131 replies to this topic

[David Schofield]

Hasn't Mike Myers done all this already - and probably so much better - with Austin Powers and Dr Evil, particularly in Goldmember?

[scotsman]

Interesting idea....could be great IF done properly.

Regards the actress,the gorgeous Sienna is too young to play an older 'babe'(the make up wouldnt work),so who would you pick as a still beautiful and sexy older actress(say supposed to be early to mid 40's,looks late 30's)to partner PB in the latter half of the film?......

[XXX]

Um.... hello? Does anybody realize that this concept has NO FUTURE at all?
What's next after CR? Cavill can't continue playing Bond, because it would be set in the past and that is a) against tradition and b) they can't use product-placements.
We would have to REBOOT the series after just one movie. Genius.

I think it's all hoax. Actually, the Gary Coleman Dakota Fanning response was the best comeback for this ... um ... overly active imagination.

Edited by XXX, 25 September 2005 - 11:45 AM.

[Loomis]

Not that I believe this "news" to be true, but a request to Eon:

Stop trying to be clever with Bond. Quit trying to "shake up the formula". Cut it out with the acres of backstory and making the films about five times more complicated than they should be.

Just give us a good old-fashioned straightforward and unpretentious Bond adventure without all the bells and whistles and flashbacks, as was always the case in the Moore era. If you can.

[Oddjob's nephew]

Who wants more of the same? We've had that for 40 years!

The whole point of the dropping of Brosnan was so EON could start again with something fresh.

People got the 'traditional Bond film' with Die Another Day - i mean, who wants more films like that??!!!

[Loomis]

The whole point of the dropping of Brosnan was so EON could start again with something fresh.

After the (usually underwhelming) spectacle of Bond being "radically reinvented" in virtually every film from THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS to DIE ANOTHER DAY (accompanied by the "Back to Fleming" and "'Bond women', not 'Bond girls'" press conferences), my idea of something fresh at this point is another THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN.

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

The whole point of the dropping of Brosnan was so EON could start again with something fresh.

After the (usually underwhelming) spectacle of Bond being "radically reinvented" in virtually every film from THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS to DIE ANOTHER DAY (accompanied by the "Back to Fleming" and "'Bond women', not 'Bond girls'" press conferences), my idea of something fresh at this point is another THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN.

I would love another movie with the feel of TMWTGG, however, the ending is what should be different. The whole solex gun thing was just pointless to me..just seemed convoluted for the sake of it.

[Pussfeller]

I find this very unlikely. I don't know anything about Dr. Shatterhand or his reputation, but I can't imagine EON framing a Bond film in such an unorthodox way. I wouldn't mind a departure from the norm, even to this extent, but I don't think they' go for it. This all sounds too fantastical and too much like a fan script.

In reality, I just think everyone is just grappling with the latest round of Brosnan rumours. "How will he fit in?", etc. I guess many people take it for granted that he WILL be in CR, just like Daniel Craig WAS going to be Bond two weeks ago. I still strongly doubt that we'll be seeing Brosnan in CR, so I don't think this "back and forth" framing is a possibility.

[Loomis]

I would love another movie with the feel of TMWTGG

Yes. Beautiful women, reasonably gentle and sophisticated wit, urbane villains, bizarre henchmen, real locations and stunts, lots of colour, terrific music....

Instead of:

Beautiful women who must every five minutes be shown to be Every Inch Bond's Equal™, belittling our hero and massacring people with machine guns; crass, loud humour that's usually aimed at thrusting some kind of politically correct point in the audience's face; ditchwater-boring villains and henchmen; locations mocked up in British studios; CGI-stuffed action scenes; a dull, grey colour palette; David Arnold's usual rubbish....

Bring back the Moore era and proper James Bond!

(Agreed about the ending of THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN. The film does wobble a little there. Still a masterpiece, though. )

[Kronsteen]

I don't really know if I can post these or not, but I've made a poster (two versions of it) for the idea of two Bonds in the same movie.

Attached Files

•  crblackwhite2.jpg   170.79KB   183 downloads
•  crblackwhite.jpg   177.28KB   150 downloads

[WC]

I don't really know if I can post these or not, but I've made a poster (two versions of it) for the idea of two Bonds in the same movie.

After seeing those mock-up posters, I definitely DON'T want a young Bond. He'll look more like a student off to his graduation ceremony than a MI6 agent in a tux.
Heck, it could even look just like a snazzy school uniform. While it doesn't have to be the Perfect Bond, we don't want Prefect Bond either.

[blueman]

Don't see Brosnan fancying the Old Bond to anyone's New Bond, either.

[Loomis]

Don't see Brosnan fancying the Old Bond to anyone's New Bond, either.

