165 replies to this topic

[Qwerty]

So if you still not get over with it about Owen who doesn't want to be Bond, then go ahead and have homo-sexual relationship with him.

Kovit, what exactly is the deal with that? People who are fans of Clive Owen for Bond instantly want to have a homosexual relationship with him?

[RevolveR]

It's all about Jackman. Owen isn't suave at all.

[Qwerty]

It's all about Jackman. Owen isn't suave at all.

He could be, he just has not had as many chances as Jackman to do so.

[RevolveR]

It's all about Jackman.  Owen isn't suave at all.

He could be, he just has not had as many chances as Jackman to do so.

I can accept that. But Jackman is proven in that regard. I favor his overall appearance over Owen.

[Qwerty]

[quote name='RevolveR' date='5 August 2004 - 23:33'] [quote name='Qwerty' date='6 August 2004 - 03:30'] [quote name='RevolveR' date='5 August 2004 - 23:28'] It's all about Jackman.

[Bond_Bishop]

Hugh Jackman.

[Agent 76]

Clive Owen always!

[The Next Bond]

Clive Owen.

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

I liked Clive Owen in the Bourne Identity, but I can't see him as Bond. I'm sure that given the chance he'd be a talented actor but he just doesn't look the part. To be blunt, he just doesn't look like the kind of man women would fall for. Clive Owen just looks like someone you'd grab coming out a London pub to me so my vote goes to Jackman.

[00-FAN008]

[quote name='kovit123' date='6 August 2004 - 03:25'] 00-FAN008, let me tell you the facts, you never get over that Owen doesn't interest to play Bond, also I pick Eric Bana as the second choice to play Bond below Hugh Jackman, but I accept that Bana doesn't want to play Bond as well. Owen and Bana both said it was all the rumors. Another thing is Van Helsing does not suck, it was the no.1 movie box office when Val Helsing opens in its first week. But King Arthur was really the piece of trash, because King Arthur sucks and also it was the no.3 box office when it was open behind Spider-Man 2 which the King Arthur can't beat and they can't beat I, Robot either. So if you still not get over with it about Owen who doesn't want to be Bond, then go ahead and have homo-sexual relationship with him.

Thumbs down on Clive Owen as Bond.

Edited by 00-FAN008, 06 August 2004 - 07:45 PM.

[Qwerty]

Please stop the bickering, it's better to ignore an inappropriate comment like that

[00-FAN008]

Please stop the bickering, it's better to ignore an inappropriate comment like that

Sorry, Qwerty. That just makes me so mad. Myself and some others have been victim to his insults too many times, and I think the appropriate thing to do is disband him from these forums.

[Qwerty]

Point taken 00-Fan008. Be better and don't reply with insults.

As they aren't needed.

[Athena007]

HEY! What's going on in here! I don't care if you're gay or a nazi
(keep the personal attacks off of CBn)

Back on topic guys Serriously.

[Qwerty]

(keep the personal attacks off of CBn)

Quite so, as Athena said.

So if you still not get over with it about Owen who doesn't want to be Bond, then go ahead and have homo-sexual relationship with him.

You've said this before, it's getting old.

[B5Erik]

OK, a lot of you know that Timothy Dalton is my favorite Bond. Owen comes across a lot like Dalton did (only not nearly in Dalton's league as a trained actor), and he could definitely bring that edge back to Bond.

I want Jackman as the next Bond.

Jackman is a MUCH better actor with a MUCH greater range. He can be hard and edgy like Dalton (OK, Dalton-lite), and he can be funny like Roger Moore (well, almost as funny), and he also has a certain Connery-esque style that I can see working extremely well in the role. He's the perfect guy for EON since he can go in any direction that they want to take the character in the future.

Having said that, who knows if they can or will sign him to a 3 or 4 film contract? I sure don't.

So I hope that Jackman gets the role, but I'll give the next guy a fair chance regardless of who it is (well, with a few exceptions).

[Qwerty]

Jackman is a MUCH better actor with a MUCH greater range. He can be hard and edgy like Dalton (OK, Dalton-lite), and he can be funny like Roger Moore (well, almost as funny), and he also has a certain Connery-esque style that I can see working extremely well in the role. He's the perfect guy for EON since he can go in any direction that they want to take the character in the future.

The only problem with that may be that Pierce Brosnan was also a bit of a little bit of many of the past Bonds and alot of people disliked in that he then didn't stand out in any way.

Could work for Jackman, but this also could go against him. We'll see.

[bryonalston]

This is a tough one. Each one would bring something different to the role:

CLIVE OWEN seems like he would be much more of a Dalton-esque Bond. He has that dark, brooding quality that Dalton had in LTK. Unfortunately, we all know how that turned out financially. I don't think that EoN will want him, for fear of making the same mistake twice, even though Dalton was one of the better Bond choices. Also, Owen looks the part, but his nose is a little...imposing.

HUGH JACKMAN seems to be the perfect choice...a little too perfect. He has the look, the acting experience, the action credibiltity, and is a perfectly well rounded actor. It's hard to find reasons why he shouldn't be Bond #6, or at least pick one. He seems like he'd try and imitate Brosnan, just as Lazenby tried to imitate Connery. Jackman might be able to pull it off for the general public, but us Bond fans will see through the screen. I can only see what direction the films will take--more CGI, more implausible action, and more atrocious scripts by Purvis and Wade. I think that Both of the actors should do a screen test, instead of basing the choice on their work in other fims.

If I had to choose the actor who I think would make a better movie, I'd have to go with CLIVE OWEN. If I had to choose the actor who I think would make a more successful film, I would have to go with HUGH JACKMAN.

