My two is - as much as I like Rachel and that he is happy, she wasn't all that good for his career so far.
He was too thin for C&A from all the stress he has had with the split, he wasn't still looking his best for Tattoo either. Rather grey and stressed out. (To be fair, also probably from shooting back to back.
But he did sweat a lot during ASR, too. I think, he does sweat easily and has nothing to do with thinking, it was a wrong decision. Nervous yes - he will be for some time.
I suppose, critics will say, he is good, but with this role - there is just so much you can do. Shame. He is so loved up, that nothing else seems to matter anymore. With Sats, he could do what was good for his career or seemed good, without loving her less.
I don't wanna be too negative just yet, though. But it sure doesn't look like Tony material he has on his hands.
That's my problem. Where is his ambition? In the long, long break between Bonds, which could be 3 years, other actors, many of them like Brad Pitt and Matt Damon with many small children, will have acted in, and/or produced 7-10 films. This is just nuts. He will wake up one day years from now, and ask himself what the hell was he thinking. I'm upset with him for not being smarter about his career choices. And I'm mad at her for doing a play that is Tony bait for her, but badly short changes his talent. This weaker role was in the script and on film. They were not guessing about his role.
Agreed. But maybe they are wise to put their marriage before all else (to the detriment if us.) This is an easy gig for them ($/working hours.)
I think anyone sitting close enough to Rachel would have seen how amazing she played the part. She and Rafe ruled.
His best acting and roles were years ago.
But you can be happily married and still work after taking a year off. And if they have to do a play together, why the heck couldn't they have found a play where HIS role was also a great role. If he is going to do Broadway, then do Broadway damn it. Take a risk, and play a big, passionate role. Swing for the rafters. Maybe he'll fail, but maybe he'll actually hit a home run, and show people what a great actor he is - or was. Staying home by the pool, and cooking dinner every night isn't ultimately denying us. It's denying his talent and he will be the poorer for it.
I totally agree with both GG and Tampa. If doing Broadway, do it big. He could have any part he wants. Why not one that is captivating.
And GG, I totally agree about Tattoo. That was a plum role and he couldn't have done it better. Brad Pitt would have probably liked to have had that role. It's just that it was seen as a remake. C&A could have been big. I do think that H Ford is too old for a summer action movie aimed at teens. He's a grandpa to them. And DC has reinvented Bond and the franchise that was about dead. That's HUGE. Bond is an icon. He's done some great things. I think his true fans who know his acting capabilities are looking for him to play a great non-Bond leading man.
But we can't forget that this was the first preview. Maybe DC's role will change. Interestingly, the Tisch grad told me that the Tisch preview would have given no indication as to what the general audiences would think. The Tisch audience would have been looking for very specific things that relate to their field. This guy graduated in dance, and he says that's all he pays attention to in Broadway shows (where there is dance.) People focus on their area of interest. He said tonight's audience was going to be the the big one for them. He says the first preview night audience read is hugely important.
Last edited by sf2la on Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
I think the main problem for a career is his actually great characteristic way of always stepping back to let others shine, too. That is not new. From what i know, he always had that trait. He has that big fear, that people might think, he is attention seeking, to the point, where its a bit, well, sick. But for whatever reason its deeply implanted in him. That is very contra productive for a career. But maybe this will serve as a wake up call. Its not, that he will get bad reviews here...people and critics will acknowledge, there is just so much, you can do with this role. Sf, is there a chance to beef uo his role?
The top notch acting in the Weisz/Craig/Spall 'Betrayal' is emotionally true, often v funny and its beautifully staged with filmic qualities..
Fear they can do little with his role. It's Pinter and the smaller, lesser role is in the script. they won't rewrite Pinter. Nichols is going to go with RAfe and RW. They are his leads. Many critics love Pinter and DC may get a pass and decent reviews but what a waste of his talent. He could have done something great.
But I'd be surprised if some things don't change before previews. I've seen a fair bit of theater this last year due to my traveling and this is he ONLY one where people didn't remark how good it was. No one around me made a comment like that. All I heard was, "That was short." Or "was I supposed to learn a lesson?" AND "Daniel Craig wasn't in it much." But Tampa is right about changing Pinter. But as DC says, there are a couple gay comments in their version. I think it's K who has read the play?
I also think people expect a lot from Mike Nichols.
Sf – first, thank you for getting your report out so soon after the performance. I was eager to find out your impressions of the play and Daniel’s performance, so when I woke at 5am this morning the first thing I did was reach for my phone and log in to DtD. What can I say other than I have a sense of disappointment? You seem to regret that Daniel has chosen to play the smaller role of Jerry, obvious reasons being that he has less time on stage than either Rachel or Rafe, and he only has one scene with Rachel. I have never seen a performance of the play, I have only watched the 1983 film adaptation on YouTube. After watching the film and reading reviews of various stage productions of ‘Betrayal’, my impression is that Robert is a more potent character than Jerry. Hiding his own emotional pain, he exhibits cruelty and relishes the power he has over Jerry. It will be interesting to read what the critics have to say about this latest revival of the play and to find out the views of theatre-goers.
