Off Topic Messages

The new James Bond actor...

Tue Oct 11, 2005 2:23 pm

Daniel Craig...Im not too excited...

Tue Oct 11, 2005 2:30 pm

I would have liked to have seen Clive Owen get it.

Tue Oct 11, 2005 2:42 pm

Delboy wrote:I would have liked to have seen Clive Owen get it.


Ech, no way. At least Daniel Craig can act - Clive Owen's just a pretty face, IMO.

Jules

Tue Oct 11, 2005 5:26 pm

The decision hasn't been finalized yet, so don't get your hopes up (or down?) yet. MI6.co.uk reports that the Craig-rumor came from The Daily Mail, whose "...reporter was the first to state Pierce Brosnan will not be returning, but the reason behind the scenes was that it was due to his age - a claim denied by both Brosnan and sources close to the production. The reporter has previously been sued for publishing stories known to be untrue. The paper's latest 'confirmation' follows a long string of British tabloids backing Craig as 007 #6."

As usual, I'll wait for an official announcement from MGM for this kind of news, and I suggest you do the same.

Tue Oct 11, 2005 5:45 pm

EM for me...

BOND, BROOK BOND....

Tue Oct 11, 2005 11:07 pm

Delboy wrote:I would have liked to have seen Clive Owen get it.


I was impressed with Clive Owen in King Arthur, so I'm inclined to agree with you Del.

Anybody but Colin Firth! A good enough actor, but not for Bond. Bond has a license to kill. Firth looks like he couldn't get a license to wipe his a$$. :)

Wed Oct 12, 2005 1:08 am

I hear on the grapevine that the role is going to David Blunkett.

Wed Oct 12, 2005 5:58 am

Pierce still had at least one more Bond movie in him and should have been allowed to continue. I think he was the best Bond after Connery - in some respects on a par - so have no idea why he's been replaced before time.

Sat Oct 15, 2005 2:18 pm

I too an a fan of Pierce as 007.

I'm not impressed with this Daniel Craig choice,

but I do agree with the leaked Producers' memo...
Ewan - too short,
Colin Ferrel - too sleazy (glad he didn't get it)



oh well, the vintage pop culture excitement about 007 is long gone.

Image

Sun Oct 16, 2005 4:59 am

it has been confirmed in a press conference that Dan Craig IS the new James Bond. i saw it on the news
damn, i wish Hugh Jackman got it :(

Sun Oct 16, 2005 3:16 pm

I must say he isn't as easy on the eyes as Pierce Brosnan was, but let's give the guy a chance. Shooting hasn't even started yet and the press are already jumping at him. Okay, chewing gum at the press conference wasn't very Bond, but at least he has got a certain look in his eyes, that's been described by Ian Fleming. Craig somehow looks like he's stepped out of the 1960s, and I think they're going for that raw kind of sexuality Connery had. Craig could certainly play a suave roguish killer. Controlled and deadly. But I am more concerned about reading that there aren't going to be Miss Moneypenny and Q in the script. WTF???

----

New York Times reports:

Some 200 actors from throughout the British Commonwealth "came up for discussion." They included well-known names like Colin Farrell, Orlando Bloom and Clive Owen, as well as many unknowns. Those who rated screen tests included the British actor Henry Cavill, the Australians Alex O'Lachlan and Sam Worthington, and the Croatian-born Goran Visnjic. It was only after all these ruminations that the producers and Sony finally settled on Daniel Craig. "I think that he has a kind of intensity, and a sexuality, and a roguishness," says Pascal. "And he seems like he could be a spy." Production begins shooting in January and is due for release worldwide on November 17, 2006. It will be filmed in the Czech Republic, the Bahamas, Italy and the UK.

Sun Oct 16, 2005 6:49 pm

Melanie wrote:I must say he isn't as easy on the eyes as Pierce Brosnan was, but let's give the guy a chance. Shooting hasn't even started yet and the press are already jumping at him.

Agreed!

I'm not convinced though! I agree with TJ in that Brosnan had at least one more movie in him. Having just turned 40 I must admit he makes me feel a whole lot better! 37! No way! :wink:

Sun Oct 16, 2005 7:24 pm

Yes, if the producers wouldn't have fired Brosnan, he would have had one last film in him. He certainly deserved a worthy swan song, because he saved the franchise in the 90s and I strongly believe he would have made the most out of the Ian Fleming material. Remember, he never got to shoot a script according to a book. IMO his last "Die Another Day" was full of crappy CGI, the Korea torture scenes were tops though. During some scenes he looked old, but he looks younger in recent photos.

Anyway the thing is Brosnan did not want to quit the role yet. He begged for the past six or seven years for grittier and edgier scripts, free from the escalating effects and one-liners that were starting to pile up.

I read that he has been let go, because the studio/producers want to attract a younger audience. Let's just see how CR turns out next year. This is no criticism of Craig, just that Brosnan looks like Bond, always looked like Bond, is Bond for the current generation, has been widely accepted in the role and always had the public on his side.

How is the audience supposed to believe that Craig is young Bond at the beginning of his career? Sorry to say, but none of the other actors looked as old as he does in their first films. And IMO he has no charisma. It will take a lot of good acting to convince in fight scenes etc.

When Brosnan took over the franchise, the world was WAITING for him to finally get the role. Nobody outside of the British indie circuit knows who Craig is, and I think that will hurt the film.

Director Campbell announced that they might tweak the script to show how Bond got his Aston Martin. To which we say: good Lord. Martin, dude…rent Goldfinger and do pay attention to the scene where Q gives the car to Bond. :D

Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:31 pm

Craig has a hell of a lot more charisma than Brosnan, and is by far the better actor. Lets face it, Brosnan as likeable as he was, is just too old for the part. Brosnan never had the nasty edge that Bond is supposed to have, that Connery had. Like Moore, he was just to likeable and pretty....and far too old.

