207 replies to this topic

[Loomis]

Another day, another rumoured replacement for Brosnan. Personally, I think Bana would be an appalling choice for Bond - really and truly, I'd rather see Bloom in the role. Heck, if they're so desperate for an Aussie actor, they might as well get Paul Hogan as Bana, IMO. Isn't AICN supposed to be ultra-reliable, though? *Shudder*

http://www.aint-it-c...ay.cgi?id=18051

[WhiteKnight2000]

We get all these names put about. But how many of them would want to do it? Not many.

They are all up and coming stars. Brosnan had been a star and Bond helped him get back up there.

They should look to TV actors. Most current film stars are likely to say ciao to Bond.

Edited by WhiteKnight2000, 28 July 2004 - 10:16 AM.

[mattbowyer]

If I'm going to believe anybody, I'll believe these guys.

Trouble with this is that it is going to be very hard for any Australian to watch him and not think of Poiter.

[Loomis]

If I'm going to believe anybody, I'll believe these guys.

Yeah, I think AICN tends to wait until it has very reliable insider info before publishing news (as does CBn).

I believe this is Harry Knowles and co.'s very first report on the "Brosnan in or out?" BOND 21 rumours that have been doing the rounds since February.

Still, I think Bana's utterly wrong for Bond (not because he's Australian, but because he just doesn't - IMO at least - look the part), and I find it hard to believe he's landed the gig.

Even though this is being reported by AICN, it seems like just another rumour. It appears we're getting a new one every single day. Yesterday's big news was that Brosnan is out. The day before yesterday, we learned that Orlando Bloom will play Young James Bond. Today, Bana is the new 007. I expect tomorrow will bring a report from some newspaper or website that Guy Pearce has been cast.

[[dark]]

Is this Moriaty chap reliable?

I can't look at Bana without seeing Poiter. Or any of his Full Frontal characters, either. And Bana has the sophistication of a wet blanket.

[Loomis]

,28 July 2004 - 13:06] Is this Moriaty chap reliable?

I don't know. But like I say, I think AICN tends to wait until it has very reliable insider info (or thinks it has very reliable insider info) before publishing news. Of course, if you check the site's archive you'll soon see plenty of reports that subsequently turned out to be false.

But this is the first time that AICN has reacted in any way to the "Brosnan out?" stories and BOND 21 rumours that have been infesting the media for nearly six months, and I find that pretty telling. I don't believe that Bana is the next James Bond - let's face it, he'd be a rubbish choice - but I believe that Moriarty believes it.

At any rate, this seems to be further evidence that Brosnan is out.

[[dark]]

Most interesting.

I can't see Bana being a real candidate, but it fits with what Michael Madsen said earlier, for what it's worth.

Perhaps Danny Kleinman could incorporate the Hulk into his title sequence?

[Qwerty]

I hope these rumors are not going to be the thing now everyday now that Pierce Brosnan seems to have stepped aside. Really don't think Bana is a fine Bond candidate, as truthful or reliable as this rumor may be.

Don't believe he's the next Bond, but yet another name.

[Mister Asterix]

[hrabb04]

Eric Bana? C'mon, folks, I'd rather see Michael Keaton play James Bond than Eric Bana!

[mattbowyer]

Ladies and Gentlemen I present the next James Bond...

[Mister Asterix]

Interesting that his IMDb profile mentions that he hates guns.

[mattbowyer]

Albert R. Broccoli's Eon Productions Presents

POITER

as Ian Fleming's James Bond 007

[luciusgore]

Well, the next Bond film will bomb, then they'll pay big bucks to get Brosnan back for one more. Maybe then they'll be forced to take Tarantino up on his offer to direct. Obviously the producers don't know what the they're dong. It's likely the only reason the first Brosnan Bond was any good is that Jon Calley, then head of MGM, played a role in the making of it. Brosnan should go make a Bond movie with Kevin McClory.

[hrabb04]

I smell another Connery going on!

[Loomis]

It's likely the only reason the first Brosnan Bond was any good is that Jon Calley, then head of MGM, played a role in the making of it.

Albert R. Broccoli played a role in the making of it, too.

I sometimes wonder whether it was a mistake to try and carry on after "Cubby"'s death. The post-Cubby Bond films have all lacked a certain je ne sais quoi.

Might it be the case that Cubby was the true auteur of the cinematic 007, and that his vision is impossible to replicate, just as Fleming's vision is impossible to replicate?

