View Full Version : The Future of James Bond (merged)

01-18-2003, 03:38 PM
I saw this picture from "Down with Love," - Ewan's new movie with Rene Zwelliger. It just struck me as very "Bond-looking."

Agent OB1-Seven?

01-18-2003, 04:54 PM
It's not too bad, but Brosnan has a better look for it I think.

Now Rowin Atkinson I could go for! :D

01-18-2003, 05:19 PM
Originally posted by Quite-Long Dong
Now Rowin Atkinson I could go for! :D

LOL, now that you've mentioned it, have you seen the new Johnny English trailer (http://www.uip.nl/johnnyenglishtrailer.html)? It looks like a fun movie, I can't wait till it is released.

Anyway, Ewan as 007??? To be honest I don't think that would work, he just doesn't have that "look" about him.


01-18-2003, 05:44 PM
Yeah, I am really looking forward to seeing Johnny English. Looks pretty darn funny. Atkinson can not say or do anything, and still make me laugh. His face is so.....funny.

01-18-2003, 07:23 PM
No. Absolutely not. It would destroy the space-time continuum.

01-18-2003, 09:57 PM
i say no to both ideas, ewan as bond, and english johnny being funny. i just watched that trailer, and i guess i saw the un-funny version, cause i didn't laugh at all.:crazed:

unless they can bring in some decent writers, i don't really care for any more bond films. i haven't liked any since goldeneye.

01-18-2003, 10:05 PM
Eh, next bond movie, i think Rowan Atkinson should be the Bond Villian. Just my thoughts though. :D

Dark Knight
01-19-2003, 01:31 AM
Originally posted by Fulit
No. Absolutely not. It would destroy the space-time continuum.

I agree. :) :D :evil:

01-19-2003, 02:00 AM
Ewan as Bond? Nah! He's too cool to play a tight *** wannabe like Bond.

Eternal Padawan
01-19-2003, 08:56 AM
Ewan as 007? Maybe in about 10 years. Bond needs to have a maturity about him that someone in their 30's (even as talented as Mr. Magregor) can't achieve.

My vote goes to Clive Owen. After seeing him in those BMW short films, I've been expectin EON Productions to give him a ring. After he's done his five or so films (although he'd be the next "even" Bond, so he'd only manage one or two films: See Lazenby and Dalton) I'd like to see either Ewan, or maybe Christian Bale put on the Tux.

Remember when Quentin Tarantino desparately wanted to make a faithful adaptation of Casino Royale with Daniel Day Lewis? There were legal issues over the rights to the book and the film, so he asked MGM and EON and they said no.

01-19-2003, 07:21 PM
I think Ewan would be an awful choice. His personal style is just so different from the cinematic 007 and, nearly as important, he's a totally different build. Then again, Bond 20 was such a piece of crap that it really doesn't matter who they get to play the part if it continues on that path.

01-21-2003, 10:08 AM
I could live with Ewan as Bond. He's a great actor, and I'm sure he could do it. I myself, like Bond 20. It wasn't great, but it was what it was. It was an action flick with hot chicks and cheesy one-liners. What did anyone expect? I think too many people build up their expectations on what they think movies should be, instead of taking them for what they are. Same thing goes for Star Wars movies. But it's the movies that are more than what they are, that are truely exceptional. Now, did I confuse everyone?

Anyhow, I like the Clive Owen idea. Man, those BMW films are cool. And Bale would also be a good choice, but I like Brosnan so he'll do for now.


01-21-2003, 11:58 AM
I think Pierce is the man for now. I don't see a need to replace him right now. He fits the roll extremely well. As far as Ewan goes. . . not right now. I agree with Eternal Padawan. He would have to wait at least ten years, maybe more. He has to have an older look to him, and the whole Star Wars connection will have to be 'old news.' He has the proper delivery with his wit, and he could pull off the Bond comedy well. I'm not so sure about seeing him pulling all the ladies, but they had Timothy Dalton do it. He can't be nearly as bad as Dalton, or Lazenby, so I would at least give the movie a chance.

As far as Rowan Atkinson. . . wasn't he already in a Bond movie before? I can't remember right this moment. . . but I am pretty sure he was. If I can think of it, I will repost. Can't really see him as a different character then.

01-21-2003, 12:03 PM
OK. . . Rowan Atkinson was in "Never Say Never Again."

I know that movie isn't considered by all to be a true Bond movie, but I knew he was in something.

The Overlord Returns
01-21-2003, 12:04 PM
Well, I don't know about this "Ewan McGreggor" guy, but I can sort of see Ewan MacGregor as james Bond in a few years....

Patient Zero
01-21-2003, 02:02 PM
Originally posted by Fulit
No. Absolutely not. It would destroy the space-time continuum.

HOLY CR*P! You have to teach me how to do that!

But seriously folks, after this movie why don't we just get Edward Grimley and Pee Wee Herman to fight it out in the next Terminator movie!?! :(

01-21-2003, 04:07 PM
Originally posted by Pendo
LOL, now that you've mentioned it, have you seen the new Johnny English trailer (http://www.uip.nl/johnnyenglishtrailer.html)? It looks like a fun movie, I can't wait till it is released.


