"MEMBER DC MUSINGS ARCHIVE"

Visit here to read and post all the latest Daniel Craig-related news, TV/VCR(DVD) alerts, etc.

Moderator: Germangirl

Germangirl
Moderator
Posts: 46404
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 5:05 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Germangirl » Sat Feb 28, 2009 7:33 pm

Thelma wrote:Thanks you for doing that GG!
You´re welcome - its a nice change to go looking for the quotes...
The top notch acting in the Weisz/Craig/Spall 'Betrayal' is emotionally true, often v funny and its beautifully staged with filmic qualities..

Image

Germangirl
Moderator
Posts: 46404
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 5:05 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Germangirl » Sun Mar 01, 2009 3:51 pm

I would pay to see Danny read the phone book or just stand in front of a brick wall for two hours. There are times I think that I would rather sit and watch the back of his head than 90% of the other actors that are out there.
That description is so cute. ...and the back of his head with those ears is quite a sight :wink:
How many of us really take the time to study Daniel and notice how sexy he really is? I'm willing to bet that 99.99% us on this forum spend a hell of alot of time doing just that. I thought I would take a moment to share with you what I love about Daniel. It won't take you long to realise that he's SEXY ALL OVER!!!!! :) :twisted:

... I love his hair. The combed forward look he sported in C/R was a little too stylised for my liking. I prefer it loose and slightly unkempt like the pic in my avatar.

...I love his eyes. Blue, grey whatever... They're still the most brilliant and expressive pair of peepers I've ever seen!

...I love his lips and that space above - what d'ya call it? Filtrum? Hmmm, I just know it's good for kissing!!

...I love his sticky-out ears. They're cute and I keep wanting to bite or rub his earlobes!!!

...I love his nose. Fat and squashy it may be but it lends a greater character to his face.

...I love the curve of his neck and the prominent adam's apple.

...I love those broad shoulders. How's about this for a chat up line? 'Excuse me but something about the thickness of your neck and the broadness of your shoulders makes me think you'd be a good hunter and provide well for our family'!!!!!! :lol:

...I love the bulging biceps. They're shown off to particular good effect in the shower scene in C/R. Just as he starts to get wet, the white shirt he's wearing sticks to him and well... it's just so hot!! :twisted:

...I love that muscular belly and his stickie-out belly button. Who cares about a six pack? This is more manly by far. And the appendix scar is a curious addition to make an even more tantalising image. (Dunda, I think you know what I'm saying??!! :wink: )

...I love the hint of pubic hair above his trouser line and the way it travels up his belly. I love his 'male bits'... (Thanks, Zonzi!!! :oops: :twisted: )

...I love his thighs cause they're so chunky. Perhaps a throw-back to his rugby playing days?

...I love his calves too... They're so shapely!

...I love his feet. We don't see too much of those but, in the scene with Caterina in C/R when he gets up after kissing her and walks towards the phone, you can see his feet are quite smooth and tanned. I think that tanned feet are very sexy!!! Also, and this is important for women, he wears good shoes. His dress sense as a whole is completely sharp.

Perhaps the most important thing of all...

...I love his mind and soul. His mind because it's full of intelligence and humour. His soul because it's full of emotion and he is, essentially, a good person.

There's also the things that I can only imagine and would need to verify with personal contact... He smells good whether he's wearing cologne or not.

I imagine that Daniel would baulk at being called 'perfect' though. He is human and therefore must have his faults. In my mind, I have made the following guess-timates about what his 'faults' are...

Restless
Stubborn / Wilfull
Sulks when he doesn't get his way
Prone to bouts of depression
Quick to anger
Drinks / swears too much
Thank god he doesn't smoke anymore but I bet he enjoys a cigar occasionally. I prefer cigars to cigarettes. My grandfather used to smoke them before he died. They're a sensual pleasure. A man would light up a cigar like a woman would eat a bar of chocolate...

I could be wrong on any of the above negative traits. But who gives a damn about that? I'm willing to let him be human. He'll still be pretty damn perfect to me.
We have examined him almost more intensely than any forensic specialist. If we could, we'd probably check out his liver and internal organs too! Cancel that - what a morbid thought!

I can only try in vain to detail the things that make him so irresistible to us. It goes beyond reason or visual explanation. There are film stars and athletes all over the world who possess equally appealing qualities and yet I have no words for them. I am a blank canvas and the only muse to urge my creativity is Daniel Craig. I don't know why and I don't seem to care.

