Gay James Bond

Lightwizard, incorrect, this is not a rumor...he is gay and he is pressuring producers to include a gay scene with full frontal nudity in the next Bond. Will producers cede to his request? I don't know.

Possible characters we may encounter in the next movie are: Sir Danceallot, Harry Bahler, and Mister Bates Allot

He has not outed himself nor has anyone outed him -- it does take someone who's actually slept with a person to actually out him, or at least have photographs of the person engaged in sex with another male or at least kissing another male other than a screen kiss. Several sites characterize this as a rumor. If you're going to swallow everything...

Or have you dated him?

Maybe more realistic reporting using the word "supposedly" and that the gay scene may or may not involve 007 himself.

Daniel Craig Gay Scene Link

It's also stated that Craig would supposedly like to do a frontal nude scene to please both his female and male fans.

Maybe his latest is actually a transvestite?

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,26334,1559688,00.html


This wouldn't be a wish dream, would it?

Ok, it's pretty dang obvious that he is gay in real life...
Here are some more quotes to shake (not stir) things up

Daniel Craig plays a gay man in Love is the Devil

"Daniel Craig's gay kiss the talk of Venice "

"Daniel Craig is trying to convince producers to include a gay sex scene between Bond and another man."

"4th September 2006 14:15:01

Daniel Craig will have a male love interest in the next Bond movie.

The British actor has attracted a large gay following after sharing an onscreen kiss with another man in his latest movie 'Infamous', and film bosses are keen to capitalise on this new status. "

"he is now a gay icon. Craig, who is currently filming forthcoming 007 movie CASINO ROYALE, was mobbed by admiring homosexuals on a night out, and was surprised to find they had other things on their minds than Bond. The 38-year-old says, "I was out recently and all these gay guys were all over me like a rash, but they never ask about the Bond plot.""

"Craig told Bond bosses that he is actually only qualified to drive an automatic transmission vehicle, which was a huge problem with driving the manual Aston Martin DB5. Filming had to be halted so that the actor could actually learn how to drive the fictional spy's hi-tech car."

"The only way it could get worse is if he spent the entire movie in pink hot pants with the words "shaken, not stirred" on his ass and introduced himself as "agent double-o-pretty princess.""

Totally dopey -- it's more chic and award nomination bait for a straight man to play gay than ever before. Is it past cocktail time in your part of the world or did you start early?

There's nothing wrong with a straight actor playing a gay role if the actor is fine with it...I only used the example of Daniel Craig playing gay in other films as evidence for his overboard complacity in the role which suggests that he is bisexual in real life since you seemed to be arguing that you didn't think he was gay in real life. The problem with a gay bond scene is that it is ANTITHETICAL to the CHARACTER of Bond, which is an insult to all the Bond fans out there...it would be like revealing that "Bond was an alien all along!"... it just ruins all the existing plot lines.

You are changing your tune -- you now suspect he is actually only bi-sexual because he's played gay in more than one film. You emphatically stated it was obvious he was gay. Want a list of all of his girl friends for the past several years including Kate Moss and Sienna Miller? They must be hired as cover. I'm not into outing people on an internet forum -- leave that up to Yahoo Chat.

The character of Bond went all over the place after Connery, thanks mostly to Roger Moore, and the "plotlines" we're concocted by Hollywood action movie scriptwriters. Thank gawd for "Casino Royale" which had the atmosphere and essence of Fleming that had been virtually lost. I'd watch most of them as entertaining but throw-away action films without a great deal of substance.

If the rest of the film is well written, well acted and well directed, I could care less if a gay scene stirs up the pot.

BTW, Al Pacino has played a gay man twice, three if you count "Cruising" where the interest in another male character is not too ambiguous even though he's really suppose to be playing gay in the movie for a police investigation.

Anyway you will notice that I have been defending the choice of Daniel Cragi as bond on other threads of this forum...and I absolutely loved C.Royale, in my opinion it was the best Bond flick ever. I'm not "outing" him...I like Daniel Craig...I just don't want a gay scene...

Daniel Craig kissed Rhys Ifans in Enduring love.

Oh yeah if he played a gay person in a film, he must be bisexual in real life.. its obvious.

So, it's not a rumor, it's a rumor.

That's some pretty darn weak "evidence" you got there, Stuh.

Well first he was outright gay, then it slipped back to bi-sexual. Perhaps he is tri-sexual -- men, women and sheep. I'm trying to remember what animals have appeared in his films but I'm very suspicious. I know I'm guilty at times -- watch clicking on that submit button before you're sure you've stated what you meant. Gay fans flock from one idol to another -- as fickle in public adoration as they are in private (not kidding).

Huh? If I want to take something back I'll let you know. I stand by all my previous statements on this thread. Gay is a subset of bisexual in my book. He's obviously gay. No doubt about it.

Rrright... and how would you argue that?

Bisexual = you are attracted by both genders
Straight - you are attracted by the other gender
Gay = you are attracted by your own gender

So.. is being straight a subset of bisexual as well, then?


Based on... that he played a gay character in other films, and ... eh .. what other reason did you say again?

It's not going to help trying to explain something to a schizophrenic.

Think about the word "straight." It refers to not wavering from the obvious path, the straight path. In other words, its meaning is primarily "not gay", "no bisexual," and could further be extended to mean "not into weird sexual fantasies"...which I suspect is how it was originally used, although we don't use it that way anymore. Since your own definition of "gay" is a strict subset of "bisexual" I will assume you do not disagree on that point.

How much evidence do you need, honestly...do you need him to slap you in the face and say "OMG girlfriend, I am SO gay! Pssssh" Honestly, playing a gay role isn't huge evidence, but actively seeking out and begging for gay roles IS.

Huh? My definition of "gay" is no more a "strict subset of "bisexual" than that of "straight" is.

Homosexuals are attracted by the same gender; heterosexuals are attracted by the other gender; bisexuals are attracted by both genders. If we'd take your suggestion of viewing homosexual as subset of bisexual, than heterosexual would be too.

But I'd obviously say that they're three fundamentally different sexual orientations.


This logic would classify gay and bisexual together solely on the basis of their both purportedly being 'deviations' or 'perversions'.

I think thats pretty inane, but even there I dont see how one would be a subset of the other.

Forget it -- the armchair psychiatrist hath written. Probably read a lot of text about the subject in the National Enquirer. Why does there seem to be a recent compulsion to emulate Tom Cruise being interviewed by Matt Lauer?

(At least I got my ostriches and emus straightened out. Or gayed out. Or whatever).

Johnny Depp has played a bi-sexual cross-dresser in "Ed Wood," (which Ed was most definitely), a flamboyant queen in "Before Night Falls," has a gay kiss with Rupert Friend in "The Libertine" (the character who, in real life, was known to prefer young men over women in later life) and is seeking another gay role. I guess he must be gay, too.

Lightwizard, I do not appreciate your continuous slimy little insults directed at me. I have not said anything to offend you, nor have I made any negative comments towards anyone else. Whatever...waste of my time

oh and nimh, in answers to your questions...no,no no. Read more carefully...your questions can all be answered by reading the previous post more carefully, I don't have the patience anymore to re-explain what is obvious. I'm in a bad mood.