YEAH!!!!!!!!!!! :D

I can't wait!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

01-30-2003, 12:14 AM
I love Ewan McGregor, he's an amazing actor. But he's not James Bond. It takes a right look to be 007.

I can see James Bond just by watching Pierce Brosnan in "Remington Steel." He had the look, the walk, and the charm.

02-01-2003, 12:44 AM
Ewan MacGregor is a fantastic actor.. but, unfortunately, in films, look sometimes matters more (read: always.. lol)... and I don't think Ewan really has the right "look" for Bond... It's a shame, I think he'd certainly bring a lot of charm and intelligence to the role, but I doubt it would ever happen.... I do think Christian Bale could pull it off successfully, though.... ;)

mylow thehutt
12-06-2003, 10:11 AM
Check this out,Looks to me Ewan will be the next big action hero.


(It wouldn't let me copy and past).

12-06-2003, 10:53 AM
I NEVER listen to any "Next 007" rumours! Whenever they're making a new Bond film there's ALWAYS these rumours, and this isn't even the 1st time Ewan has been rumoured! All these rumours about the next 007 are a load of b:eek:ll:eek:cks! I will not believe any of this until it comes from MGM or EON.


Lord Malakite
12-07-2003, 04:34 AM
The name is Wan. Obi-Wan.....Kenobi. :p

master jedi
12-08-2003, 12:16 AM
I heard about this rumor a very long time ago. I can't really picture Ewan McGregor as James Bond. I'm sure he'd do a fine job but, in my opinion, he just doesn't look the part.

12-08-2003, 01:19 PM
I heard Hugh Jackman's name mentioned

Mandalorian Candidat
12-08-2003, 03:40 PM
Check this out,Looks to me Ewan will be the next big action hero.

Yeah, but can he say "Poooshy" like Sean Connery?

02-11-2004, 10:01 AM
I heard Hugh Jackman's name mentionedI hear that Orlando Bloom and Jude Law are being considered as well along with a host of others. It would have to be Bloom or McGregor for me, would prefer McGregor though but I don't think he is on the list anymore.

02-11-2004, 05:36 PM
I'm with Pendo on this one. I don't take any of these rumors seriously. As far as Ewan is concerned I think he would be a terrible choice. Don't get me wrong I love his work and think he's very talented but James Bond material he is not. If it wasn't for Christian Bale getting the Batman role I'd say he would be the best choice but otherwise I'm not sure who I like.

03-21-2004, 06:52 PM
"The name is Bond..........James Bond"

Does it work?

03-21-2004, 07:22 PM
"The name's Greenleaf, Legolas Greenleaf" Sorry, no.

BTW, the writers of Bond 21 say they're having trouble writing it, it's all been done before and that's giving 'em a hard time. Of course, these are the guys who wrote TWINE and DAD and virtually nothing else, so I'm not that surprised they're having a hard time, it's difficult to come up with a 3rd piece of Bondian dreck (oh, I'm sorry, they also wrote the Bond-parody "Johnny English", so I guess that'd make this their 4th).

04-06-2004, 05:02 AM
I so hope this happens.



04-06-2004, 04:35 PM
Honestly, there's not one thing that Tarantino has done that I've seen that leads me to believe he'd make anything but a terrible 007 film. Hell, if you read that SFC article, he would prefer to shoot it as a '60s period piece! I like what he's saying about a lower budgeted, story-driven film, but I don't believe he's the right man to put it out.

04-07-2004, 04:30 PM
I would love this to happen. The way it sounds now, the producers are aiming at the lowest common denominator- spectacle over substance. I understand there needs to be a mix of both, but Goldeneye is about a zillion times better than Die Another Day, IMHO. I think Tarantino would give the series an awesome shot in the arm, since it appears the writers are clearly out of ideas.

Of course, QT would have to include the classic Bond Elements, but I think he would do it magnificently, because all his films incorporate classic bits from the genres they belong to.

Message to Barbara Broccoli and Mike Wilson- catch a brain and do this!

04-07-2004, 05:49 PM
Something drastic needs to happen with this franchise. I too am uncertain about a marriage of Tarantino to Bond, but at least it would create some excitement. The lukewarm reception to everything since Goldeneye is indicative of the fact that spectacle has far surpassed substance where 007 is concerned. Tarantino might make a better producer than director or writer here. One things for certain: the need to go back to basing these movies on good stories - Vin Diesel hasn't been cast as James..... yet. :dead:

Darth Jax
04-12-2004, 01:41 AM
tarantino, spielberg, pj - it doesn't matter which master director does it, it'll be a bad movie until bond gets back to being bond. the smooth-talking master spy who has his martinis shaken not stirred and always manages to get the girls. every since bond went pc the movies have been terrible.

04-12-2004, 06:13 PM
I absolutely love QT and I'm a Bond fan but I don't think his vision of Bond is anything I'd like to see made into a film. I'll agree that the franchise needs some changes but a retro James Bond isn't the right direction IMHO.

Ric Olie
04-29-2004, 12:34 PM
I'm a huge Bond fan and Casino Royale directed by Tarantino would be intresting. I loved all the recent Bond movie even Die Another Day. I think they only thing they need to do is make the next film like For Your Eyes Only or the Living Daylights. Something that could actully happen. Giant lazers are fun but lets do something real next time.