He has shown us his emotional range in his face and actions. Where these emotions come from is what makes him so interesting. Not simply a beautiful face - that being argued on so many levels. His face transforms out of the clay under deft artist's hands. What you don't see right away - will come to haunt you when you least expect it.

When I see him in stills or on the screen, I am completely captivated and lose myself. Content to admire him in all his manifestations and mine - however delusional.

I think my fascination comes mostly from his personality, which I still try to grab. As I said it on some other thread, he is a man full of extremes ( I don´t like this word, but Leo says its the translations) I would perhaps go for opposites.

-He has all that confidence - but still has insecurities I would normally consider as mutually exclusive
-He can be extremely manly - but can be all boy the next moment
-He has that beautiful bariton voice - but that boyish giggle
-I feel he has fought and beat a lot of daemons and lerned from it. I consider him nowadays almost wise in many aspects - but as its said by a collegue "There is a simmering lunacy just underneath the surface"
-He knows and likes to dress very well - but even after winning for example his first GQ award (pre Bond), journalistes have seen him with holes in his t-Shirt and sloppily dressed
-He is so perfectly controlled on screen - but often jittery off screen
-He has chosen a profession, where its all about showing off really - opening up - but he is (as we all know) about the least person to enjoy self promotion
I would just like to say, that I just love looking at him, watching him walk, talk, laugh, cry, protect his girl as she protects him, stumble across his own sentences and still say something worthwhile, watch as he never lets anybody get the better of him...
His beauty is unique and somehow unexpected,. But appearently the world was ready for it. Some don´t get it while looking at his stills but seeing him float the screen with his charisma and the personality of his characters, most women and men (in a way) will settle for gourgeous in his very own way.
The way he uses that expressive face of his just speaks of guts rather than the need to appeal to everybody.
I think another thing that's endearing is his modesty, when he tries to disprove that he is sexy, we have Cardidan and, he then blows it when he dons a suit, wears his tux and his photo shots just highlights his manliness even more.
The top notch acting in the Weisz/Craig/Spall 'Betrayal' is emotionally true, often v funny and its beautifully staged with filmic qualities..

Image

Germangirl
Moderator
Posts: 46404
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 5:05 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Germangirl » Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:28 am

The top notch acting in the Weisz/Craig/Spall 'Betrayal' is emotionally true, often v funny and its beautifully staged with filmic qualities..

Image

User avatar
Lu
Posts: 3415
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 5:31 am

Post by Lu » Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:41 pm

I think part of his charm is the perceived split personalities.

He once said when he takes on a project he gives it his all, and there is no point in getting Greta Garbo over things (love his turn of phrase). There is a sense of duty in seeing things through with him which I think shows through his approach to acting and his work ethics, because he will go the extra mile and muck in with whoever he works with.

He hates flying and yet look at the air miles he racks up to promote a film, doesn't like heights but will push himself to the limits, is uncomfortable in interviews but will not shirk away from the spotlight.

He will take on roles because they interests him, and won't necessarily appeal to a wider audience, he encourages talent and doesn't just play lip service eg Bailey and Matthew Vaughan neither had directed their own films, he stepped up to the plate in both their films.

When the spotlight is on him he will take a step back and give centre stage to his fellow actors, I've noticed he always lets whoever is with him have their moment too.

I think he's quite amiable with a dry sense of humour most of the time, if he dislikes you or a situation he's polite but detached but he most definitely has a temper, which he doesn't disguise, and only the unobservant will not see his body language and expressions to know when to back off.

All in all DC is an extremely talented and an extraordinary actor, who also happens to be a star and is able to separate what he does with who he is and since he doesn't let us in on his secret therein lies the contradictions.
My books!
Image

Image

Germangirl
Moderator
Posts: 46404
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 5:05 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Germangirl » Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:24 pm

Back in 1996, to say that I was excited about the prospect of Our Friends in the North was an understatement. I'd spent the 4 years since the Power of One watching like a hawk for the role that would truly fulfil that early promise. There were strong signs of it in Anglo Saxon Attitudes and Between the Lines. Each role built on the previous one and Daniel showed that the ability to hold the eye of the audience as he did in the Power of One was no fluke. I realised from the get-go that I was always going to be biased, but in fairness to Daniel, I can remember friends and family commenting that he had a screen presence that drew one's eye, and so I knew it was not just my addled imagination.

