Sunday, November 12, 2006

Oh ye of little faith...

There were many naysayers when Daniel Craig was announced as the latest James Bond. Criticisms ranged from his appearance (he's no Pierce Brosnan to be sure) to his physique and acting abilities. I, however, never doubted Craig's abilities to fill the expansive shoes left by Brosnan. And it appears I have been vindicated. After the release of the latest instalment of the Bond franchise, Casino Royale, named for Ian Fleming's first Bond novel, the naysayers have been definitively shut-up as the critics rave about Craig's portrayal of the Bond role. They have evoked the memory of Connery, normally seen as the best Bond (though I'm partial to Brosnan, whose only downfall was the pitiful script-writing with which he had to contend).

I should add, I have yet to see Casino Royale but am absolutely salivating at the opportunity to do so. Judging by how long it takes movies to reach Libya though...I'm not going to be seeing it any time soon. Most cinemas here are still playing Jackie Chan flicks...


At 3:48 PM, Blogger deena said...

This is how I read your first sentence:

"There were many naysayers when Daniel Craig was annoucned as the latest James Blunt."

But it translated in my mind as this:

"There were many naysayers when Craig David was announced as the latest James Blunt."

So, I thought that this post was going to be about the future of British music and I wondered why you even cared. I guess that's what happens when you skim.

At 9:49 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You only have to watch Craig in Layer Cake to see that he clearly was the right choice to play Bond. I'm just glad they didn't opt for another pretty boy - I mean Hugh Jackman was being considered.
Nice to see you back at CIGI, if only for a moment.

At 8:05 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You can probably find it in the shops that sell DVDs.


Post a Comment

<< Home