11-23-2004, 09:23 AM
We know we've reported roughly 1,245 James Bond casting rumors in the past, but it's just so hard to resist this latest speculation as to who might be taking over the 007 role. Moviehole reports that Ioan Gruffudd (King Athur (http://movies.go.com/moviesdynamic/movies/movie?id=628597), The Fantastic Four (http://movies.go.com/moviesdynamic/movies/movie?id=507704)) is the "only guy" that production company EON is considering for the part. (Moviehole)

11-23-2004, 11:12 AM
He looks the part, but can he play the part?

It's not a bad choice IMO, could have been a LOT worse!

But as usual, I NEVER believe these rumours until EON officially announces it! There's always gonna be James Bond casting rumours, and so far to date NONE have been true!


11-23-2004, 08:53 PM
I could live with him as the new 007. IMO he is a much better choice than most of the other rumored actors and he was quite good in King Arthur. If The Fantastic Four is a success though I'd be surprised to see him land the part. You know how those superhero movies and their sequels can be. :greedy:

11-23-2004, 09:02 PM
I don't think that he looks the part. He looks kinda young to me.

Is there some reason why they switch 007 every couple of movies?

11-23-2004, 09:47 PM
Is there some reason why they switch 007 every couple of movies?

Actually other than George Lazenby who only appeared in one film and Timothy Dalton who only appeared in two the other 3 actors have had close to or more than decade long runs as 007. Sean Connery's run was from 1962-1971 and ran for 6 films, 7 if you include the Thunderball remake Never Say Never Again, Roger Moore held the role the longest from 1973-1985 which spanned 7 films and Pierce Brosnan had a respectable run from 1995-2002 for a total of 4 films. In most of these cases the actors moved on because they wanted to pursue a greater range of projects but age was definitely a factor as well. I actually find it quite impressive that a franchise that has run for nearly 43 years has only had 5 actors occupy the title role.

11-25-2004, 01:12 AM
I agree, he looks too young. Oh, and if I were him, I would have changed my name as soon as I was legally allowed... yikes!

I'm not sure the franchise can survive much longer the way it's been going, Tomorrow Never Dies was fun but sloppy, The World is not Enough was pretty putrid, and Die Another Day was downright terrible.

11-29-2004, 10:52 AM
Thats a little harsh JT -I thought they were ok.

I think he looks alright. Just look at the Goldeneye press photos of Pierce Brosnan compared to Die Another Day, he looks SO young.

I think the franchise is doing fine. True, they dont make 007 movies as often as they used to. It would do better if Barbara Broccoli stepped up the pace a bit.

11-29-2004, 10:33 PM
I dunno, I think both TWINE and DAD are really quite bad films both as 007 flicks and on their own, for totally different reasons though. We had a thread about 007 films in general in this section a while back, I wonder what happened to it.

Brosnan looked younger, but I don't think he looked "young" in Goldeneye or any of its press. Ioan looks mid-20s even though he's 31, but Brosnan in '94/'95 looked mid-30s even though he was 42 at the time of filming Goldeneye.

11-29-2004, 10:50 PM
This guy also reminds me of Christian Slater in his "Heather's" days, especially if you don't click on the pic to make it bigger.

Goldeneye is my all-time favorite Bond movie along with my all-time favorite first-person shooter. Halo has nothing on some late night 4 person Goldeneye.

11-29-2004, 10:55 PM
Jayspawn, you seem to think I'm a little harsh more often than I remembered: 209279 (and your post following it ;)).

11-30-2004, 01:41 PM

I would like to see some re-occuring characters like Blofeld and Jaws were other than say Q, M, or Moneypenny.

11-30-2004, 07:55 PM
The Bond films have always been a mixed bag IMO. I just take the good with the bad and usually sit back and enjoy being able to spend time in the Bond universe once more. I think each of the 3 main actors have had hits and misses in their runs as Bond. I thought Lazenby's and Dalton's 3 films were excellent additions even if they weren't well received but I tend to favor the films that return to the roots of Fleming's novels and focus on a good ole' spy story.

My top 3 favorite Bond films would be For Your Eyes Only, From Russia With Love and You Only Live Twice. My 3 least favorites would be :stupid: Moonraker, The Man With the Golden Gun and Goldfinger :nerv: . I know Goldfinger is supposedly considered one of if not the best Bond film by many but I always found it to be pretty cheesy. For me Goldeneye was Brosnan's best film and one of the best entries in the series overall as far as thats concerned. Tomorrow Never Dies was his worst effort in my eyes but that opinion is mostly based on the ridiculous stunt scenes that defied all logic. TWINE was decent but no Goldeneye and other than a fantastic sword fight and a pretty cool car duel DAD was just alright. I have a problem with just about everything Halle Berry does, seriously. So it was hard for me to get past her lame character and enjoy the film.

I'd like to see the series return to a more intellectually complex reality based espionage type story. It seems like the gadjets, cars and over the top action scenes have been the focus for the last few films while the plotline has taken a back seat.