But all his roles between the Power of One and Our Friends in the North left me wanting a whole lot more. The roles were too short and there was not enough of them. Then there were the not so wonderful roles obviously taken to either pay the bills or keep him in casting director's eyes, or both. His theatre work proved that he was an actor who could wipe the floor with his contemporaries on screen, if only given a half-decent chance. But with the exception of a few little gems like Between the Lines and (surprisingly) Genghis Cohen, he had little to work with to impress screen audiences until Our Friends in the North. Although not reaching a mass audience, he was getting good reviews for his theatre work, and I felt a totally disproportionate sense of pride that at least he was getting recognised somewhere!

Our Friends in the North gathered many accolades when it was shown and nominated/won BAFTAs (though I gnashed my teeth at the time that Daniel did not win one). Not everyone was convinced by the series however and some critics said that it was too "windswept", that it was impossible to cover such subject matter in depth in the time allowed. Others said that the characters seemed not to age within themselves, they just ended up with grey hair and bald patches in 1995, but were the same as they were in character in 1964. I think it benefited from being "windswept". If the 4 storylines had been presented in more detail it would have got bogged down and become something of a soap opera. I don't agree with the claim that the characters did not grow. I think they did, but maybe the growth was not graphic enough for some tastes. Even after all this time, the series still has impact. I know what is coming, but I still cry when Daniel’s character Geordie has hard times and I still get irritated with Tosker's behaviour and I still get exasperated at Mary's overly pedantic stoicism, and I still want to tell Nicky to wake up and smell the coffee.

The central character of the four friends is Nicky (Christopher Ecclestone) who is the product of his father's passion and his mother's compassion. His father Felix walked the Jarrow March as a young boy and believed in the Labour movement as the soul of the working class. After the war he refuses to become involved in Labour Party politics because he believes they have sold out to capitalism. At the start of the saga, his son Nicky still thinks that the Party is the only way to make a difference and, on return from 2 months in the USA helping to get black voters registered, he gives up his chance of university to become employed by a local Labour leader. Over time it becomes apparent that this man is everything Nicky's father warned him about. He becomes disillusioned and moves further and further to the political “left“, towards anarchist politics. His journey from 1964 to 1995 takes him through a voyage of trying to reconcile his political beliefs with the reality of post-war working-class Britain as it moves from poverty to prosperity and back into threatening poverty.

When the series starts, Nicky has a girlfriend, Mary (Gina McKee), an intelligent girl eager to loose the chains of a predictable womanhood of being a wife and mother. She has a place at university, but in an ill-judged moment of weakness, she sleeps with the third member of the quartet, Tosker, played by Mark Strong, becomes pregnant and has to marry. 1964 Britain is no place for single mothers. As a young man, Tosker is a weak character with no thoughts other than his own gratification and dreams of being a singer in a successful hand. Unfortunately that never happens, mainly because he is tone-deaf! Tosker is basically a spoiled brat. His mother dotes on him and leads him to believe he can be the next big thing in music. To make things worse he is in turn feckless (sleeping with his friend's girlfriend) and then resentful when he has to shoulder his responsibilities as a father. His story is one typical of more than one young man in the 1960s, a decade that offered so much, but in many cases failed to deliver. Mary and Tosker set up home in one of the new high-rise housing blocks built in the early 60s. But that proves a disaster, and they lurch from crisis to apathy and then into despair before they part company.

The fourth member of the quartet is Geordie played by Daniel. When Our Friends in the North aired we had a very large lounge with the sofas a long way from the TV. That just would not do and so I claimed front-row seating, sitting on the floor, looking up at the TV so as not miss anything. I could hardly sit still for the excitement through the opening minutes, waiting for his first scene. And then, there he was. Just casually sitting on a swing in a playground, smoking a cigarette, with slum houses being demolished in the background. A more symbolic beginning one could not wish for, in every sense! Daniel's long blonde fringe had been swept back away from his face and he was wearing a typical "sharp suit" of the era. Who was this character going to be? The initial shots showed a rather biting expression on Geordie's face, and I remember hoping that they had not cast him as another "hard man".

His first exchange with Nicky was a relief, Geordie had a dry sense of humour and Daniel's delivery was pokerfaced. Geordie's dry retort of "Well spotted" to Nicky's observation that his birthday present (of a second-hand Fender Bass) was not a football still makes me laugh. But all was not well with Geordie; he revealed to his best friend that he was having to get married because he made a local girl pregnant. But even through Geordie’s bewilderment about how he got himself into such as mess, his irrepressible and totally irreverent humour was still there. Nicky, in exasperation at his friend's plight exclaims "Oh, fuck me Geordie!!", to which Geordie dryly replies, "No thanks, I‘m not shagging any more Catholics“.