[Qwerty]

HUGH JACKMAN seems to be the perfect choice...a little too perfect. He has the look, the acting experience, the action credibiltity, and is a perfectly well rounded actor. It's hard to find reasons why he shouldn't be Bond #6, or at least pick one. He seems like he'd try and imitate Brosnan

That may be the biggest fault with him, in that he'd be too alike a past Bond. They just need to make sure that wouldn't happen if he gets the role. I hope he does.

[Daltonfan]

As far as I can tell, Clive Owen plays the same character in all his films. He does it well and it seems a good match with Bond. It's easy to imagine him in the role and the style is pretty much defined from the moment he's cast.

Hugh Jackman is more of a chameleon. If you see him in X-Men, then in Oklahoma! it's hard to believe he's the same actor. If he's cast, he'll work with the director/production team to develop his version of Bond. Hopefully, it wouldn't be an imitation of past Bonds, but with a character that has been played by five actors over forty years it will be a challenge to come up with something different (and that's true for whoever takes over the role). As someone has already said, he's capable of going in whatever direction they want.

Out of the two, Jackman has almost everything in his favour:
- better actor
- better looking
- has said he'd like to play Bond
- greater box office appeal
- better at PR

In Owen's favour I can think of:
- British
- cheaper
- the BMW ads make it easier to picture him in the role
- less visibility in other roles

I think neither is likely to get the part. Owen doesn't want it and Jackman will have better offers.

[BONDFINESSE 007]

well if i have to choose between these two then i guess its jackman because owen is to ugly to be james bond


but then again i dont want jackman







GOD BLESS THE GREAT PIERCE BROSNAN...BECAUSE IF THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE TO LOOK FORWARD TO THEN THE MOVIE SERIES WONT LAST MUCH LONGER


BROSNAN WAS THE LAST GREAT BOND...THERE WONT BE ANYMORE

[Qwerty]

I disagree with that Finesse. How do you know unless you see it for sure? Jackman or Owen could be good Bonds.

[Agent 76]

I disagree with that Finesse. How do you know unless you see it for sure? Jackman or Owen could be good Bonds.

Either one could be a good James Bond , but if I were to choose I would pick Owen and not Jackman , because IMHO Hugh Jackman resembles Brosnan in the looks and his interpretation of Bond would be similar and I don't want that , I want a rough , ruthless Connery Bond type.

[BONDFINESSE 007]

I disagree with that Finesse. How do you know unless you see it for sure? Jackman or Owen could be good Bonds.

Either one could be a good James Bond , but if I were to choose I would pick Owen and not Jackman , because IMHO Hugh Jackman resembles Brosnan in the looks and his interpretation of Bond would be similar and I don't want that , I want a rough , ruthless Connery Bond type.

well thats the rub huh? you dont want that but i do....some want a moore type while others want a lazenby type so what shall we do? no matter what way they go someone going to be unhappy

[Agent 76]

I disagree with that Finesse. How do you know unless you see it for sure? Jackman or Owen could be good Bonds.

Either one could be a good James Bond , but if I were to choose I would pick Owen and not Jackman , because IMHO Hugh Jackman resembles Brosnan in the looks and his interpretation of Bond would be similar and I don't want that , I want a rough , ruthless Connery Bond type.

well thats the rub huh? you dont want that but i do....some want a moore type while others want a lazenby type so what shall we do? no matter what way they go someone going to be unhappy

yes........ well it's life.

[Jim]

no matter what way they go someone going to be unhappy

Whilst this is true, are you not going to give Bond 21 a go if Pierce Brosnan isn't in it?

[Simon]

no matter what way they go someone going to be unhappy

Whilst this is true, are you not going to give Bond 21 a go if Pierce Brosnan isn't in it?

Giving rise to the question, are you a Bond fan or Brosnan fan. Or a Bond fan because Brosnan is in it?

[Loomis]

In defence of Finesse, I don't know whether I'll give BOND 21 a go if Clive Owen isn't in it. He's the only possible replacement for Brosnan as far as I'm concerned.

Who am I kidding? Of course I'll see the film, regardless of who plays 007 (although asking us faithful fans to accept a Bond actor who rejoices in the name Rikki Lee Travolta would arguably be asking a bit much). But I'd only feel truly excited with Owen in the lead.

Perhaps I'm no longer a Bond fan, then. Maybe Bond has turned out to be the path leading me to Owen fandom. Except I'm not an Owen fan - I want to see him as Bond, certainly, but I'm not interested in seeing him in other roles. You can keep your KING ARTHUR and all the rest of it.

[Seannery]

There are simply a fair amount of good candidates beyond Jackman and Owen. I don't even see that they would be the two most likely to be the next Bond. They maybe the obvious choices to many here but not necessarily the best or most probable. Saying that I rank Jackman much higher than Owen.

[Agent 76]

Mr Jackman seems to have his schedulle full for the next couple of years...

Remember the opening of Friends? How they're all splish-splashing in a fountain? Now picture Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weisz splashing around in a Fountain. OK, that was a weak lead-in to the latest news from The Hollywood Reporter, which is that Weisz has signed on to co-star with Jackman in Darren Aronofsky's long-in-development sci-fi flick The Fountain. Originally, Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett were to star, but the project was killed (even the sets were sold off). The plot is being kept mostly secret, but it reportedly deals with a man traveling and living in three different time periods. Filming, from a script by Aronofsky and Ari Handel, is expected to begin in November.

source: http://movies.go.com