Ric Olie
12-08-2004, 05:21 PM
I'm a huge Bond fan and I can't wait till the next film. Regarding Brosnan I hope he comes back. I'm not ready to see him go. He's needs a better send off then Die Another Day (I still like it).

One reason for the delay is that they could not secure a director for the film. Rumors suggest that GoldenEye director Martin Campbell will helm the film yet right now he's in Mexico filming The Legend of Zorro. After that wraps he could come on board for Bond 21. If Brosnan and Campbell came back for Bond 21 it would be a wonderful way to bookend the Brosnan era if he leaves the series.

The release date for Bond 21 is up in the air and rumors have it coming out at Easter 2006 (possible but unlikely) and November 2006 (most likey). The film could also come out sometime in the summer of 2006. I'm hoping for Easter 2006 with Bond 22 (with or without Brosnan) debuting Christmas 2007.

12-08-2004, 11:16 PM
2007 is WAY to far away. They better and another one done and another started by then. They better get crackin and start shooting out more movies like they did in the Roger Moore days.

12-09-2004, 11:03 PM
I heard part of the problem was that the 21st Bond film's authors, Robert Wade & Neal Purvis - who are apparently partners and have only written 2 films before TWINE, their first 007 film, and DAD, as well as the 007 parody "Johnny English" - are having a hard time coming up with a script because they feel it's all been done before.

Since you already know how I feel about those 2 films, I'll just say that this bodes very poorly for the next 007 flick.

Lowly Bantha Cleaner
02-26-2005, 05:31 PM
Was buzzing through the entertainment section of the news and saw this: 2 in line for the next James Bond (http://www.sky.com/showbiz/article/0,,50001-1172392,00.html)

Bond 21st movie will be directed by alum Martin Campbell and will be a make of Ian Fleming's first novel "Casino Royale" not a remake of the godawful comedy starring David Niven, Peter Sellers, and Woody Allen from the late 1960's. The talk is that the buzz of all the gadgetry and action of the last few Bond outings will be toned down and replaced with more of a storyline and drama. Look for a late 2006/early 2007 release.

02-26-2005, 06:21 PM
Clive Owen looks alot like George Lazenby.

Darth Grifter
03-01-2005, 12:44 AM
if it's between owen and the other guy, owen's got it in the bag...the other guy looks too much like a bond villain to be bond himself; plus, he has blue eyes! i look to see owen get it soon...isn't it curious though how both he and ian gruffudd were in king arthur and were both considered for bond...???

Lowly Bantha Cleaner
03-01-2005, 11:12 PM
You are right about Daniel Craig. He may be a great actor (he played Paul Newman's son in "Road to Perdition") but he doesn't look the part. He isn't as tall, his hair isn't as dark, and he does lack the brown eyes (but those can be easily corrected).

Pierce Brosnan was offered the role in "Casino Royale" but the two sides couldn't reach an agreement, so he parted ways.

Darth Grifter
03-02-2005, 02:52 AM
is "casino royale" the title???

03-02-2005, 03:00 PM
is "casino royale" the title???


03-03-2005, 08:20 PM
Even though it's not official, I'm 99.9% sure that Clive Owen will be the next James Bond. The other guy does indeed look too much like a Bond villain. Plus, Owen's recent Oscar nomination raises his chances of bagging the role. Personally, I also hope that John Cleese will return as R, same goes for M and Moneypenny...

Lowly Bantha Cleaner
04-10-2005, 12:49 PM
From imdb.com

<<Bond Bosses' Secrecy Over Daniel Craig Announcement

Producers of the forthcoming James Bond sequel have refused to comment on reports British star Daniel Craig has won the coveted superspy role. Craig, 37, was in competition with Closer star Clive Owen for the part of the spy, after Pierce Brosnan was ditched for demanding a staggering $42 million for his next Bond film. But Owen has since decided the role would limit his acting career and a leak from movie giant Eon Productions suggests producer Barbara Broccoli has offered the Layer Cake star a contract for the next three films. An insider explains, "Everybody who works at Eon Productions, which makes the Bond movies, has been told Daniel is the new 007." >>

Well, a bit disappointed, but Clive is right when he thinks the role of Bond puts limits on his career. All the best to Daniel and may he make a convincing Bond.

04-10-2005, 02:48 PM
Well all reports I've read indicate its basically a done deal as far as Craig getting the role. Maybe its just me but I can't see this guy as James Bond. The only movies I've seen him in were 'Tomb Raider' and 'Road to Perdition' and I didn't see anything to indicate that he is right for this role. Not that hes a bad actor by any means I just don't think he physically fits the mold of what we've come to expect from James Bond. I've attached a picture, what do you guys think?

04-10-2005, 05:56 PM
No, he doesn't remind me of Bond at all, but I am not as against his casting as some of the other names in the hat. What's really weird is that this week there was a report of Brosnan not actually having been dumped as Bond, that it was part of a negotiating tactic and he's still very likely to come back. So confusing.

04-11-2005, 06:31 AM
I don't believe any casting rumours about James Bond until they are actually confirmed! To be honest I think Daniel Craig would be alright as the "new type" of Bond, the new type beig the hard, dark, 'don't give a ****' type of Bond that is rumoured to be in Casino Royale.