There were then two scenes in rapid succession which showed that Geordie had a mischievous streak to go with the dry wit. When Nicky's mother shouts up the stairs that Nicky's father is home, Geordie exclaims "Felix is home!" and promptly dives under Nicky's bed shouting "Dive! Dive!". At Nicky's birthday tea shortly afterwards, Daniel does a comical show of Geordie talking with his mouth full and promptly showering breadcrumbs over half the tea table in a choking fit. Family friend Eddie asks him if he wants to "….try that again, I think you missed Felix". Geordie covers his mouth and laughs like a naughty school boy.

It took very few screen minutes for Daniel to take full advantage of his lines and show Geordie as a character of wit, charm and, intriguingly, naivety. Geordie's preoccupation with starting a pop group was obviously out of step with his friend's university plans, something highlighted by the sprinkling of political talk at the birthday tea table, With three out of the four friends present, it was obvious that Geordie was the one out of step; with a pregnant girlfriend and a life ahead of him working in a coalmine, he was the one "least likely to succeed".

On a visual level, one could not fail to notice that Daniel, now 27 years old, was strikingly beautiful and his blonde blue-eyed good looks enhanced the impression of Geordie's child-like qualities. Underneath all the bravado, Geordie had more to worry about than a “shot-gun” wedding. He lived with a violent and alcoholic father and seems to have raised himself while his father wandered from mental home to the streets to a grubby and poverty-stricken home and so on, round in a circle. Geordie, a “pitman”, while not physically frightened of his father was in turn wary, embarrassed and frustrated. He feared that he had somehow inherited his father's traits and it was a worried Geordie that asked Tosker "Do I remind you of my father?". For all the abuse metered out to him he refused to fight back until one night, driven to distraction by a life-time of cruelty and frightened for the safety of his friend Tosker, he does make one strike back and knocks the old man out. In a panic, he runs off to London, leaving behind his friends and a pregnant girlfriend. Within a very short space of screen time, Daniel won the audience over with a Geordie who was in turns, funny, vulnerable and naïve.

Geordie's first morning in London shows him being woken from his sleep on a park bench by two mounted policemen. He makes a quick exit from the scene in a manner that may pass by everyone except die-hard Daniel fans. The famous swagger, first aired in Power of One, is all too evident as he lifts his kitbag and smartly makes his way out of the park. While the three in the north struggle with adulthood, minor successes and major disappointments, Geordie's story carries on in London where he becomes, almost by accident, the right-hand man of an underworld crime boss whose fortunes are built on pornography and prostitution. Everything that happens to Geordie seems to happen, for good or for ill, by accident or by the conscious manipulations of those using him for their own ends. He seems to almost fall into situations with little forethought for his own future wellbeing. Despite becoming jaded by his new lifestyle, there is still evidence of the underlying naivety which, with his humour and loyalty, become Geordie’s hallmarks.

At times it appears that Flannery, having created this naive and loveable character then doesn't know what to do with him. However, that underestimates both Flannery's expertise as a writer and Daniel's expertise as an actor. Geordie's story arc, unlike those of the other three, does not run in a straight line. It weaves in and out of the other three, moving their stories on at pivotal moments, all the while spiralling downwards to the inevitable rock-bottom of alcohol addiction and homelessness.

If it were not for Geordie, Tosker would never have had the chance to start his business. If not for Geordie, Nicky would never have started to question again the ethical dilemmas that drove his conscience as a young man. All through the story, there are a lot of circumstances where people’s lives were changed by what Geordie did or did not do at a crucial moment. His character is an essential mechanism to the story, but is one which is strung across the story arc of the other three, making it the most difficult of the four roles for an actor to sustain. Daniel plays Geordie with a finesse that steers well clear of self-pity and with a sensitivity that clearly telegraphs to his audience his ability to interpret emotional suffering with an enormous amount of personal insight.

I feel that Geordie never really knew how he got to rock bottom. His enduring simplicity of nature meant he never really caught on to the forces which manipulated him throughout those 30 years. As the character grows and we get to know him, so Daniel grows into the role. Every time he appears on the screen, we are treated to another facet of Geordie's character expertly interpreted by an actor whose touch is so discreet that Geordie’s descent into the gutter is a seamless slide of inevitability.

