With it's 95% rating on RT - with 77 reviews in - and the "new beginning"-ness of Casino Royale, why not?

James Bond is one of the franchises that built Hollywood; it's influence cannot be denied. There's not much reason for AMPAS to award a regular well-reviewed Action film, but there is reason to reward a Bond film in some way - rewarding Casino Royale (in some way) would be like rewarding Martin Scorsese for The Departed. It's a comeback for an important "figure" in film history.

How would AMPAS do that?

Well, to start, nominate Daniel Craig. If we nominate actors or actresses for going through hardships to portray a character, certainly Craig has gone through enough hardships to warrant at least a nominee. The rumors of a new Bond lasted years, and once Craig was announced as Brosnan's successor, people went mad. I mean, this guy's been going through so much undeserved negativity, from blogs to actual press, because of his blonde hair. Like, I can imagine he's had to sit through tons of interviews and hear shit like "So, how exactly are you going to surpass Brosnan? I mean, after all, he's a great actor and you're blonde." It's gotta be torture.

And, the reviews? Holy fucking shit. This guy went from being the butt of jokes to being considered a "god" for saving the series:
































A nomination is a way of saying "Thank you, Daniel Craig." Will it happen? No. But let's dream.

if bale didnt get nominated for batman, craig shouldnt be for bond.

I don't think Bale had anywhere near the praise that Craig is getting. Craig's bond, in a nutshell, is being unanimously called one of the rawest, mos thrilling action performances in a long, long time. But maybe I'm just forgetting.

But, if you read the last line, you'd know that I don't think it will happen. I'm just throwing it out there for whatever reason.

If Johnny Depp can get a nom for Pirates, Craig is at least in the running for Bond. But it'll be tricky.

depp had charsima craigs mroe like keanu reeves

I think it all depends on how the film is received. If it does about as good as most Brosnan Bond films and doesn't have exceptional WOM, I doubt it. However, if the film really strikes a chord with audiences to the extent that it gets enough people talking, sure I think that he could get a nomination. Best Actor certainly is a weak enough category this year that a dark horse could sneak in.

People don't get nominated for oscars because they're "charming." Depp got nominated because he was great at acting charming (even if he might be in real life).

But, anyways, everything hints to Craig's Bond being charismatic, just in a "badass" and "gritty" way.

welll haven't seen the film yet but one may argue back that craig's performance was great as bond and bond only though. its a criteria i've never liked as its just a nice way of saying that they won't be nominating a person even if they acted much better than most of the other nominated actors.

I just have a feeling that most actors part of a franchise will probably never see an oscar come their way for their performances in them.

Both Craig and Cohen should be nominated. Unfortunately, I don't think neither will...

Craig absolutely deserves to get a nomination.

Craid was badass, not dramatic.

Is Casino Royale itself in the race even the slightest bit? It's asking the impossible, but god wouldn't it be something if it was.

Once upon a time, there lived a time where the Oscars honored the movies of the year, not just movies that are the best at being pre-planned contenders and set up directly for this show. And with 96% at RT and solid scores everywhere, as well as having the box-office and audience support, everyone and their dogs has this movie as a triumph, a kick to the heart of Bond, the best of the series in decades.

Really, in my mind Casino Royale shows incredible finesse in quality, in terms of filmmaking it's no worse than Oscar films. The direction, the cinematography, the score, Craig's acting, the screenplay, all of it is absolutley top notch and among the best of film in any year. It is truly what making great movies is about.

It's a spy thriller but it's best traits are not the action, but rather the scenes of people sitting in a room or in a shower or at poker table or on a train, scenes shot between the people and their incredible dialogue, and in that way I don't think the action scenes are as handicapping as they may seem.

Also, other than the 3 nominees listed in Lecter's thread today, there isn't THAT many contenders, the competition isn't that strong. It may be a wish in a blue moon, but what if. If LOTR can bring fantasy and trolls to the Oscars, Star Wars light sabre sci-fi, how great would it be to finally honor Bond with a nomination after so long, to finally give some love to the most legendary Hollywood franchise, with the movie that has revitilized the series.

At the end of the day this is still a Bond film and a holiday blockbuster, and for people's choice The Departed and Little Miss Sunshine might be all for the academy this year. Yes, probably this is a wish in a blue moon, and the chance is still less than 10%, but I'm keeping the wish alive... if King Kong was in the race up until the end last year, I'm putting Casino Royale as at least a longshot position, in this weak year. Oh yeah and after all, it is partly written by Paul Haggis. I suppose that means something.

I don't know if I've ever agreed with one of your posts so much, last sentence aside.