04-11-2005, 05:55 PM
What the hell kind of name is Casino Royal supposed to be???? Makes me hate the movie already.

04-11-2005, 06:00 PM
What the hell kind of name is Casino Royal supposed to be???? Makes me hate the movie already.
Casino Royale is the title of the very first James Bond novel by Ian Flemming (the only one which hasn't been made into an MGM/EON movie). Casino Royale is the main setting of the story. I don't know how you can hate the movie from the title, and James Bond fans are so please that Casinao Royale is finally being adapted.


04-11-2005, 06:06 PM
Casino Royale was previously made as a TV play in the UK before Dr No was a movie, and later was used as a horrid piece of comedy that just didn't work.

04-11-2005, 06:22 PM
Casino Royale was previously made as a TV play in the UK before Dr No was a movie, and later was used as a horrid piece of comedy that just didn't work.
The original TV Play was awesome! I'm hoping it comes out on DVD, it was out on VHS a while back! The spoof version was DIRE! They had a good cast, just and awful screenplay and awful jokes :(.


Lowly Bantha Cleaner
04-30-2005, 11:02 AM
What's really weird is that this week there was a report of Brosnan not actually having been dumped as Bond, that it was part of a negotiating tactic and he's still very likely to come back. So confusing.

JT, you were right. This was overheard yesterday, and while it is unofficial, it seems to be true that Pierce Brosnan will be back for "Casino Royale."

<<(London-AP) April 29, 2005 - 00-Brosnan again! Pierce Brosnan is returning as James Bond in the new movie "Casino Royale."

At least that's what Judi Dench has told The Mirror in London. There had been reports that a new Bond was going to be cast, possibly Clive Owen or Daniel Craig. But Dench says Brosnan will be back. She says an announcement will be made this summer.

Dench has played Bond's boss "M" in the past four 007 movies. >>

Lowly Bantha Cleaner
05-30-2005, 04:37 PM
Apparently Dame Judi has recanted her above statement and the hiring of Pierce for "Casino Royale" is in limbo. Filming is scheduled to begin in January of 2006.

Imperial Monarche
09-18-2005, 10:30 AM
Recently, Paul Haggis came out saying that he and the producers are going for a re-invention of Bond, kinda like Warner's did with Batman Begins. He said that Bond is supposed to be 28 with no gadgets and no Q in Casino Royale and that it will be more of a book adaptation than of a "based loosely" on the book, which means basically just taking the title and perhaps the villians. But, Sony doesn't like this idea of going back to the original formula and wants to stick with the slam-bam action of the three previous Bond movies.

I personally think that this is the best thing that could have happen to James Bond. The movies have become so over the top and each one seems to try and push the envelope further. I say, screw Sony because movie studio's just don't seem to understand how to treat fans of movies and just want to cater to the mindless loafs that just like to watch things go BOOM! They need to give something to the people that have been fans of James Bond for a long time. If anything, make more Bond movies like Goldeneye, which in my opinion is a perfect mix of what the movies used to be and what they are now. Who perfect to reinvent the movies but Martin Cambell who directed Goldeneye.

09-18-2005, 11:56 AM
That would be quite a radical change, which I think could be good. Although it would be weird not to see the gadgets. I think the bigger issue is the stories that are being told. I'm ok with the big blow em up type flicks as long as there is some point to it. That last bond flick was pretty weak (although Jinx was just fine ;)) with that weird opening montage of Bond getting the crap kicked out of him while a Madonna song is being played? That was lame. If its a good story then I'm on board.

09-18-2005, 02:01 PM
that formula for Casino Royale sounds like Dr. No more than anything else. I like the more down to earth films such as Goldeneye, From Russia, and for Your Eyes Only, but I think it is important to keep the gadgets and the Q scene, unless it totally doesn't fit with the story (like in Licence to Kill). Die Another Day was really good until about halfway through and we got into the Ice Palace, that silly exosuit, and the Face Off rip off. I have to admit I was partial to the car battle though... :thumbsup:

09-18-2005, 06:55 PM
I think From Russia with Love is probably the best balance between the book 007 and the movie character, he has some gadgets and even uses 'em, but he also has a real spy story. Sony should get as far away from over-the-top silliness like Die Another Day as quickly as they can, it's dull, predictable, and unfulfilling, but I don't think audiences could handle a 007 from Dr. No at this point, especially without that film's sci-fi aspects.

09-19-2005, 12:11 PM
I think United Artist and Barbara Brocolli need to get up and start shelling out 007 movies before people get tired of waiting (I'm tired now) and forget about em.

09-19-2005, 12:39 PM
Pierece has been saying some interesting things in the press now that he won't be back as Bond. He laughed at the love scenes saying they should be more 'revealing' about about keeping his nose clean since he was Bond.

09-19-2005, 03:49 PM
Didn't they have a Bond slump like this in the early 90's too? What is going on with this? You would think they'd have chosen a new Bond by now.

09-19-2005, 04:00 PM
According to IMDB, in the early '90s, they had planned to release what we now know as Goldeneye with Timothy Dalton, but the previous 007 film hadn't done very well at the box office and then there was a legal battle over who owned the film rights to the character (yet again), also another hurdle was the death of longtime screenwriter Richard Maibaum, all of which slowed preproduction to a standstill. Frustrated with all this and no script, Timothy Dalton walked away from 007 even though he was still under contract.