There are so many impressive scenes to choose from, but one of the very best is known as "The Park Scene". Geordie is meeting Jules, the love of his life, in a local park in order to pass on an assignment from their boss Benny. Unfortunately, Jules is both Benny's mistress and his chief “call girl“. Geordie is head over heels in love with Jules and begs her to come away with him to a new life. Jules refuses; she sells herself not only for money but for the freedom she hopes it will buy her. Geordie, while bitterly reproachful of Jules’ choices, dissolves into tears, crying "I shouldn't love you. I shouldn't love you".

If Daniel had given us an accomplished portrayal of murderous rage in the Power of One, at the other end of the scale, he now gave us an accomplished portrayal of a broken heart in Our Friends in the North. Where overplaying rage can result in caricature, overplaying a broken heart can result in sickly pathos. In addition, the sight of a grown man in tears can provoke an uncomfortable reaction in many viewers. Daniel's tears (and they do look real) are a million miles away from pathos. His is a dignified and heart-rending display of the realisation that Jules will never be his, will never be the girl he dreams she should be. I believe it is a scene to be valued. It is evidence that Daniel could act both sides of the coin and in doing so mark out his stock-in-trade; riveting portrayals of the extremes of human emotion. Previous to "The Park Scene", the extremes he had played were at the "mad, bad and dangerous to know" end of the spectrum. At the other end of the scale, when Geordie cried, many cried with him, lost to the fact that this was just fiction on the TV screen.

To any Daniel fan watching Our Friends in the North for the first time, I recommend a box of tissues close at hand, and maybe a glass of good wine. There will be many points where you want to just reach into the TV set and pull out Geordie, rescue him and take him home. Daniel manages something that only the best actors can achieve, he captures the audience’s sympathy without belittling the character. In the latter episodes, given Geordie’s intrinsic rootless arc, Daniel produces a real tour de force of acting. There is often nothing to hang the character on other than the character itself. There are no mechanisms other than Geordie himself. In many of the scenes there are no other characters to use as a reflection. The scene in the homeless hostel is one example, the scene in the dock and in the prison van are others. Daniel has to carry this alone, with limited screen time, and no sense for the audience of where Geordie is headed next. That the audience all these years later remember Geordie with affection and concern is evidence of Daniel’s expertise.

I always find myself at some point not rooting for the other three characters. They too have their naivety, but it is borne sometimes of a selfishness that I think is part of the human condition. Watching those three is like looking in a mirror, and that is not comfortable. Geordie's character on the other hand is naive, often sweet-natured and irrepressible. He is self-destructive, but one cannot help but feel that if his chances had been better, or had promises been fulfilled, then the alcohol would not have taken such a hard grip and he would not have turned to the only methods of survival he knew from his needy and morally deprived upbringing. At every point in the story, I want to take Geordie home and look after him.

After stumbling so badly at the beginning, Geordie grows into the one character who consistently displays a basic moral imperative to do the right thing. Yes, he does break the law. But what he does not do is betray his friends. At various times over the 30 year span of the story, all of the other three betray each other, and in turn both Tosker and Nicky betray Geordie. But Geordie does not betray any of them. He may do what he has to do to survive and that may be outside the law, but his basic goodness, honesty and loyalty shows through right to the end. It is the underpinning recurrent theme of the series that he always misses out on the chances offered him because he tries to do the right thing with regard to those he cares for. His character starts on a moral low note and ends on a high one.

The ending is the part of the series I actually dislike. I have never been able to figure out why Flannery allowed the other three to have their happiness, but we are left wondering what becomes of “the bonnie lad”, the one character that deserved a decent break. Does he ever find peace, happiness and most important of all, a place of safety? The ending is a “glass half empty versus glass half full” scenario. If one feels optimistic, one can see Geordie back with his pals, living a simple life, retired from wandering and homelessness. If one feels pessimistic, then one sees him wandering off the Tyne Bridge back into the gutter he so recently struggled out of. Even Daniel himself does not know exactly what happens to Geordie. He is quoted as saying: “Look, Geordie is fine, he’s OK, at the end he just walked off. He’s quite alright”. But I don’t think I’m the only viewer who finds that hard to believe.

