NTTD: Out October 2021

SilverDragon · Post by **SilverDragon** » Fri Sep 09, 2016 6:12 pm

People should know by now that Daniel has no filter

bubita · Post by **bubita** » Fri Sep 09, 2016 6:34 pm

Germangirl · Post by **Germangirl** » Fri Sep 09, 2016 9:04 pm

To be frank, in a way its understandable he got angry. It was a stupid comment and it can indeed produce negative Buzz. I so Hope, Daniel is really finished with the Role, If they dont ask him back. Because he wouldnt deserve to get the door shown. They will never have another actor this Committed

CheekyNandos · Post by **CheekyNandos** » Sat Sep 10, 2016 12:41 pm

Germangirl wrote:To be frank, in a way its understandable he got angry. It was a stupid comment and it can indeed produce negative Buzz. I so Hope, Daniel is really finished with the Role, If they dont ask him back. Because he wouldnt deserve to get the door shown. They will never have another actor this Committed

I actually kind of agree with you here. I don't think it should be the reason he doesn't do the role again, far from it, but in the grand scale of things, the press are wankers and you know when to push and when to pull. This was a faux pas.

It's incredibly unprofessional, filter or not. I work with customers all the time, and if you consider it, Dan's customers are the audience which includes the journos either in a professional capacity or a personal one.

There are plenty of clients I would never want to work with again and I could attribute the "slash my wrists" comment to. At the end of the day, pay packets aside, we all work hard and we all have hard jobs. But this was still a really silly thing to say even if the context was blown way out of proportion or it was said firmly tongue in cheek. In any business this would give you a dressing down if you said it to your customer's face (if we take the analogy that the press here is the customer).

I don't think it will damage him PERSONALLY. He's clear the type who doesn't give a flying fuck what anyone thinks. Professionally, though, there's only so much a studio can take before they cut you loose. As much as we joke that Babs loves him, she "used to love" Pierce but was ruthlessly cut throat about it, too. Making movies is a business at the end of the day.

That said I don't think they will cut him loose over just that comment. I think that would be blowing it out of proportion, but he definitely deserved a good bollocking for it from my perspective. They were the wrong words to say as promotional material to the movie. When people hear that they think of the terms "Nightmare Shoot" and that doesn't bode well for the quality of the film which then may convince people to stay away. His "saving grace" (if, of course, you see it that way!) here was that the movie still did well. Maybe not in the States per se, but then Bond has never been the hugest franchise over there.

I think if they are done, he is done. I think if they're not done with him, then he will "consider it" based on various factors (script?). From what I can see I don't think he has any particular problem walking away. For a lot of people that are deeply involved with James Bond they have a particular love/hate relationship with him. He's a horrid man with disgusting traits that goes out and saves the world. His bad side gets romanticised by the big screen, cutting out a lot of his internal troubles from the books, and as an actor, I suppose, if you have the chops like Dan does, then it can be frustratingly one dimensional.

Because that's the problem. Everything for Bond is internalised because that's how he survives. Dan portrays this absolutely bob on, to which he gets a lot of shit for "not showing emotion" ... But that's EXACTLY who Bond is. He's some guy that's faking sociopathic tendencies to stay alive.

After all the explosions and glamour, if you have the chops then that has GOT to be boring at some point.

Germangirl · Post by **Germangirl** » Sat Sep 10, 2016 1:13 pm

Perfectly put.

SmittenDramaKitten · Post by **SmittenDramaKitten** » Sat Sep 10, 2016 2:14 pm

You make a lot of sense CN. Well done for putting things in such a specific and concise way.

For my 2 cents, I think Daniel knew he'd made 'a booboo' by saying those words just before SP came out. He was probably very tired, exhausted actually and we all get cranky when we feel like that. But then he deserved a little kick in the pants for letting such words slip out of his mouth. As the junket rolled on, I think he was quite chagrined by the 'moment of madness' and did his best to make up for the faux pas in the subsequent interviews conducted for TV and internet consumption. The press just took it and ran with it. Alas, that is one of the pitfalls of being famous. Any word you speak could be taken out of context or made a mountain of, when in truth, it's just a molehill...

I hope I understood the core of your argument CN because you're way smarter than me...

SilverDragon · Post by **SilverDragon** » Sat Sep 10, 2016 8:07 pm

I would agree like no way would they let him go over that comment. Give him a bollocking yes but they wouldnt cut him loose. If they had we would have heard by now

CheekyNandos · Post by **CheekyNandos** » Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:52 am

A sacking like that gets around, yeah. He was lucky that the film preformed decently well even with it's inflated budget. If it really tanked then things might be very different right now.