09-20-2005, 01:32 AM
I like a good share of the Bond movies but if they never make another one, I won't care. :)

Lowly Bantha Cleaner
09-21-2005, 09:10 PM
This return to the basics, is nothing new in the Bond world. The "gold" standard of the Bond movies was "Goldfinger," a phenomenon that swept the world. Each sucessive Bond movie after that tried to incorporate those elements that worked in Goldfinger--the fast cars, the action-laden plot, the zingy one-liners and scantily clad girls. Most of those movies missed, going even further beyond the Goldfinger, becoming more outrageous and over the top. An attempt to rein in Bond mania started in 1969 with "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" which featured a minimum of Q's gadgets, a believable plot, and a lack of the elements that caused Bond to stray too far from Ian Fleming's vision of Bond. But that movie was not a lucrative moneymaker as the previous ones, even though it has been hailed by Bond fans as one of the best.

The cycle repeated itself when "Moonraker" brought Bond to outer-space with an even more outlandish story line and "For Your Eyes Only," the next movie, brought him back to Earth, so to speak. Now we saw "Die Another Day" reflect all the bad things in a Bond movie, and it looks like the production company is going to make another attempt to make the next movie,"Casino Royale" more of an old-fashioned Bond spy story.

09-22-2005, 03:44 PM
Don't forget "Live and Let Die", Roger Moore's first, which was also attempt at minimalistic early Bond (it reminds me of From Russia with Love in some ways, albeit a little cheesier). I think folks don't care for OHMSS because of George Lazenby as Bond, he's not a particularly good actor and he doesn't look smooth enough to be Bond, also the film is good but a little uneven and plodding.

In a sense, Roger Moore got to go through the Bond cycle twice, although I think only "The Spy Who Loved Me" was his Goldfinger moment.

Lowly Bantha Cleaner
10-14-2005, 10:18 PM
Well it is official. After months of speculation and the rumor that Pierce Brosnan would be returning to the role of James Bond, Daniel Craig was announced as the 6th actor to play the role of James Bond. Craig replaces Brosnan who started the role 10 years ago. Filming for the next Bond movie, "Casino Royale" based on the first book of Bond creator Ian Fleming starts in January of next year.

Craig is the first blondie to play Bond and only the second Englishman after Roger Moore to play the iconic character. (Connery is Scottish, Dalton is Welsh, Brosnan was born in Ireland, and Lazenby is Austrailian).

I kinda feel mixed about Craig. I liked him in "Road to Perdition," the only role that I've seen him act in. He doesn't look the part (Bond has to be dark haired and over six feet tall) yet I may change my mind once I see the next movie. Producers have desired a return to the original Fleminesque Bond--a harder edged, grittier type Bond who at times is conflicted; not the super-hero type he has been depicted in, in too many movies. Craig seems that type of actor--more like Timothy Dalton--one of the most underrated Bonds. Only time shall tell. We shall see how he pans out.

10-14-2005, 11:35 PM
Well after seeing Craig in 'Layer Cake' I'm less skeptical about him being able to fill the role. For anyone who is wondering if he would make a good Bond I highly suggest watching this movie as his performance impressed me quite a bit. He probably wouldn't have been my first choice but they could have definitely done worse. I'm just glad to here that Bond is returning to the more grounded old-fashoned style spy stories I grew up loving. :pleased:

10-15-2005, 12:20 AM
The new Bond movie is based on Casino Royale ? Are they gonna get Woody Allen to cameo ? lol lol lol

I've only seen Daniel Craig in Road to Perdition and man did I ever hate him in that movie, I mean, I was supposed to hate him so that's a compliment. :)

Good luck to him.

But what's this about Bond having to stop a game of No Limit Texas Hold'Em ?
Is that the game in the original novel or is this a reflection of the current popularity of Texas Hold'Em ? :confused:

10-15-2005, 12:21 AM
I think Craig is a good choice. Famous but not too famous. I'm really looking forward to seeing Casino Royale.

10-15-2005, 06:22 AM
Just based on looks, he seems all wrong - and I don't mean the hair color. Plus, I thought they wanted a younger Bond, 37 ain't "younger" and by the time he does a sequel he'll be in his mid 40s.

10-15-2005, 08:18 AM
I don't like his look. I always pictured Bond as being chiseled and all sexy man and this guy just looks weathered. I'm sure he's seen much better days in his life.

Don't matter either way since I haven't see any Bond movies since Goldeneye anyways.

10-15-2005, 09:14 AM
I think he might be able to pull it off, but I don't think he'll be better than Brosnan was. I would have rather seen Clive Owen take the part of Bond. Now who do you guys think the next Bond girl is going to be?

10-15-2005, 03:57 PM
I don't like his look. I always pictured Bond as being chiseled and all sexy man and this guy just looks weathered. I'm sure he's seen much better days in his life.
Yes, exactly! That's what I wanted to put into words but couldn't, thanks Slicker, that's exactly what I think too.

