38 replies to this topic

[Sir James Molony]

I just saw X-Men:First Class today. Great movie, very stylish, well-made and well-told. It's hard not to see Michael Fassbender as a 1960s-era James Bond in the first half of the movie. Don't get me wrong, I have enjoyed Daniel Craig (esp. CR), but would love a return to the more stylish (early) Connery-era Bond.

Plus, Michael Vaughn (the director) also directed Layer Cake, which starred a pre-Bond Daniel Craig. I saw Layer Cake before the Craig announcement and thought "you know, he might make a good Bond."

Once you see X-Men:FC, you'll know what I mean.

[Cody]

I'd welcome either or both Vaughn and Fassbender to Bond at some point, but I'm hoping Craig will still be around for 24.

[Binyamin]

I have a hunch that Craig will be bored with Bond after 23. He doesn't need the money anymore, his Bond legacy is quite secure, and he seems interested in exploring more creative acting roles. We'll see.

[sharpshooter]

I have a hunch that Craig will be bored with Bond after 23. He doesn't need the money anymore, his Bond legacy is quite secure, and he seems interested in exploring more creative acting roles. We'll see.

Hmm. If so, with Martin Campbell ushering in another new Bond, thus completing his unique 'trilogy'.

I think Craig will be around for a while yet, though.

[TQB]

I have a hunch that Craig will be bored with Bond after 23. He doesn't need the money anymore, his Bond legacy is quite secure, and he seems interested in exploring more creative acting roles. We'll see.

agreed

[jamie00007]

Well he signed a contract for three more films (counting Bond 23) according to the CEO of MGM, so being bored or not might not have anything to do with it.

[jaguar007]

I have a hunch that Craig will be bored with Bond after 23. He doesn't need the money anymore, his Bond legacy is quite secure, and he seems interested in exploring more creative acting roles. We'll see.

I don't agree. Unlike some of his predecessors, he does not seem to be pigeonholed into specific types of roles while playing Bond and from interviews he states that he really wants to continue for some time.

[Binyamin]

Well he signed a contract for three more films (counting Bond 23) according to the CEO of MGM, so being bored or not might not have anything to do with it.

I'm not sure if this is true. There was a report that came out about this, but then it (I believe) proved to be un-official. Craig has the OPTION of more films beyond 23 but is not locked in. That's my understanding.

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

I'm looking forward to more Craig movies for now. I think it's highly likely he'll do Bond 24, Eon like him and playing Bond hasn't disadvantaged him at all as far as I can tell.

[jamie00007]

I'm not sure if this is true. There was a report that came out about this, but then it (I believe) proved to be un-official. Craig has the OPTION of more films beyond 23 but is not locked in. That's my understanding.

Well he is certainly signed on for five films, which was negotiated after CR, thats straight from the MGM head honcho in an interview he gave which makes it pretty official. What the specifics are and how firmly it ties it to him I dont know.

I dont know why people are always talking about Craig like he wants to leave, he's never given any indication that he'd want to leave (just the opposite, saying he wanted to stay on until his knees gave out. Plus it makes him the highest paid actor in Britain.

I just saw X-Men and was totally blown away, and I dont think I've ever seen an actor more born to play Bond than Fassbender. It was like he could have stepped out of Fleming's novels. Him becoming Bond is I think about the only thing that would placate me if Craig left.

[Garth007]

I'm not sure if this is true. There was a report that came out about this, but then it (I believe) proved to be un-official. Craig has the OPTION of more films beyond 23 but is not locked in. That's my understanding.

Well he is certainly signed on for five films, which was negotiated after CR, thats straight from the MGM head honcho in an interview he gave which makes it pretty official. What the specifics are and how firmly it ties it to him I dont know.

I dont know why people are always talking about Craig like he wants to leave, he's never given any indication that he'd want to leave (just the opposite, saying he wanted to stay on until his knees gave out. Plus it makes him the highest paid actor in Britain.

I just saw X-Men and was totally blown away, and I dont think I've ever seen an actor more born to play Bond than Fassbender. It was like he could have stepped out of Fleming's novels. Him becoming Bond is I think about the only thing that would placate me if Craig left.

I haven't seen Fassbender act yet because i haven't seen the x men movie yet, but i totally agree with what u say along the lines of craig. He hasn't given any indications that he wants to leave but it seems alot of people on this site are acting like he is. He has been signed on for 5 films not 3 i think people need to start reading info on his contract be for saying he leaving on his 3rd. also who started or were did this info of him leaving on his 3rd outing come from?????