As for Daniel and his choice of roles generally, we may disagree with his choices but we have to accept that he will take on whatever grabs him at the time, although I think he has been quite careful in building a career. We want him to take on meatier and potentially award winning roles, but such roles are few and far between. He himself has commented on the lack of good film scripts, and when it comes to theatre there are not many new plays out there.
Oh, how nice!!! Fun to see these. Thanks! Yes, he looks very suave/handsome/sexy at that table with Rafe. And the pics of him in the black shirt and khaki pants are the only more normal-type clothes he wears. He looked good there. Otherwise, it's wide corduroy pants, etc., or that's just what I remember.
Somebody elses review:
I'm back from the first preview and don't have many strong emotions about the play either way. I don't think I'll ever love the text, but this is a totally respectable and well-acted production. I think people who bought a ticket to see Daniel Craig will be disappointed as he has the smallest and least interesting of three roles.
I found Rafe Spall to be very good, especially in the final scene. He's charismatic and quite handsome. He and Weisz have good chemistry, and the scenes with the two of them were the most enjoyable.
I liked Weisz, but the role isn't very flashy and I wish there was more for her to sink her teeth into.
The set and lighting are both wonderful. They capture the simplicity and economy of the language and really become an extension of the text. The scene changes are fluid and the underscoring is lovely.
The play is so quiet and intimate that I wish I had been watching a movie instead of seeing it on stage. Given the subject matter there isn't any bombastic yelling or melodrama; you're not going to find Emily Thorne and Olivia Pope taking any pages from the Betrayal handbook!
The play is not told in chronological order, and the interest comes in noticing the lies and inconsistencies the characters tell each other as the play progresses.
I don't think this is going to set the world on fire, but it's above board and professionally done.
The top notch acting in the Weisz/Craig/Spall 'Betrayal' is emotionally true, often v funny and its beautifully staged with filmic qualities..
Yes. I'm so shallow. I'm happy now. No white beard and long hair. I hope i'm being way too tough and maybe, maybe his reviews will be good. First time i can remember RW not looking great in photos. She was probably tired because her role was tough, while DC looks good as he was well rested because his role was so small. Me bad.
Whatever they do with it now - they sure have to better tings, as appearantly, audiences were disappointed. I see a chance, when sf said, it would be good to read the play to fill the gaps. Maybe they can work with that and bring in more of what was left out.
Tampa, glad you feel a bit better. Maybe it was just time for him to relax and become his old self again. If nothing else, we have to respect that and be happy to see his beauty being there again.
Nothing on YT yet.
The top notch acting in the Weisz/Craig/Spall 'Betrayal' is emotionally true, often v funny and its beautifully staged with filmic qualities..
Yes. I'm so shallow. I'm happy now. No white beard and long hair. I hope i'm being way too tough and maybe, maybe his reviews will be good. First time i can remember RW not looking great in photos. She was probably tired because her role was tough, while DC looks good as he was well rested because his role was so small. Me bad.
LOL...You not bad. The long hair is really, really awesome. No sticky-out ears (regardless of whether we think they look cute or not), and this look makes him look younger and sexier. You just want to run your hands through his hair.
Cass, you are right; he does have a good, strong scene with Rafe at the end. I have friends who are flying with me to see the play again, and I SO want DC to be the everything that I claim him to be. I was just very aware that to me, Rafe appeared to be the better actor between the two He seemed more comfortable and natural; Daniel seemed seemed to be 'acting' more. OUCH. I just need to go again...
Regarding Rachel, OMG, if people thought she was good in The Deep Blue Sea with her subtle performance, good grief, this was 10X better than that, IMO. And honestly, I didn't expect to see much from her. Maybe I just had higher expectations for Daniel.
He will UP his game, we know, he can. There was A LOT of pressure on him - much more then on the other two. HE is the STAR here. And we know, he does have nerves getting the better of him at times. He will relax and be better, no question about it for me.
Out of the three performances, I saw him doing for Rain, one was good, one was better and one was out of the world great. Maybe he tried too hard last night - due to his nerves.
sf, when are you planning on going next? I suppose, its the friends, who also saw ASR?
The top notch acting in the Weisz/Craig/Spall 'Betrayal' is emotionally true, often v funny and its beautifully staged with filmic qualities..
I'm happy now. No white beard and long hair. I hope i'm being way too tough and maybe, maybe his reviews will be good. First time i can remember RW not looking great in photos. She was probably tired because her role was tough, while DC looks good as he was well rested because his role was so small. Me bad.