Our Friends in the North proved Daniel could hold true to a character with a powerful consistency and allow it to travel to the end of the story, a very long story at that. A lesser actor would have played Geordie as a parody: the wide-boy who becomes a Soho spiv; the failure who descends into vagrancy and a wasted life. Daniel’s own physical beauty captures the audience’s eye from the first moment. But that physical distraction would not have got him far because the part required that out of the three male friends, Geordie would become physically ugly and someone many would turn away from. It was Daniel’s talent which held the audience and endeared Geordie to them right to the very end. Daniel made Geordie sing. Everyone I have ever spoken to at length about this series all said that they wondered what happened to Geordie in the end. The other three characters were given their chance at lasting happiness, but the enduring question remains - whatever happened to “the bonnie lad”?
The top notch acting in the Weisz/Craig/Spall 'Betrayal' is emotionally true, often v funny and its beautifully staged with filmic qualities..

Image

Germangirl
Moderator
Posts: 46404
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 5:05 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Germangirl » Sat Mar 14, 2009 8:48 am

Image

Could you imagine how wonderful it would be growing up with those hands?
Ideally (imo) a father should be a "safe pair of hands" to lift up and support when a child falls.
Imagine being that toddler and being scooped up and rescued by such a strong pair of hands.
That looks like what he is doing in the photo....dusting off the little one after a tumble or a spill.
Shows his gentle side so graphically.
The top notch acting in the Weisz/Craig/Spall 'Betrayal' is emotionally true, often v funny and its beautifully staged with filmic qualities..

Image

Germangirl
Moderator
Posts: 46404
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 5:05 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Germangirl » Sun Apr 19, 2009 9:30 pm

I think it's hard to form a solid opinion about Sats as a person because I don't think anyone outside their circle really knows her.

Fans can piece together Daniel's personality via his work, interviews, paparazzi encounters and what his peers say about him. There are 20 years of Daniel's professional history out there to enable people to get a feel for him - and for his often unguarded honesty. Over time it has become possible to get the broad strokes of his personality, his strengths of character, and his ways. But there is so very little out there to base an opinion on when it comes to Sats.

From what little that can be seen, I think she is a strong, independent woman, I think she is a professional, and she conducts herself totally professionally out there with him. On the red carpet, to my eye, she makes two things abundantly obvious. Firstly, it is all about him. He is the star. Secondly, she is there for him, watching his back and supporting him.

I don't buy the "she's a security blanket" idea. Daniel has spent all his adult life in the most exposed and ego-crushing business in the world. He would have to be a total wimp to need any human being for a security blanket, and there is just no evidence for that. He would never have survived without strength and a very healthy ego.

What I think she does do is to help him with his nerves in public. He sometimes does get a little nervy, he has admitted it himself (for example he talked about being nervous going onto Parkinson). But loads of actors get that. Sir Lawrence Olivier, the finest actor of his generation, used to be physically sick before going out on stage. He said in his autobiography "Stage fright is... always waiting outside the door, waiting to get you. You either battle or walk away."

If Daniel has "red carpet fright" that does not mean he needs a security blanket, but it may mean that it is nice for him to have her there, and she obviously wants to be there for him. He has mentioned on several occasions that he could not have got through the last 4 years without her. That doesn't make him a wimp. That makes him a gentleman who readily acknowledges the support of his partner. Sometimes his nerves come through in irritation and frustration (like telling the interviewer who asked about his daughter "that's none of your f**king business"). If she helps him with frustrating moments like that, then she is a clear asset to him.

The one single instance which really made an impression on me regarding Sats, was because of a horrid and intrusive paparazzi. There is a snippet of film going around the internet, taken without permission on St Barts beach at the New Year. Daniel approached the guy to ask him to stop filming, and Sats was with him. She spoke to the guy too, and I loved her strong voice. It really sounded like she was shoulder to shoulder with Daniel, and that was so nice to hear. As ironic as it may seem, because it came via the intrusion of the press which Daniel finds so tiring, that snippet brought her to life for me.

Basically, if Sats is his choice, if she gives him what he needs, brings quality and warmth to his life, then for those of us who consider Daniel to be a gift, someone who gives us so much entertainment and pleasure, we have much to thank her for.
The top notch acting in the Weisz/Craig/Spall 'Betrayal' is emotionally true, often v funny and its beautifully staged with filmic qualities..