[Dekard77]

Craig is very secretive or dismissive at times. Especially when he signed on at first. Good fit for Bond but I get the feeling his ego is getting bigger by the year especially since he's in demand.

[Dustin]

Well, there is certainly no indication Craig would like to set sail to distant shores as yet. That said I doubt anyone here does have a copy of Craig's actual contract handy. Previous info tends to indicate to a traditional three film contract and an option on two more. If you prefer it this way you probably might say he's signed for five. And I can surely understand why MGM prefers this reading. Craig is most valuable and they'd have to be quite crazy to give any indication of wanting someone else. Also it's never mentioned who can take or leave that option at what point. For all we know MGM could indeed already have pulled out their chequebook and nailed a deal, who's to say they would not want to?

[jamie00007]

The only information I take without salt is the information given by the head of MGM, who in 2007 gave an interview and stated that Craig's contract was renegotiated from a three film deal to a five film deal. Usually, if its like any other actors contracts, it ties the actor to doing the films unless they dont want to be sued. We've seen it many times where an actor has had to do movies out of contractual obligation even if they didnt want to, as well as actors being paid out by a studio when its reneged on its side of the deal. I dont know why Craig's contract would be much different.

[univex]

I just saw X-Men:First Class today. Great movie, very stylish, well-made and well-told. It's hard not to see Michael Fassbender as a 1960s-era James Bond in the first half of the movie. Don't get me wrong, I have enjoyed Daniel Craig (esp. CR), but would love a return to the more stylish (early) Connery-era Bond.

Plus, Michael Vaughn (the director) also directed Layer Cake, which starred a pre-Bond Daniel Craig. I saw Layer Cake before the Craig announcement and thought "you know, he might make a good Bond."

Once you see X-Men:FC, you'll know what I mean.

Yeah, I know what you mean. Still, Craig is Bond, and I´m fine with that. Eon should make a period piece with Fassbender, Emily Blunt and Christoph Waltz...and Albert Finney as M. Oh well, a fan can dream...

[Captain Tightpants]

I think Vaughn and Fassbender together would be a bit of a mistake. Don't get me wrong - FIRST CLASS was great. But I think teaming them up again simply because of some recent success would be a bit hollow. If Fassbender picked up the mantle of Bond, then I'd welcome Vaughn as his director once Fassbender has a film or three under his belt.

I'd actually be very interested to see Michael Fassbender in a Bond film directed by a) David Fincher, Danny Boyle and/or c) Christopher Nolan before Matthew Vaughn.

[Sir James Molony]

I think Vaughn and Fassbender together would be a bit of a mistake. Don't get me wrong - FIRST CLASS was great. But I think teaming them up again simply because of some recent success would be a bit hollow. If Fassbender picked up the mantle of Bond, then I'd welcome Vaughn as his director once Fassbender has a film or three under his belt.

I'd actually be very interested to see Michael Fassbender in a Bond film directed by a) David Fincher, Danny Boyle and/or c) Christopher Nolan before Matthew Vaughn.

Nolan has said he wanted to do a Bond film, but he's probably too expensive now.

[Captain Tightpants]

Yeah, I know Nolan wants in - but does he really need the money? I mean, he can do pretty much whatever project he wants once THE DARK KNIGHT RISES wraps up. Even if he wanted to go back to making indie films like MEMENTO, he could do it. If he really wanted to do a Bond film, his price wouldn't really be an issue. And it's not like EON are struggling to put a budget together ...

[dinovelvet]

Nolan has said he wanted to do a Bond film, but he's probably too expensive now.

Well it's not like Sam Mendes is cheap. I mean, if Nolan really wants to do a Bond movie and EON really want to hire him, I don't think either of them will let money get in the way of it happening.

[brunoman]

It would be cool to have Matthew Vaughn to direct a Bond movie, but I don't think he be a good fit for EON given that Vaughn is outspoken and brutally honest when it comes to directing his films and he doesn't want any interference from anyone of how he should direct his movie including Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson.

Edited by brunoman, 16 July 2011 - 07:18 AM.

[Germanlady]

It would be cool to have Matthew Vaughn to direct a Bond movie, but I don't think he be a good fit for EON given that Vaughn is outspoken and brutally honest when it comes to directing his films and he doesn't want any interference from anyone of how he should direct his movie including Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson.

