Daniel Craig’s James Bond – Is Daniel Craig Bringing the Traditions of James Bond Into the Future?
There is a lot that has been written about the differences between Daniel Craig’s James Bond and Pierce Brosnan’s version of the character. The controversy has centered around what exactly these differences are, and how they affect the film. I would like to take a look at these criticisms and see if they hold water.
Firstly, I will start with my favorite comparison of all of them and that is that the new Bond is more like a contemporary James Bond than any of the other actors. I think this is the most accurate comparison.
The problem with the Pierce Brosnan version of the character is that he was so totally different from the modern era of the character and we did not recognize it. And as a result, we simply came to accept the character as being one who wasn’t James Bond, but a unique character, and that is why it worked.
But, Daniel Craig has actually blended Brosnan’s original concepts with some of the more recent elements of the movie to give the character a certain style that is entirely his own. Of course, there have been many comparisons made between Brosnan and Craig, but really it is just that the director has been able to combine all of the elements together and create a completely different experience.
In order to understand where I am coming from, I think it would be very helpful to look at how Brosnan presented himself. He had a very long, dark hair and often sported sideburns, and sometimes even the trademark tusks of the profession.
Daniel Craig has, on the other hand, kept the trademark tusks, but he has been able to combine this with a wide range of hairstyles. Most of the time he wears his tusks clean-shaven, which allows him to take advantage of some of the really exciting options for hair grooming. This is where I would agree with critics that there is some disjointedness in the way Brosnan presented himself and his hair.
But with Craig, it is very much a smooth transition to the way he presented himself. You can tell that he has a carefree attitude about him, and he also seems to enjoy the challenge of taking on the role and putting it on display. He has clearly put a lot of effort into the physicality of the character and the way that he deals with the character and his demands.
More than this, however, he has given an extra effort in terms of the character. He has seemed to draw on the strengths of the character and the way that he presented it in the past movies and wove it into the series. This helps the film to be what it is and what it wants to be, and that is something that Brosnan has never really been able to do.
Daniel Craig’s James Bond
And finally, and perhaps more importantly, Daniel Craig’s James Bond has been able to capture the essence of the character and present it to us. This might seem like a bad thing, but there is a lot of value in that. In particular, the emotional response that the viewer gets to the character is really enhanced by seeing the character as portrayed by Craig.
This is because, in the case of some of the most successful films ever made, the key element was to define a specific idea of that culture and then bring that to life through the actor’s performance. As an interesting aside, this is probably why Russell Crowe was able to get so many audiences to connect with the character so easily.
Tradition of Bond
What’s more, there is a long-standing problem with Daniel Craig’s James Bond films, and this is that they are too dressed up in tradition. No longer is it about living up to Brosnan’s vision or the tradition of Bond, but rather Daniel Craig wants to rewrite the book to suit his own personal vision and taste.
Risky as that sounds, I feel that he is doing something that is going to be important moving forward. We can now expect more innovation in Bond films in the future, and I hope that we have come to a point where those films can be as good as the Craig films and maybe even better.