Now who do you guys think the next Bond girl is going to be?I don't care, the concept has gotten out of control, especially after Denise "you want me to play a bimbo nucular sciantict?" Richards and the Halle Berry route where they made her an equal even though she was meek and inept and boring, and were considering doing a spin-off movie with her character. It used to be that Bond girls were actresses that were in some way fresh and new and an exposure to the audience which they hadn't seen before, now it's become this cheap attempt at promotion which undermines the story writing.

10-16-2005, 12:19 PM
I don't like his look. I always pictured Bond as being chiseled and all sexy man and this guy just looks weathered. I'm sure he's seen much better days in his life.

I don't really remember Connery being all that chiseled... or for that matter a number of the other humps that played Bond.

10-16-2005, 01:07 PM
But they were handsome. This guy, to me at least, doesn't look all that handsome. Connery seemed to suave and dashing along with Moore.

10-16-2005, 03:57 PM
I don't really remember Connery being all that chiseled... or for that matter a number of the other humps that played Bond.
Connery was really not the right look exactly, he wasn't a richboy looking dude, but he made up for it with charisma. George Lazenby I am told by some (while others conflict with this) that he was considered handsome at the time but I think he looks doofy. Roger Moore has that rich guy handsome look somewhat but I think Pierce Brosnan had that look down pat. Timothy Dalton was the other side of the coin, I thought he did look somewhat right but he played it even stronger like the character was meant to be.

10-16-2005, 04:56 PM
They should get Jessica Simpson or Lindsay Lohan to be the next Bond Skank.

10-16-2005, 07:38 PM
I don't like his look. I always pictured Bond as being chiseled and all sexy man and this guy just looks weathered. I'm sure he's seen much better days in his life.

Agreed, he pretty much looks like Gollum in a tuxedo.:D
But it might not be toooooo bad.

Lowly Bantha Cleaner
10-18-2005, 06:14 PM
The Bond series has been faltering for a long time now. Why, it's been decades since they last made a decent movie, not since the days of Roger Moore, not since . . . since . . . Octo*****.


(The above statement contains some falsehoods but this user just likes to mention that title over and over.)


10-26-2005, 04:59 PM
From Yahoo! News:

The new James Bond film will see the superspy shaken from the world of cartoonish sci-fi action and stirred by a woman who changes him forever.

Casino Royale, which begins filming in January with newly named Bond Daniel Craig (http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news/?p=Daniel+Craig), will be the first of the 007 movies to reveal the hero's origins, director Martin Campbell says.
"We're going toward a much more realistic Bond, much more From Russia with Love than we've had in the past," says Martin, who also directed 1995's GoldenEye with former Bond Pierce Brosnan (http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news/?p=Pierce+Brosnan).
Campbell's Legend of Zorro opens Friday, and he says he's ready to trade swords for spies.
Casino Royale was first made in 1967 as a spoof of spy movies, with David Niven as Bond. Ian Fleming's first Bond novel, Casino Royale was set during the Cold War and focused on a gambler named Le Chiffre who tries to reclaim a fortune he lost for SMERSH, the Communist secret enforcement unit.
"He has to mount a card game in order to win the money back. Bond is sent in to make sure he doesn't win," Campbell says. The 2006 version of Casino Royale eliminates the Cold War setting.
Bond is teamed with female agent Vesper Lynd, who later helps him recover after he is brutally tortured.
"She's the one who forges him into the Bond that we all know and love," Campbell says. "He certainly falls in love with her, and it does change him forever. It's a genuinely deeper relationship. The film deals much more on a personal level with Bond."
The reason the hero treats subsequent love interests as one-night stands also will be revealed.
"He talks about how it's too boring to have a relationship," Campbell says. "You meet, and it's all exciting, then it starts to fade, and you go through the uncomfortable part of having to get rid of the girl, etc. It's a very interesting observation, given his sort of misogynistic views."
The film also will feature a lot of "embryonic stuff" about why Bond prefers his martini "shaken, not stirred," and why he favors the Aston Martin sports car.
But there will be no gadget-master Q. The story is trying to avoid over-the-top weaponry.
The production will move among the Bahamas, Prague, Italy and London, says Campbell, now going over action sequences with Million Dollar Baby screenwriter Paul Haggis.
Who will play Vesper?
Says Campbell: "We were so wrapped up getting Bond, that's what we have to do now."

10-27-2005, 10:14 PM
*bangs head on keyboard* NOOOOOO!!! BOND PREQUEL IS A BAD IDEA!!!!!

And with this move, the Bond Franchise is laid to rest.

Lowly Bantha Cleaner
10-30-2005, 09:19 AM
I think it's a good idea.

After 20 movies, and many recycled story lines, something innovative needs to be brought back to the series. The prequel idea is inevitable if you are planning to cover James Bond's first storyline, in the first book by Ian Fleming, Casino Royale. After all, even in the first Bond movie, Dr. No, we only learn of brief tidbits of Bond's start with MI6, such as the fact that he did standard intelligence gathering before he became an agent. We never learned how he got into the business, his first mission, his first girl (who we assume he tried to have a committed relationship with but learns the hardway that it is impossible for him to do so in his line of work) and the first villain. It'll be interesting to see how his first meeting goes with M (who I assume for continuity's sake can't be played by Judi Dench?) and whether or not he had a fling with Moneypenny.