Well unfortun ately Mark Forster was given pretty much free raine with QOS. Even MGW admitted, he didn't like the way it was cut - there is such thing as too little interference IMO.

[TheREAL008]

Forgive me, but there's too much hype about Fassbender becoming James Bond. Having seen first class he would make a convincing actor; but once Daniel retires I think we'll all need to be more open minded to other possibilities.

Michael is a good actor, but I don't personally believe he'd make a great Bond like everyone else is preaching.

[SecretAgentFan]

Forgive me, but there's too much hype about Fassbender becoming James Bond. Having seen first class he would make a convincing actor; but once Daniel retires I think we'll all need to be more open minded to other possibilities.

Michael is a good actor, but I don't personally believe he'd make a great Bond like everyone else is preaching.

I agree. He´ll join Clive Owen as one of those who could have been.

[Odd Jobbies]

They be an excellent Bond team.

However, i believe and hope that Craig has at least a few more in him. I think we've only scratched the surface of what he can bring to the table.

[Donovan Mayne-Nicholls]

Why would anybody in their right minds would think of changing Craig after only three movies? I have a better idea, since everybody here talks about their excellent ideas to change Bond, let's change his name, nationality, ethnicity, sex, profession, etc.

[Dustin]

Well, after Craig it's not beyond Eon to cast somebody who has never been considered for the role, I should think. It's somewhat understandable that fans see possible Bonds in every other film. But I doubt Eon has the same habit, and if they do they probably see these candidates in a very different class of films we do. I really think all that buzz around certain people is more of a hurdle than a recommendation.

[coco1997]

Why would anybody in their right minds would think of changing Craig after only three movies? I have a better idea, since everybody here talks about their excellent ideas to change Bond, let's change his name, nationality, ethnicity, sex, profession, etc.

I think this is based more on the presumption that Craig will likely not return for a fourth film. I'm not sure he has ever indicated an inclination to leave the franchise any time soon (in fact, some quotes seem to indicate quite the opposite), but apparently many fans just get the "feeling" he will.

[univex]

Why would anybody in their right minds would think of changing Craig after only three movies? I have a better idea, since everybody here talks about their excellent ideas to change Bond, let's change his name, nationality, ethnicity, sex, profession, etc.

I think this is based more on the presumption that Craig will likely not return for a fourth film. I'm not sure he has ever indicated an inclination to leave the franchise any time soon (in fact, some quotes seem to indicate quite the opposite), but apparently many fans just get the "feeling" he will.

I suppose that lies with how Bond23 pans out for him. A good experience and a good result may wind the clock a bit more.

[Dustin]

Craig seems to be the one actor in the role who definitely doesn't need it for his career. The only thing one safely can say is that Craig will leave once he feels it's not fun anymore. That could take a long time. That said I doubt Craig will ever come remotely close to his sell-by date. I'm confident he won't stick a minute longer than he feels welcome and just move on, once that day has come.

How long exactly Craig will be our Bond is everybody's guess. It probably depends how fast Bond 24 can pick up momentum, but I think the plan to get it on screen two years after Bond 23 is mostly wishful thinking - or BS, depending on how one's personal view of the concerned parties happens to be - three years probably being more realistic. This is a long time, an eternity in the business, and many things can happen in between.

A Bond 25 - yet another two to three years after Bond 24 - with Craig in the part seems somewhat unlikely to me.

[univex]

I have to be honest, I really don´t give a damn . Craig is perfect for the role, we have a new film coming out, ..., and that´s all I really care to wonder - how Bond23 will set itself in the Bond cannon. But hey, that´s just me, I´m a "now" kind of guy. Honestly, if Bond23 is , I won´t care about this era anymore. Sure I´ll follow it, Bond is Bond, but just not with the same enthusiasm. I remember feeling the same shortly after TWINE

TLD, GE, CR, ..., all were breaths of fresh air and then...asphyxia , it´s how they play the game down there at EON and I´ve made peace with that - of course they´re free to change that evil curse whenever they want (Bond23 hopefully)

Craig seems to be the one actor in the role who definitely doesn't need it for his career.

Agreed at some point, although I really don´t think Dalton needed it, he simply should have kept it in the theatre and in films like The Lion in Winter. Connery needed it, of course, in the beginning, Roger...yeah sure, Lazenby...he still needs it, and Brosnan...don´t neeed to elaborate on that one (Mamma mia kind of choices would have left him in TV series - William Shatner anyone?.

Edited by univex, 16 July 2011 - 06:15 PM.