Image

User avatar
sharmaine
Posts: 5496
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 5:28 am
Location: Lotusland, Canada

Post by sharmaine » Sat May 16, 2009 4:29 am

The first paragraph from I, Lucifer by Glen Duncan

I, Lucifer, Fallen Angel, Prince of Darkness, Bringer of Light, Ruler of Hell, Lord of the Flies, Father of Lies, Apostate Supreme, Tempter of Mankind, Old Serpent, Prince of This World, Seducer, Accuser, Tormentor, Blasphemer, and with doubt Best Fuck in the Seen and Unseen Universe (ask Eve, the minx) have decided – oo-la-la! – to tell all.


OMG, if the rumors are true, then I can't wait to see DC in this part!
To hear him utter those words.....would be fitting for the devil that he is. This demon of our dreams that tempts us with his promises and fills us with desire. This blue-eyed Lucifer with the liquid tongue, deep and sweet and bitter as honey and chocolate and raspberries. I want to see those eyes and hear those words from his lips, on the screen, twenty fucking feet wide.
Image

Image

User avatar
chocolatecake
Posts: 383
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:41 pm
Location: In Daniel's pocket.

Post by chocolatecake » Sun May 17, 2009 7:11 am

sharmaine wrote:
The first paragraph from I, Lucifer by Glen Duncan

I, Lucifer, Fallen Angel, Prince of Darkness, Bringer of Light, Ruler of Hell, Lord of the Flies, Father of Lies, Apostate Supreme, Tempter of Mankind, Old Serpent, Prince of This World, Seducer, Accuser, Tormentor, Blasphemer, and with doubt Best Fuck in the Seen and Unseen Universe (ask Eve, the minx) have decided – oo-la-la! – to tell all.


OMG, if the rumors are true, then I can't wait to see DC in this part!
To hear him utter those words.....would be fitting for the devil that he is. This demon of our dreams that tempts us with his promises and fills us with desire. This blue-eyed Lucifer with the liquid tongue, deep and sweet and bitter as honey and chocolate and raspberries. I want to see those eyes and hear those words from his lips, on the screen, twenty fucking feet wide.

Love the quote.

What is this about Eve?

Germangirl
Moderator
Posts: 46404
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 5:05 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Germangirl » Sat Aug 08, 2009 12:37 pm

There is not much more - try http://gavinevans.blogspot.com/2008_08_03_archive.html with tape 7 for what can be seen.

The film is part of a project the protographer Gavin Evans (he is also responsible for the hairy worm under the lip photoshoot...) with the National Theatre in 1998. The story is under the Aug. 5 entry.
It's interesting that Daniel needs far fewer words and much less "acting" to get his message across. His finely-tuned sensitivity and innate ability to step into the skin of a character at a second's notice makes Oliver Reed and Ron Pickup look heavy-handed when placed alongside him.

As for the subject matter, I think that of all of them, his is by far the most compelling. I know I'm biased in his favour, but with the exception of one, the others are predictable and most of them entirely off-putting for a variety of reasons, not least of which they do not invite me to engage with the character. (The exception for me is Derek Jacobi.....layers and layers and layers going on there in his!)

Daniel's pick-up line is unpredictable and intriguing. He is using his ability to be vulnerable to attract the woman's instinct to nurture. And I do feel he is aiming his at a woman even though he is not explicit about it. Some of them are a-sexual and could be for either sex, some are clearly directed, but I feel that his is implicit.

Where the intrigue comes into it is.......what does Daniel want us to help him with? Underneath the immediate impression of vulnerability is a sub-coda almost like a threat. The layers are multiple and varied and totally unexpected. Like everything he does, it is a rich tapestry and a good writer could weave an entire screenplay around those few seconds.

Gavin's blurb says this is unscripted and totally improvised by the actors. It is interesting what this tiny snippet tells us about both Daniel the actor and Daniel the man.

As an actor, this is just another aspect of a superb understated craftsman able to convey a wide range of possibilities into just a few seconds and even fewer words. As a man, that Daniel would choose to invent and convey a pick-up line in this very subtle and oblique way tells us a lot about the complexity of his personality and how he relates to the emotions of others. It is as though he recognises his own complexity mirrored in his audience.

Such a tiny a snippet telling us so much. I could watch this over and over on a loop, it so good.

It is also interesting that these videos are the "outcuts" that were not used, these ended up on the cutting room floor. With most of them I can see why, but not with his! The only explanation can be that, once again, someone critiqued his work and failed to see the best of what there was to see.

