Sponsor |  lerryn | Apr 6, 2005 3:42pm | British actor Daniel Craig picked as new James Bond
The producers of the hugely successful James Bond film franchise have chosen British actor Daniel Craig to take over the role of the suave super-spy, a report said.
The 37-year-old has been offered a three-film deal by Bond producer Barbara Broccoli and is expected to sign up formally in the next few weeks, The Sun newspaper reported Wednesday.
Craig, a tough-looking character actor who has mixed up appearances in many art-house titles with roles in blockbusters such as "Lara Croft: Tomb Raider", just beat fellow Briton Clive Owen for the role, the report said.
Craig would be the sixth Bond in the official series of films based on the novels by Ian Fleming, following Sean Connery, George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton and most recent incumbent Pierce Brosnan.
According to The Sun, Owen -- nominated for an Oscar this year for film "Closer" -- had told casting agents he did not want the job, although Broccoli was already favouring Craig.
While Craig remains relatively unknown outside Britain, he is well respected as an actor and also has the necessary reputation for being something of a Bond-esque ladies man, having recently dated supermodel Kate Moss.
Citing an unnamed "movie source", The Sun said that staff working at Eon Productions, which makes the Bond movies, had been told Craig would star in the next films.
"Daniel is the new 007. He is going through the deal with his lawyers. It's a big commitment for a minimum of 10 years, but he has indicated he will take the job," the source said.
Brosnan's last film as Bond was "Die Another Day" in 2002. Since then a string of possible replacements have been mooted, including Britons Jude Law and Ewan McGregor and Australian actors Hugh Jackman and Eric Bana.
Fleming's novels chronicling the adventures of the British spy codenamed 007 were first turned into a film in 1962, with "Dr No". |
|
| | | ClareQuilty | Apr 6, 2005 6:38pm | | I haven't seen a James Bond movie since "The Spy Who Loves Me." Perhaps this new Bond, who hopefully isn't the kind of waifish preening ponce that Brosnan was, will breathe new life into this tired old franchise. |
|
| 
Sponsor | | dragonhead | Apr 7, 2005 1:18am | | It's very tired, isn't it? I have had no interest in it since...ooh! wait!.."The Spy Who Loved Me". And I was 8. |
|
|
Sponsor | | lerryn | Apr 7, 2005 1:39am | Same here but this guy does not look like the archetypal bond!
 |
|
| 
Sponsor | | Lisuebie | Apr 7, 2005 8:13am | Oh dear. Looks like Crocodile Dundee. :)
Plus, he is not nearly young enough to make more than a couple movies (oh, please, no more aging Bonds a là Moore) Unless of course, they do it the LOTR way and film them all at once! |
|
| 
|  ourtime99 | Apr 7, 2005 8:13pm | | I don't think the producers can come up with enough inane plots and floozy Bond girls to film more than one at a time. |
|
| | | ClareQuilty | Apr 8, 2005 12:53am | | #4 Dear god, he's ugly. Are you sure this isn't the arch-villian from the next Bond film? This bloke looks more like a pick-pocket than a 00 spy. |
|
|
Sponsor | | dragonhead | Apr 8, 2005 1:37am | | He's only 36! Bloody hell. I thought I looked old.... |
|
|
Sponsor | | Lisuebie | Apr 8, 2005 4:25am | 6. It is probably the lack of girls. Plots? I think they only have one, right? In different disguises. It's kinda like going to McDonald's- doesn't taste particularly good, but you're sure of what you'll get.
8. Only 36? Well, fine. He'll last a decade, then. |
|
| | | ClareQuilty | Apr 8, 2005 4:04pm | #9 "It's kinda like going to McDonald's- doesn't taste particularly good, but you're sure of what you'll get."
That was all well and good way back when the titillation factor, gadgets, and special effects in Bond movies distinguished them. Now, especially with the Bond franchise hand-cuffed in attempting to appeal to as wide of an audience as possible without offending anyone, they seem utterly run of the mill, boring even. With likes of "Sin City" and the up coming "Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Universe" overloading an already jaded movie going public with a synapse-frying orgy of visual delights, what's the point in trotting out this anachronistic cold-war nag for one more predictably mediocre showing? |
| |
| |
Pop Culture → Discussion