Movie News


More Humor in BOND 22?

By: Jarrod Sarafin, News Editor
Date: Friday, July 13, 2007
Source: Daily Express

The latest JAMES BOND, actor Daniel Craig, has told the Daily Express that the producers would like more humor interjected into the next Bond film (currently titled BOND 22). Craig re-invented the 007 character in last year's CASINO ROYALE with a tougher grittier look and feel but that doesn't say the next movie will be as serious.

"They [the producers] just want more gags. The next one’s going to be a lot funnier. Octopussy and Pussy Galore style gags. They’re all great names – but that’s the thing, the Bond jokes will be flipped on their heads.”

The Cheshire-born actor is keen to make Bond his own creation and that will apparently mean showing a softer, less macho side to the character.

“Bond is supposedly the most male moment [in film] but to me he’s never been macho. That Bond is something that Sean Connery created in Dr No,” he says.

“I don’t know Sean but I wouldn’t want to meet him in a dark alley – he was a big strong guy and he had a big male presence about him.

“Everybody was in an uproar when he was going to be James Bond. He got flak because he was basically an Edinburgh bricklayer. And everyone who read the books thought how can he possibly do it? But he created a style that was unique and kind of sexy.”



Not that Daniel wants to imitate Connery or any other preceding Bond, adding: “There’s no point in trying to compete with every Bond that came before. You manage to make it your own.”



More From Mania

THE JAMES BOND ENCYCLOPEDIA

Creators, Craig Talk JAMES BOND 22
(Saturday, September 8, 2007)
JAMES BOND ACTION FIGURES
(Thursday, September 19, 2002)
James Bond Collection #3
(Thursday, December 14, 2000)
Bond Book Author Benson, Raymond Benson
(Friday, September 15, 2000)
An Interview with James Bond Screenwriter Richard Maibaum
(Friday, March 3, 2000)
Bond in the '90s
(Tuesday, November 23, 1999)
His Name Was Bond, James Bond
(Monday, November 15, 1999)

See more related content
More Content By Jarrod Sarafin, News Editor
Agent Zero & Barnell Revealed for WOLVERINE
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
Amazon Producing Fantasy CHILD
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
Cameron Updates Status on AVATAR
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
Doomed JLA, More Mutants & Ant Man!
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
First Bloody Pic from LOST BOYS 2
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
IRON MAN Trailer Debuts on Feb 28 Lost
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
New Victims Ready for FINAL DESTINATION 4
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
Two More Gangsters for Mann's ENEMIES
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
Weaving Tracks After the WOLFMAN
(Friday, February 22, 2008)
BIONIC WOMAN Officially Axed by NBC?
(Thursday, February 21, 2008)
Comments/Responses
1 2 3 > >>
hanso • Jul 13, 2007, 04:57pm •
More gags? I thought what worked perfectly in this film was the gritty portrayel of Bond. Something to rival the Bourne films.
As long as they don't make him and the jokes campy I'm all for it. I think they can find a perfect balance so Bond can lighten up a bit but still be a bad ass like in CR.

sharpe95th • Jul 13, 2007, 04:57pm •
Oh for f*ck's sake. Tell me we're not going back to the hammy, self-conscious OBVIOUS contrived one-liner quips that became so embarassing with the later Moore films, agonizing with Dalton and hamstrung with Brosnan. It's the writers that truly screw up the Bond essence with tired old formulas and dialogue that's so contrived. I liked "Casino" because it lacked that self-conscious humor. Ugh. My two cents are not paying for a ticket if this is where the franchise is heading back towards.

sharpe95th • Jul 13, 2007, 04:58pm •
Oh for f*ck's sake. Tell me we're not going back to the hammy, self-conscious OBVIOUS contrived one-liner quips that became so embarassing with the later Moore films, agonizing with Dalton and hamstrung with Brosnan. It's the writers that truly screw up the Bond essence with tired old formulas and dialogue that's so contrived. I liked "Casino" because it lacked that self-conscious humor. Ugh. My two cents are not paying for a ticket if this is where the franchise is heading back towards.

chirop1 • Jul 13, 2007, 05:04pm •
If they keep it to something like a sexually suggestive name... then I'll be on board with it. If it leads to "campy" then I'm gonna wonder why the hell they'd tamper with a formula that obviously worked in CR.

thorin02 • Jul 13, 2007, 05:08pm •
Let me get this straight, Casino Royale did damn good box office, has been doing great business on DVD, was universally praised by critics and fans (I can’t think of that many negative comments about the film) so the producers want to mess with the formula. And people wonder why Hollywood is going down hill. The gags were what ruined the last few Bond films (and what drove Brosnan away).

The grittier, more realistic Bond is what made Casino Royale a great film.


codymr • Jul 13, 2007, 05:33pm •
ARE YOU KIDDING!!! I had my doubts about CR due to the average quality of the bond films since - and including - many of the Roger Moore outings. With every new Bond film those guys at Eon would say they "...are getting back to basics..." when really meant they were just recasting the main characer. On CR they finally went in the right direction and made boat loads of cash doing it... and yes, it was a risk (remember how fans were pissed about Daniel Craig being cast as Bond?) Now they want to head back to mediocrity?! WTF!

gauleyboy420 • Jul 13, 2007, 05:57pm •
Casino Royale was by far the BEST Bond film ever made. The gritty tone indeed is what made it enjoyable. That and the lack of goofy special equipment, and the use of good old fashioned ass kicking to takle the villains.
WHY?! WHY?! WHY?!
Why would they take what was the best thing of the new movie, and destroy it?
Oh yeah it must be because Hollywood really listens to fans, Yeah Right!
This explains the new director they chose a couple of weeks back.
Stoopid Hollywood!

Captmathman • Jul 13, 2007, 06:28pm •
Horrible news. It seems like they're just anxious to get back to churning out crap. I may have to wait until I hear good WoM before I venture into a theater to see this...

almostunbiased • Jul 13, 2007, 06:50pm •
These producers don't know a good thing when they see it. Why screw with something that rocked?

samson7842 • Jul 13, 2007, 07:20pm •
First of all, I miss the gadgets and the suggestive name of the female leads. That part of the lore dates back to the Sean Connery days. If they bring that back, I'm good. But leave the humor elsewhere. This isn't, "Our Man Flint," "Matt Helm," or "Austin Powers."

Also, let Bond be a MAN! Let him be a chauvinist, uber macho man who gets the girl. Thats part of what makes Bond cool and timeless. Please, don't water him down any further.

1 2 3 > >>
Login to post a comment!