Good point. Can't see that happening at all. An open invitation for critics to write things like: "Cavill is so good as the younger Bond that you wish the filmmakers had had the courage to give him the entire film; Brosnan looks past-it and dull by comparison".

[Jim]

Bizarre concept.

Does anyone really want to see this? And if the conclusion those thought dead by the young Bond turn out to be alive, isn't that "twist" rather evidently foreshadowed by having an older Bond turn up anyway?

One or the other and do stop mucking about, chaps. This really doesn't sound a particularly good idea.

 

Daniel Craig as Bond, though - yes.

[killkenny kid]

I would love another movie with the feel of TMWTGG

Yes. Beautiful women, reasonably gentle and sophisticated wit, urbane villains, bizarre henchmen, real locations and stunts, lots of colour, terrific music....

Instead of:

Beautiful women who must every five minutes be shown to be Every Inch Bond's Equal™, belittling our hero and massacring people with machine guns; crass, loud humour that's usually aimed at thrusting some kind of politically correct point in the audience's face; ditchwater-boring villains and henchmen; locations mocked up in British studios; CGI-stuffed action scenes; a dull, grey colour palette; David Arnold's usual rubbish....

Bring back the Moore era and proper James Bond!

(Agreed about the ending of THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN. The film does wobble a little there. Still a masterpiece, though. )

I like the way you think.

[SecretAgentFan]

Sorry, can

[Oddjob's nephew]

I would love another movie with the feel of TMWTGG

Yes. Beautiful women, reasonably gentle and sophisticated wit, urbane villains, bizarre henchmen, real locations and stunts, lots of colour, terrific music....

Instead of:

Beautiful women who must every five minutes be shown to be Every Inch Bond's Equal™, belittling our hero and massacring people with machine guns; crass, loud humour that's usually aimed at thrusting some kind of politically correct point in the audience's face; ditchwater-boring villains and henchmen; locations mocked up in British studios; CGI-stuffed action scenes; a dull, grey colour palette; David Arnold's usual rubbish....

Bring back the Moore era and proper James Bond!

(Agreed about the ending of THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN. The film does wobble a little there. Still a masterpiece, though. )

We'll never see TMWTGG's like again! Tom Mankiewicz was probably the best Bond writer they have ever had - certainly the wittiest, and his characters were all great fun - as were his action and suspence scenes. Some of the ideas and the general plots of his films don't work, but you can't have everything.

Agree with your comparison between then and now 100%! There was certainly more fun to be had when Moore was Bond.

After seeing those mock-up posters, I definitely DON'T want a young Bond. He'll look more like a student off to his graduation ceremony than a MI6 agent in a tux.

Not the best pics of Cavill - probably the worst you COULD find. Even Brosnan smiling like a little girl would turn you off Bond! Terrible pics to choose.

The more i think about this rumour, the less sense it makes. Actually, it doesn't make sense on ANY level.

As if Brosnan would share a Bond film with Cavill.

As if Cavill would be Bond 20 yrs before - instead of being his own Bond, he'd be impersonating Brosnan.

As if they'd get Farmer Craig to be Le Chiffe.

It just doesn't make any sense. Why would they have Brosnan - why not just Cavill? It would just confuse everything. There would be no room for plot or action because it would cross the 20 yr barrier every 20 minutes (if anyone has seen the Doctor Who story 'The Trial of a Timelord', then they know what i mean).

Interesting idea - could work as a book, or a computer game - but not as a film.

[Loomis]

As if Cavill would be Bond 20 yrs before - instead of being his own Bond, he'd be impersonating Brosnan.

Another good point against this utterly bogus fan-created idea.

Why would they have Brosnan - why not just Cavill?

Well, because apparently no one would be interested in seeing a new Bond film without Brosnan. I don't subscribe to this notion myself, but it seems to be the current thinking.

[blueman]

Why not just have Connery do the old Bond part, or Dalton? Or, 3 generations of Bond, anyone?

[Pussfeller]

Yeah. Why have it be slightly terrible when it could be completely terrible?

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

I would love another movie with the feel of TMWTGG

Yes. Beautiful women, reasonably gentle and sophisticated wit, urbane villains, bizarre henchmen, real locations and stunts, lots of colour, terrific music....

Instead of:

Beautiful women who must every five minutes be shown to be Every Inch Bond's Equal™, belittling our hero and massacring people with machine guns; crass, loud humour that's usually aimed at thrusting some kind of politically correct point in the audience's face; ditchwater-boring villains and henchmen; locations mocked up in British studios; CGI-stuffed action scenes; a dull, grey colour palette; David Arnold's usual rubbish....

Bring back the Moore era and proper James Bond!

(Agreed about the ending of THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN. The film does wobble a little there. Still a masterpiece, though. )

All very well said sir....though I don't mind David Arnold that much...

