Craig, Daniel Craig
But I must say, based on the reviews, I'm ambivalent. First off, I was a huge Pierce Brosnan fan. I really thought he was the best Bond of the series. Yes, I know, Sean Connery is supposed to be the only true Bond. But I figure I've earned my Bond geek stripes. How much of a Bond geek am I, you ask? I've seen every real Bond film (Never Say Never Again & the first Casino Royale don't count, dammit!). I'm such a Bond geek that when reviewer James Berardinelli mentioned that the character of Felix Leiter was returning in the new film, my response was "Felix! That's awesome! Haven't seen you since License to Kill in the late 1980s!" I imagine most people would not know that Felix Leiter has been played by a different actor in every Bond film he's appeared in. I bet most people would go "Felix who?"
So, back to Brosnan. I've always liked him. I thought he had the lethal edge of Sean Connery, the humor of Roger Moore, and the serious vulnerability of Timothy Dalton (all of whom overplayed those qualities, except Connery who simply lacked the vulnerability). And Brosnan, unlike George Lazenby, was not a non-entity.
So I'm not sure about this Craig guy. First blond Bond. Bad sign. And what's this about there being no Q or Moneypenny? I've grown to love the conventions of the Bond films. No gadgets? I even hear rumors of Bond falling in love? You know that didn't work at all in On Her Majesty's Secret Service...except to give Bond a tragic memory. And, I suppose, that's what might happen here.
But I'll withhold judgment. Change can be good. The Bond series didn't need reinvention as much as the Batman series, but maybe new ideas will make it even more fun. I mean, there's still people shooting people. How bad can it be?