Sun Oct 16, 2005 10:29 pm

I have only seen Craig in Road To Perdition and Layer Cake.
He did a good job. And I am giving him a chance as Bond.

The role of James Bond doesn't require a stage actor. To carry a Bond film the actor needs looks, style and charisma. I wouldn't describe Pierce Brosnan as an 'excellent' actor. But when he is good and the the part fits - i.e. Remington Steele - he is a fine actor, technically speaking. I'd class him as a movie star.

As for his portrayal, I loved it. He was a women's 007. And I respect what he tried to do with the character, he tried to push the envelope, but the producers wouldn't let him and he was generally let down by poor scripts and dialogue. It was unfortunate for him that he did not star in a Bond classic. GoldenEye was a very promising beginning, but it kind of tailed away after that.

I would have loved to see more of the edge that's in the scene where he kills Doctor Kaufman in Hamburg "I'm just a professional doing my job." "So am I." (Tomorrow Never Dies).

Brosnan has been great for the series - but by the same token - look at his predecessors - Dalton played it hard, Moore played it light - Brosnan seemed to be stuck in the middle ground - which some people rave about, but for others it was "Bond for the masses", a popcorn Bond, with no substance.

Anyway he is too old now. Craig got the part. I am waiting for the film. :D

Mon Oct 17, 2005 12:51 am

I guess the producers must have lost George Lazenby's phone number...

Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:34 am

Melanie wrote: Dalton played it hard, Moore played it light - Brosnan seemed to be stuck in the middle ground - which some people rave about, but for others it was "Bond for the masses", a popcorn Bond, with no substance.

Anyway he is too old now. Craig got the part. I am waiting for the film. :D


But Bond is for the masses and always has been. It's not an underground arthouse series. I also fail to understand all the points about how faithful or otherwise different portrayals are to the original Fleming books. By now, the audience's expectations of Bond are driven by his cinematic exploits, not the books. By that definition, Brosnan was a great Bond and shall be remembered as such.

Mon Oct 17, 2005 3:32 am

It's Ian Fleming's James Bond. See title sequences. The character has always been a relative constant -- regardless of the tone of the picture. This time the producers say they are going for the original elements again, because the film is going to be an real adaption of the first book, unlike 1967's Casino Royale starring Peter Sellers and David Niven.

I am now sure that Craig is well cast as Bond, (somehow wonderfully un-safe), the story brings us back to an age of elegant spying, Campbell has the potential of making a dark and gritty film. I can't wait to see a film without nuclear threats / invisible cars / women screaming "Oh James" every two minutes / did I mention invisible cars ?

-----

BTW the negativity among the fans started in 2001 when Bond 20 didn't come out. Then they made 'Die Another Day' which was 35 minutes of awesome Bond and then utter crap. Then they tried to sell us a Jinx film (instead of an emergency follow-up to DAD). Jinx was part of the movement to update Bond while emasculating 007 by having a "female equal". They disgracefully sold that as a Bond/Halle Berry film. Then we have no Casino Royale in 2005 after Quintin Tarantino publicly begged for the job, his price tag included screenwriters too, so it was a win-win for us , but no film and Bond is getting out-spied by Matt Damon as Jason Bourne, rightly so, but when the masses seem to have really liked Vin Diesel as Triple X (Hollywood playing it safe) the core completely lost faith in the spy franchise.
Last edited by Melanie on Mon Oct 17, 2005 3:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

Mon Oct 17, 2005 3:34 am

i'm personally a connery fan. definitely the best looking with the best acting skills (as proven by the history of cinema).

as far as post-connery bonds...probably pierce. he did get the suave down really well.

Mon Oct 17, 2005 8:45 am

here is my list

1.pierce brosnan
2.sean connery
3.timothy dalton
4.roger moore
5. george lazenby (though he was australian, he did'nt do well)

pierce just had an irresistible charm that i really loved, connery was the original, very good. timothy brought a mean ness to bond, he was fairly ok. but roger moore, i don't like he had brown hair, and i just did'nt like him

Mon Oct 17, 2005 1:25 pm

A bit of Bond trivia :

Which Bond actor said words to the effect:

"The Bond situations are ridiculous.

How can he operate as a secret agent if he is world-famous
?"

Mon Oct 17, 2005 3:23 pm

There are only 2 real Bonds; Sean Connery and Roger Moore. Lazenby perhaps didn´t play or fit his role very perfect but the story and plot made that particular movie one of the best Bond movies ever IMO. I don´t think I´ll vaste time watching the the next movie.


Sincerely MB280E

Mon Oct 17, 2005 4:43 pm

Anyone ever seen the "Diamonds Are Forever" outtake, where Sammy Davis jr. makes a brief appearance, playing roulette and commenting on the way Sean Connery (in the scene he obviously doesn't know it is a British secret agent) is dressed in a white dinner jacket? It was later cut from the theatrical release, but great stuff. And Jimmy Dean is in the film too. I mean how could we forget Elvis telling his audience "And be sure to buy Jimmy Dean's pork sausages." :D

The crew wanted to shoot in Vegas, then the major '71 earthquake took place. Anyway I think Elvis was in town at that time, because I have read a transcript of a phone call, where he talks about his quake expirience. The exterior for the Whyte House Hotel in the film is the Hilton , then of course called International Hochel.

Mon Oct 17, 2005 4:57 pm

Melanie wrote: Anyway I think Elvis was in town at that time, because I have read a transcript of a phone call, where he talks about his quake expirience.

Can you post this Melanie? This would be interesting to read.

Mon Oct 17, 2005 5:15 pm

As far as the box office is concerned, Roger Moore put more bums on cinema seats than any other "Bond".