I see already a drawback, and that is the absence of Q. Even though many of us agree the gadgetry needs to be toned down, a few obligatory appearances by Q is needed in any Bond movie. His absence in Live and Let Die was noted wtih outrage by fans and even if he doesn't provide Bond with any weaponry, at the very least he can make a cameo appearance somewhere in the movie.

Imperial Monarche
11-23-2005, 11:31 AM
M will be played by Judi Dench which, IMO, is garbage. She replaced a man in Goldeneye, so how will they explain why she is M to begin with...I'm having a hard time with that. The other problem that I don't have much of a problem with is it being in modern times. That's not such a problem though.

02-21-2006, 04:18 AM
Well, today it was announced that new Bond Daniel Craig (who looks WAY wrong for the part IMO) got some of his teeth knocked in by an extra during a fight scene. That's not inspiring confidence.

Also, here's a look at the car they're giving Bond, it's the new Aston Martin DBS:
IMO, it's nice but way too new and sleek and similar to DAD's Vanquish (and they better not put another stupid cloaking device on it, that was way over the top last time), seems like business as usual for the franchise with this.

I dunno about this picture, Judi Dench as M seems wrong to bring back for a reboot, the car seems like it's saying "business as usual", and Daniel Craig can't take a punch. :p

02-21-2006, 07:17 AM
It looks like it could get him to the Dentist - and fast!!! :D

02-21-2006, 01:04 PM
I don't know if this has been put in here (probably has) but they've got the new Bond girl.

Link (http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=1632684)

02-21-2006, 01:34 PM
I'll have to see additional photographs of her to give you an honest opinion about what I think. Right now I'd rather drive the new Bond CAR if you know what I mean.

02-21-2006, 04:54 PM
I don't know if this has been put in here (probably has) but they've got the new Bond girl.

Link (http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=1632684) Fantastic, another tiny sickly waif girl who looks TOTALLY wrong for the Bond thing. More pics of her on her IMDB listing: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1200692/

As someone on the IMDB forums put it, "now we have an unattractive Bond girl to go with an unattractive Bond."

BTW, here's Daniel Craig with Judi Dench and director Martin Campbell at a press conference last week for Casino Royale:
I honestly don't get this at all, this guy looks OLDER than he actually is! I thought part of the point of new-Bond was that he was supposed to be younger so he could carry the franchise a little - this guy is 38 and looks like a liver-lipped, sunken-eyed, grizzled old sun-worn transvestite a la General Zod in Priscilla: Queen of the Desert.

02-21-2006, 05:22 PM
After reviewing some of Green's errrr....ummm...work...I have re-evaluated her attributes and now favor her over the car - and over a lot of things, such as eating, sleeping, etc. In fact, I wouldn't even watch THIS movie of hers with her around. She clearly has better things to offer a companion. :love:

02-21-2006, 06:00 PM
They're not gonna show her nude, they're desparate for PG-13 ratings so the kiddies will hit the theaters. And while they got away with the PG-13 on the smutty parts of Die Another Day, that was before the Janet Jackson superbowl debacle which will keep them cautious.

02-21-2006, 11:41 PM
I kind of dug her in KOH.

02-22-2006, 07:06 AM
Here's a site I found that's dedicated to boycotting Casino Royale because of the new Bond.


02-22-2006, 12:11 PM
Quite the interesting site there Slick. On a different note I didn't know there is going to be a Caddyshack Prequel. ;)

02-22-2006, 12:30 PM
Wow, and I thought I wasted too much time online....those guys erected a whole site to boycott the movie ? Dude, just don't go and see it. Boycott accomplished. lol

02-22-2006, 01:18 PM
I dont believe all the people who have something against Daniel Craig or Casino Royal. Its getting ridiculous! There was going to be a new James Bond eventually -deal with it! Craig, the Bond Crew, and people at United Artists have my complete confidence. I'm gonna laugh at all the skeptics when Casino Royal is a smash! I cant wait to see the publicity pictures!

The new Bond Girl looks hot! Thats all she needs to start with!

02-22-2006, 04:34 PM
people at United Artists have my complete confidenceToo bad MGM all but took UA completely out of the picture 2 movies ago.

CraigNotBond is a tad over the top, nobody's gonna boycott the film, but they are right that Daniel Craig seems all wrong for the part of Bond, and ain't gonna get younger for the next one.

02-22-2006, 07:21 PM
He looks more like a 009 who gets killed in a pre-credit sequence really. I was never a big supporter of the Clive Owen camp but after I watched 'Closer' the other week I was aghast that they didn't pick him - most definitely has the look to say nothing else.

So Craig wouldn't look out of place in a Bond film just not as Bond. I'd even have gone for Sean Bean (Alec trevelyn 006 in Goldeneye) over him and that'd be wierd. A bit like if Michael Keaton plays the Joker in a future Batman film.

01-25-2008, 01:43 PM
Clive Owen would make a better Bond villain than a Bond. :thumbsup:

01-25-2008, 01:49 PM
I nominate Gert Frobe as the next Bond.