I get frustrated when some professionals manage to look right past what he is doing. The Maybury's, Mitchell's and Spielburg's get it, but there are others who don't and I think that has to do with them not taking the time to "feel" Daniel rather than just watch him. It's interesting that the actors who work with Daniel don't seem to have this problem, but then again, they have the advantage to "feel" him acting with them up close and personal.

It's surprising that Gavin didn't use him given that he was responsible for a very revealing photoshoot of Daniel, but maybe the final decision was not totally in his own hands.
The top notch acting in the Weisz/Craig/Spall 'Betrayal' is emotionally true, often v funny and its beautifully staged with filmic qualities..

Image

Germangirl
Moderator
Posts: 46404
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 5:05 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Germangirl » Tue Sep 01, 2009 10:16 am

If you put together all the comments from his peers, directors and producers what comes across is a picture of a very complex and riveting man. The same comments come out over and over again - intelligent, intense, dedicated, charismatic, generous, funny, deep, thoughtful, thinking, a paradox, tension, persuasive, vulnerable, scary, tender, modest, forceful, sensual, self-effacing, powerful, soulful........the list just goes on and on and on.

To have that many professionals make this many comments willingly and in praise shows a man with an extraordinarly complex mind and spirit. The word is that he just blows people away when they meet him, maybe and genuinely, the others may be good actors, but they just don't have this multi-faceted personality.

It must like being with a human diamond - everytime he turns around, the other person sees something different and even more beautiful or fascinating than the last facet he showed them.
The top notch acting in the Weisz/Craig/Spall 'Betrayal' is emotionally true, often v funny and its beautifully staged with filmic qualities..

Image

Germangirl
Moderator
Posts: 46404
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 5:05 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Germangirl » Sat Sep 05, 2009 5:55 pm

Putting Hugh Jackman next to Daniel Craig in terms of being approachable in public is like day and night or ice cream and sour drops – just the total opposite.
One just seems to enjoy the attention or at least seems not being bothered by it and the other had decided – from the beginning – that it’s a part of fame, he never wanted.
We sometimes feel, I think, we would like Daniel to be more outgoing and taking it easier. But the question is – which other characteristics would need to change in order for him to be that way? Starting with his endearing shyness, his stepping back for others etc etc - many of loveable traits might be gone.
At the moment Hughs sunnyboy mentality overshadows Daniels more laid back personality and once again, he is marked as difficult. I think its also because people are not used to celebs, who don´t play their potential in terms of looks, of their public prestige etc to a maximum. Some don´t do it either but most do.

So – like FOB also said, maybe he better sticks to his goals than becoming a puppet in the face of a merciless world, that will bitch whatever he might do (Like they do with all the others).
The top notch acting in the Weisz/Craig/Spall 'Betrayal' is emotionally true, often v funny and its beautifully staged with filmic qualities..

Image

User avatar
Anglophile
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 9:50 am
Location: in front of my comp

Post by Anglophile » Sun Sep 06, 2009 10:11 am

Well put.
The more joy we have, the more nearly perfect we are. ~Spinoza~

cornell01
Posts: 786
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 11:33 pm

Post by cornell01 » Sat Sep 12, 2009 4:00 pm

Agreed. Well put.

User avatar
JEC57
Posts: 10024
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 9:00 pm
Location: 15/01/96

Post by JEC57 » Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:43 am

Germangirl wrote:Daniels life

Out of nowhere for the majority of the world
torn to bits for the cockyness
of taking on the role of the world´s most famous spy
he prooved, that there is more bravery in him than in Bond.

Born with the need to act
he started to live the dream with 16
harsh times and lots of hits
but encouragement and inner fire
kept him on track.

It took some time to get near the better roles
but once there, his peers started to acknowledge his talent
He never took the easy road
so the road to success was longer
but probably much more rewarding.

Apart from his acting talent
he is not made for show biz
too shy, too straight, too unwilling to play the b***s***game
but forced into it now
by his need to take on challenges.

Not sunnyboy for the public but laid back
loveable nevertheless for being "himself", his dry humor
for his smile and laugh, for showing nerves
for being true, for not bending to pressure
even for being dead serious, when others would put up a show
or grin as if they were in a smiling contest.

He gives everything he does his best shot
and the years to come will show, if that is enough
to survive in the merciless world of showbiz
He will surely take more hits on the way, like they all do
but in the end, through consistancy and hard work
will become what he really wants to be

..an actor knowwn for quality roles, great acting and the air of someone, who keeps slipping through your fingers.

A Man in his own right, who only answers to himself!
Image
Image

Post Reply