What I do think though is that after such a good performer in SF and then a dip in performance in SP that it would require something exceptional with Craig at the helm to reach the heights of SF again. That's not to his discredit at all. SP just wasn't a great movie and there's only so much polishing of a turd that a leading man (or woman) can do.

I think what most discredits all of the speculation (whether you sit in one camp or the other) is that he has said he truly doesn't know what the future holds for him and Bond. I would have to agree with SDK that he worked hard to redeem himself there. But he's a clever lad, knows the game well, and saw how his predecessor was treated before him. If he does ENJOY the role then he wouldn't want to build his own hopes up unnecessarily to get that bastard of a phone call like Pierce did.

I kind of believe if he had been completely done at that time he'd just come out and say it and stick to the same rhetoric throughout. The wrist slashing thing was a moment of madness - kind of sad because we've all been there. I don't believe the story that he handed in his notice as soon back as June. There's a great marketing ploy there to say "this is Craig's last Bond movie." They've never done that before and I think it would have people turn up in droves providing all the pieces of the puzzle fit into place. It's one of those events where people can say "I was there and I saw it."

Instead he's done the right thing. He's kept his distance to clear his head and I believe 7th October we'll get something, that much is clear, even if it's continuing the status quo. It could very well be that the decision is simply no longer in his hands. An open contract for a 5th for him is just as much an open contract for THEM.

Don't trust a word that comes from Babs or MGW about wanting him to carry on because they've done that in the past only to stab their leading actor in the back. IMHO, they treat their leading actors poorly. The kudos for Bond potentially carries your career (as demonstrated by others, unless your Connery, it's not always good news) and until you prove yourself you get paid sweet fa. There's always that argument that no actor is bigger than the Bond Brand. I'd agree that goes for any job but in a relationship with anything there has to be a bit of give and take here.... And bloody hell, they're notorious for taking, and what's worse people are pretty blinkered to that fact too. Good luck. You will not find someone who puts as much effort into it as Dan does, if that is their intention.

SDK, there was no way any of this was concise! lol. Honestly, you did understand the core of the argument which was me just trying to rationalise speculation around what we do know. Also, a ramble, because I like to ramble.

SmittenDramaKitten · Post by **SmittenDramaKitten** » Mon Sep 12, 2016 4:30 pm

Thanks for that CN... I like your ramblings!

I do have to still defend Spectre though...
I loved it, in particular the first 50 minutes past the Rome car chase... after that, it kind of fell on its arse a bit until they went back to London for the final scenes.

Along with CR, SP is a joint favourite of Dan's Bond movies for me. SF next and then QOS. Even though QOS might be 'last', it's still a 'high last place' for that movie.

I watched Skyfall again last night and thought to myself how Sam Mendes only really seemed to start to hit his stride when filming Spectre. I love Skyfall but sometimes it feels like it's a load of action set pieces just strung together.... that's just me being more critical than usual though. If Sam has more 'Bond' in him like Daniel may do, then I think he should do another for the reason I'd previously mentioned... he was only just getting into it. Unfortunately, Sam seems even more set in his decision not to direct another Bond than Daniel is set not to star in one....... maybe.

CheekyNandos · Post by **CheekyNandos** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 6:29 am

Lea Seydoux is pregnant:

www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3 ... tival.html

I don't think this could impact on Bond 25 if she chose to come back. If anything it probably works in their favour unless she chooses to have time off.

Not Dan, but nice news nevertheless. Congrats Lea!

Germangirl · Post by **Germangirl** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 7:29 am

Yes congrats ðŸ‘

bubita · Post by **bubita** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 12:08 pm

Red-Snow · Post by **Red-Snow** » Sat Sep 17, 2016 3:06 pm

In an interview with The Telegraph Ralph Fiennes weighs in on Bond 25.

He suspects the next instalment â€“ AKA Bond 25, the title, release date and star of which remain tantalisingly unconfirmed â€“ will take a lighter, and therefore presumably more Russian-friendly, approach.

â€œWell I think if youâ€™re the next director of Bond, youâ€™re going to not want to go down the tone and argument of what Sam [Mendes] has put into the films,â€ he says, though is quick to stress heâ€™s â€œheard nothingâ€. â€œQuestions of British nationhood, and whether Bond is a dinosaur, all that. So I would guess if youâ€™re coming to do the next Bond, youâ€™d want to take it somewhere radically different, I think.â€

Germangirl · Post by **Germangirl** » Fri Sep 30, 2016 10:35 am

For what its worth. But its one of the better sources.

http://www.denofgeek.com/uk/movies/jame ... t-question

SilverDragon · Post by **SilverDragon** » Fri Sep 30, 2016 11:36 am

Glad to hear after the rumour mill that Babs and Michael love him and want him back