortunately, NTTD was dismal. It was so poor it makes the remaining Bond films he made appear better than they were.
NTTD, QOS, Spectre and second half of Skyfall were complete turds.
Craig needs no defending. He attracted more audiences than Brosnan, and got rid of some of the sillier aspects of the series that just do not work in today's world. The billion dollars Skyfall brought in proves Craig's popularity. It's really only a certain "faction" of the Bond fandom that can't accept him.
Spot on.
Counterpoint: Brofeld.
I liked QOS when I saw it even after being exposed to negative reviews and I was anticipating it being a bad movie but I liked it though and through. It has a lean running time which is an underrated quality. The last 2 outings were way too long. I think we really got Dalton'd (screwed) in 2010 by not getting his 3rd film follow up while he's still in his prime because in Skyfall he was already the past his peak version of 007.
Bond became a different character after Quantum; he became softer. Skyfall was good, but it was a different guy.
Why I enjoyed the movie on its own, I never understood what Quantum of Solace brought to the table, to the arc. It seemed more of a detour, than a history on its own. But yeah, Bond portrayal was on spot there and set the tone what he would be in later movies.
I think that the only Craig Bond movies that I go back to from time to time is Casino Royale and Skyfall.
First three are beast. Spectre and NTTD was just an action movie with Bond elements.