What type is he?
What type is he?
Most bond portrayals are very strongly xSTj so I'd be surprised if this guy was any different. My guess is ESTj, the same type as Pierce Brosnan and possibly Sean Connery (who could also be ISTj... IMO his Bond roles are played more ESTj-like than the man really is).
Haven't seen much of him yet, though.
My own guess was ENTJ or INTJ, since he is so much more rational then the other bonds that I've seen.
Daniel Craig is ISTp. The James Bond character is ISTj. If you do a search, you'll see this has come up quite a few times. There was also very recently a discussion in Anything Goes.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
I did search a couple of days ago.
They said the original james bond of Ian flemming is ESTP.
Then the former movie james bonds were ESFP ESTP ENFP and such.
ISTJ is the first time I've heard. But Craig could indeed be ISTP. His way of holding his face (is this good english...?) resembles a bit like Putin. The tough look.
Wow... I've never seen an actor who seems so much like my Dad... Yeah ISTp or ESTj.
I see somewhat of a resemblance with Clive Owen...
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Originally Posted by Gilly
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdS5X9Nz7ZY
...why, why a classy top and jeans?
I don't like it at all. It's stupid.
Maybe I'm biased because I don't particularly like wearing jeans, but, it just looks stupid.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
why, why do you care what anyone- and in particular, Daniel Craig- is wearing?
<cough> boy crush <cough>
EDIT: Okay I just saw the interview. That does look glaringly obviously, oddly mis-matched.
EII; E6(w5)
i am flakey
I still don't see ISTP for him.....at all
I notice what everyone wears.
I'd say it is related, but, you notice too - as per what you talk to me about.
And, I particularly don't like the style, so I'm going to comment about it. From the reaction that I get from women, men, (and gay men), I know what i'm talking about.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
who thinks ISTP?
i saw an interview where i thought he seemed very obviously ESTJ.
and I think the Bond role clearly plays to his super-id.
EII; E6(w5)
i am flakey
My impression was also ESTj, but I wouldn't be shocked hearing ISTp. ESTj>ISTp though.
his type is FANTASTIC
SEE Unknown Subtype
6w7 sx/so
[21:29] hitta: idealism is just the gap between the thought of death
[21:29] hitta: and not dying
.
I've always thought Daniel Craig was Ni-ENXj myself. In the pre-bond bash interview with letterman (UDP is right, that outfit clashes horrendously) he seems more ENFj to me, but in subsequent interviews for Quantum of Solace he seems more Te/Fi to me. That being said, I'm not sure how much of that is playing to the kind of role you're selling. He is part of a major franchise that sells a stoic, impersonal character which could be easily be mistaken for Te.
In either case, I still think he's ENXj. More likely Ni-ENFj looking at earlier photographs and interviews imo.
ILE
7w8 so/sp
Very busy with work. Only kind of around.
So, I heard this movie was horrible. Anyone see it?
I heard it's good, but disappointing.
LSE LSE LSE LSE
EII 4w5
so/sx (?)
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
well, sometimes it looks good. like when it's more like this:
but in daniel craig's case it looked completely mismatched because the colors didn't compliment each other and because the top was like freaking tuxedo formal and the jeans were like slumming around informal. just way too severe of a difference. it looked like he was two separate halves or something.
EII; E6(w5)
i am flakey
Whatever -- it's nice that you like it, but I personally dislike it very much. Only with black jeans would I consider it. I did it once, actually, with a pinstriped dark suitecoat and black stylish jeans. I received compliments - I did this a few years ago, actually, before it was so popular, or at least when it was new.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
Actually,
I was providing an example of how I myself partook in it, despite my putting down of it. I'd wear it under those circumstances, but on the whole, I really don't like it.
And I know you were joking, but it seemed to be twisting things such that I felt it necessary to comment as I just did.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
Saw the movie. I could see LSE, although I definitely have no strong opinion on why Craig's Bond couldn't be other types.
I enjoyed the flick. Worth the ticket. Nothing earth-shattering; it adheres to the formula. But it does that very, very well.
SLIOriginally Posted by Charles Bukowski
Wait, are you talking about Bond or are we talking about Daniel Craig? Now I'm confused.
ILE
7w8 so/sp
Very busy with work. Only kind of around.
oh, well they said Bond is ISTj, but the thread is about Craig. The question there was why can't different bonds be different types.
also saw this movie, some good action sequences but lacking in plot i feel. Into the Bond girl but now im getting sick of her. I'll give my avatar the end of the week, tops.
Craig
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.