[Gri007]

Um.... hello? Does anybody realize that this concept has NO FUTURE at all?
What's next after CR? Cavill can't continue playing Bond, because it would be set in the past and that is a) against tradition and they can't use product-placements.
We would have to REBOOT the series after just one movie. Genius.

I think it's all hoax. Actually, the Gary Coleman Dakota Fanning response was the best comeback for this ... um ... overly active imagination.

Well they can take Bond 22 in two directions.

Henry Cavil will star as Bond and having 4 or five films set twenty years ago defeting enemies between the Roger Moore/Dalton films

or___________

Having some one completly different to play Bond and have traditional Bond films, preferbly a few Gardner ones set in present day.

You can't have Henry Caville or Daniel Craig, cus it'l be madness and confusing, as they already starred in CR

[Alex Zamudio]

Agreed about the ending of THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN. The film does wobble a little there. Still a masterpiece, though.

No, No, No!! If you want Moore then TSWLM is the perfect model to draw upon, TMWTGG is terrible, one minute you have Moore in slapstick with Sherrif Pepper, another you have Moore torturing Maud Adams!! kind of silly...

[Triton]

This story seems too ridiculous to be credible.

Why not make a proper re-make of Casino Royale and make all MI6 agents named "James Bond 007", then they can hire Cavill, Craig, and Brosnan.

I can just see them resurrect the old ad copy now:

Casino Royale is just too big for one James Bond!

[K1Bond007]

Um.... hello? Does anybody realize that this concept has NO FUTURE at all?
What's next after CR? Cavill can't continue playing Bond, because it would be set in the past and that is a) against tradition and they can't use product-placements.
We would have to REBOOT the series after just one movie. Genius.

I think it's all hoax. Actually, the Gary Coleman Dakota Fanning response was the best comeback for this ... um ... overly active imagination.

I said this too, but I removed it from my post last night thinking perhaps I was being too extreme The James Bond films are hardly the best example for continuity (ex. Blofeld - YOLT, OHMSS). I don't know. It could work, but IMO, this would kind of turn out to be another OHMSS except.. like worse as far as continuum goes.

I'd like to see it, but at the same time I don't. I really don't know what to think. This would work as a one-off, but inevitably Bond-22 will suffer because of it - similar to Diamonds Are Forever.

[Moore Not Less]

Don't see Brosnan fancying the Old Bond to anyone's New Bond, either.

Good point. Can't see that happening at all. An open invitation for critics to write things like: "Cavill is so good as the younger Bond that you wish the filmmakers had had the courage to give him the entire film; Brosnan looks past-it and dull by comparison".

Personally, I don't like the idea of two different actors portraying Bond in the same film. If Eon insist on setting Casino Royale in two seperate time periods then I would prefer them to hire a suitable actor aged between 35-40 who would look like a credible 28 year old (with a little make up if necessary).

I agree that Pierce Brosnan would not fancy the old Bond to anyone's new young Bond. Yes indeed, he would not fancy the possibility of being upstaged or overshadowed by "some young upstart" like Henry Cavill.

[Spoon]

How could it "work" to have Vesper Lynd come back from the dead?? THAT RUINS THE ENTIRE BOOK!!! Why don't we make a Romeo and Juliet where they faked their suicides and meet up 20 years later?? It'd make just as much sense. The entire freakin' point of the whole thing is that Bond loses Vesper permanently and learns a tragic, permanent lesson about the nature of the spy game and the danger of "getting too close."

The idea is beyond ridiculous. Thankfully, there seems to be absolutely no reason to believe it will in fact happen.

Edited by Spoon, 25 September 2005 - 10:00 PM.

[ACE]

If true, this sounds wonderful.

To paraphrase the two great thinkers of Western thought, Daryl Hall & John Oates:

"I CAN go for that, can go for that, can go for that...Oooh!"

ACE

Edited by ACE, 25 September 2005 - 11:12 PM.

[Gobi-1]

I would be very happy if this is how the film turned out. It gives us the best of both worlds. The first half would be a faithful adaption of Casino Royale with the line "The bitch is dead!" being a transition to the modern era and Brosnan. It worked very well in GoldenEye and it can work again.

Maybe the film could open with a Brosnan pre-credits teaser and then Bond can recall the past and we'll get an extended flash back of the main Casino Royale story. Where the novel ends the modern part of the story picks up as Bond finishes what he started all those years before.

I'm really liken this idea because it means we can have a cold war setting once again. Then like the Nazis who escaped into South America after WWII Le Chiffre will escape the Cold War and hide in secret until he rears his head again.

Plus if the audience's respond to Cavill he can carry on the Bond mantel in Bond 22 an onward.

[Jack Bauer]

Oh, I've been saying Sienna Miller for *years*!