Wednesday, December 10, 2008

DEFIANCE!

DEFIANCE!

BLOG BUDDY TANNER OVER AT DOUBLE O SECTION HAS A GREAT REVIEW OF THE UPCOMING DANIEL CRAIG FEATURE DEFIANCE ALONG WITH SOME INTERESTING TAKES ON THE TYPE OF FILMS THE ALL THE BOND STARS HAVE GONE ON TO DO . . .

One interesting thing about the six actors who have officially portrayed James Bond is that there are few other roles that these guys would ever compete for. Roger Moore couldn’t have been Indiana Jones’ father–or broken into The Rock. Sean Connery would never send himself up in a Cannonball Run. Even the great Daniel Craig couldn’t have pulled off The Matador, and likewise it’s impossible to picture Pierce Brosnan as a rugged Jewish rebel hiding out in the woods and leading a band of partisans to stand up against the Nazis in a gritty Holocaust drama like Defiance.* Why is that? Does the public perception of Bond change so much every decade that the role calls for a completely different type, or do each of these men embody a different facet of 007? I suspect it’s a little bit of both, and thus every new actor to take on the role enhances it, each leaving his own indelible mark on the public’s perception of Her Majesty’s top agent.

TO READ THE FULL REVIEW CLICK HERE

1 comment:

Keith said...

I do like how each of these actors play very different roles outside of 007. They aren't playing the same type of parts. They are all so different from one another. I like so much of the work that Daniel Craig is doing when he's off from Bond.