Nebs Sez
~Dr. Lamb asked me, "Do you think it ["Skyfall"] deserves to be the most award-nominated Bond movie ever?
I replied: "I suppose I am still a creature of Hollywood as I read your statement "the most award-nominated Bond movie ever" purely as OSCARStm. The following was written entirely in that context."
"I do not tend to think of Bond films as Oscar bait. That's not really their place in the cinema landscape, not the 'classic' Bond [read Sean Connery] which are basically Adventure Stories, and certainly not the Roger Moore films, which are full on cartoons. [Richard Kyle smiles from Hell] All the ones that follow more or less remain in that genre, save for "On Her Majesty's Secret Service", which has been a bit of an anomaly in the entire series, as it leaned back toward the source material, while kind of staying within the genre.
However...someone has gone back to the source material with this new series. The books are actually rather grim going, much closer to le Carré than the tone of the previous films would indicate. One must remember that Sir Ian was the real deal when it came to spycraft and the like. [yes, I know he was never Knighted, but I think of him as such anyway]
I have actually read all the novels. Did so one summer at camp while I was stuck in the infirmary for a week. In retrospect I'm surprised they allowed them, as they are quite cynical, sexual and brutal. Not really what the camp owners would have thought proper reading for an eleven year old boy.
In that context, I have to say that Daniel Craig is the closest to the literary Bond of any of them. Bond is an officer and gentleman and can put on a charming face, but he is moody viscous bastard and somewhat conflicted about his 'career choice'. Such is the nature of a borderline sociopath. He has just enough conscience to know he's a monster, but not enough to get in the way of his work.
Craig pulls that off magnificently. That he is, as The Eagles once said, 'brutally handsome' helps quite a bit. But he uses that instrument with great skill. His nasty smirk and grim glare tell us very clearly that this is not some 'movie hero'; this is a dangerous and unpleasant chap who enjoys hurting people.
Looking back upon the franchise, I'd say if it had started off closer to the source material, Robert Shaw would have been a better Bond than Connery. Go back and watch him in “From Russia With Love” and you'll see what I mean.
As for your original question, then yes, I'd say Craig was worthy of at least a Best Actor nomination for “Skyfall”. He certainly 'plumbs the depths' in the thing. And Dame Judy and Señor Bardem would definitely rate Supporting Noms as well."
I replied: "I suppose I am still a creature of Hollywood as I read your statement "the most award-nominated Bond movie ever" purely as OSCARStm. The following was written entirely in that context."
"I do not tend to think of Bond films as Oscar bait. That's not really their place in the cinema landscape, not the 'classic' Bond [read Sean Connery] which are basically Adventure Stories, and certainly not the Roger Moore films, which are full on cartoons. [Richard Kyle smiles from Hell] All the ones that follow more or less remain in that genre, save for "On Her Majesty's Secret Service", which has been a bit of an anomaly in the entire series, as it leaned back toward the source material, while kind of staying within the genre.
However...someone has gone back to the source material with this new series. The books are actually rather grim going, much closer to le Carré than the tone of the previous films would indicate. One must remember that Sir Ian was the real deal when it came to spycraft and the like. [yes, I know he was never Knighted, but I think of him as such anyway]
I have actually read all the novels. Did so one summer at camp while I was stuck in the infirmary for a week. In retrospect I'm surprised they allowed them, as they are quite cynical, sexual and brutal. Not really what the camp owners would have thought proper reading for an eleven year old boy.
In that context, I have to say that Daniel Craig is the closest to the literary Bond of any of them. Bond is an officer and gentleman and can put on a charming face, but he is moody viscous bastard and somewhat conflicted about his 'career choice'. Such is the nature of a borderline sociopath. He has just enough conscience to know he's a monster, but not enough to get in the way of his work.
Craig pulls that off magnificently. That he is, as The Eagles once said, 'brutally handsome' helps quite a bit. But he uses that instrument with great skill. His nasty smirk and grim glare tell us very clearly that this is not some 'movie hero'; this is a dangerous and unpleasant chap who enjoys hurting people.
Looking back upon the franchise, I'd say if it had started off closer to the source material, Robert Shaw would have been a better Bond than Connery. Go back and watch him in “From Russia With Love” and you'll see what I mean.
As for your original question, then yes, I'd say Craig was worthy of at least a Best Actor nomination for “Skyfall”. He certainly 'plumbs the depths' in the thing. And Dame Judy and Señor Bardem would definitely rate Supporting Noms as well."