Daniel Craig Says He Couldn’t Have Played ‘Queer’ Role During James Bond Run: ‘It Would Look Reactionary’

As a dedicated fan of Daniel Craig‘s work, I must say his journey through the world of cinema is nothing short of inspiring. His recent role in Luca Guadagnino’s “Queer” showcases a depth and vulnerability that we haven’t seen from him before, and it’s truly a testament to his versatility as an actor.

In a recent chat with the U.K.’s Sunday Times, I (the fan) shared that Daniel Craig expressed he wouldn’t have been able to portray his character in Luca Guadagnino’s “Call Me By Your Name” during his James Bond filming years due to scheduling conflicts.

In the movie “Queer,” which is adapted from William S. Burroughs’ 1985 semi-autobiographical novella of the same name, Craig takes on the role of William Lee, an American living abroad who develops a strong affection for Eugene Allerton, a former U.S. Navy serviceman (portrayed by Drew Starkey), who has been discharged from service.

Craig stated to The Sunday Times that it wouldn’t have been possible for him to take on this role while still working on Bond films. He felt it might appear as a response to public demand or an attempt to showcase his versatility.

He went on to say, “Initially with Bond, I believed I needed to engage in other projects, but that wasn’t the case. I was on my way to stardom, or so it seemed, and filmmakers wanted me for their productions. Remarkable! Most actors spend extended periods without work, so you accept the offers when they come – but they failed to fulfill me. Ultimately, I was compensated. After a Bond film, I’d need half a year to recuperate emotionally. I always prioritized life over work, and when work became more important for a while, it drained me.

From 2006 to 2021, Craig portrayed the main character of the British Secret Service agent in five Bond films. His debut was in “Casino Royale,” and he concluded his role with “No Time to Die.

In his conversation with the Sunday Times, Craig expressed his viewpoint that depicting a gay character as James Bond wouldn’t necessarily serve as a commentary about masculinity.

He clarified that it wasn’t a discussion he was keen on having. He had it regardless, throughout the entirety of Bond. Is there a ‘this’ Bond or a ‘that’ Bond? Anything that might stir up this debate? Absolutely not – life is too brief.

Read More

2024-12-09 04:16