[Qwerty]

Albert R. Broccoli's Eon Productions Presents

POITER

as Ian Fleming's James Bond 007

No thanks.

[Seannery]

PLEASE FOR GOD'S SAKE NOT BANA!!!


He has no suave or charm. He is a good actor but totally miscast as Bond. He comes across as an ordinary joe with no spark. Not anything like an international man of mystery. His personality is too plain vanilla for Bond. And he looks like a taller pumped up version of Corey Feldman for god's sake!! He just does not have the dash that all the other Bond actors have had!


DON'T DO IT EON!!!

[EBC007]

OOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHH GOD NO! Bana?!?!?!?!? He looks like one of those geeky guys in High School that got his kicked on a daily basis. Totally unbelieveable as James Bond. Didn't anyone see Hulk??? James Bond is the guy every girl wants to shag and the man every guy wants to be!!! Eric Bana....fits neither of those descriptions!!!

Edited by EBC007, 28 July 2004 - 05:18 PM.

[Bryan Harris]

This may be excessive parsing, but I took note of the way Drew phrased his rumor: "the guy who MGM has already tapped to replace Brosnan" (emphasis mine).

Wouldn't it be interesting if (not for the first time) MGM had one choice for the role and EON had another? Considering how little we know, many questions arise out of this tidbit, if true:

-Is EON really in a position to object if MGM says, a la Mulholland Drive, "This is the guy"?

-Was the friction that resulted in Brosnan's departure with the studio or with EON?

-Did MGM want someone else after DAD, and did EON insist on trying to nail Brosnan down, and thus wear out MGM's patience?

-For that matter, had Brosnan poisoned the well with EON but not with MGM, and did MGM try to hold onto him but eventually give up?

-Do I have any hobbies that don't involve excruciating examination of deliberately vague press reports, and if so, why don't I go spend some time with one of those?

Fascinating enigmas abound...

[Loomis]

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that Bana would be an absolutely horrible choice for Bond, just about the worst of the "candidates" whose names are often bandied about.

I can see Bond potential in pretty much all of them: Bale, Brosnan, Butler, Grant, Jackman, Owen, Purefoy.... heck, even the controversial likes of Bloom and Paul. But Bana's just a dead loss as a Bond candidate. He'd be very slightly better than Robbie Williams, but that's all he's got going for him, IMO.

If they're going to go with Bana, then I'd really and honestly prefer them not to bother. I'd rather have no more Bond films at all than Bana as 007.

[EBC007]

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that Bana would be an absolutely horrible choice for Bond, just about the worst of the "candidates" whose names are often bandied about.

I can see Bond potential in pretty much all of them: Bale, Brosnan, Butler, Grant, Jackman, Owen, Purefoy.... heck, even the controversial likes of Bloom and Paul. But Bana's just a dead loss as a Bond candidate. He'd be very slightly better than Robbie Williams, but that's all he's got going for him, IMO.

If they're going to go with Bana, then I'd really and honestly prefer them not to bother. I'd rather have no more Bond films at all than Bana as 007.

Agreed! If that happened (Bana) I would all together stop going to see James Bond flicks....

[hoodman22]

geez, you guys are harsh, i'd say he's better jackman, and he was a lot better than either bloom or pitt in Troy. but, well he just doesn't fit in my mind, maybe he'll prove me wrong though, but clive owen is still the perfect choice at the moment.

[EBC007]

geez, you guys are harsh, i'd say he's better jackman, and he was a lot better than either bloom or pitt in Troy. but, well he just doesn't fit in my mind, maybe he'll prove me wrong though, but clive owen is still the perfect choice at the moment.

Better in TROY??? His acting was wooden and he walked around like he had a broomstick up his . Jackman has presence. Clive Owen is too old.

[Alex Zamudio]

Better in TROY??? His acting was wooden and he walked around like he had a broomstick up his .EBC007

Man I'm having a lot of fun with all this!! I wanted Brosnan to stay, but now I think all this speculation and rumours are more entertaining that the same old thing for Bond 21!

Bana?? this could only be a rumour, AICN sometimes do post inaccurate info, they said Star Wars Episode III was going to be called "The Creeping Fear"!!! this news was on their front page for weeks!!! so take this with a grain of salt...

Bana? well maybe the Bond producers know or see something we don't!

Regards.

[SeanValen00V]

I'm a big Tim Dalton fan, but I must say after watching Roger Moore, I found early viewing of Dalton when I first saw him as Bond, just as weird, didn't mean I didn't like him, but I had to get used to his approach, then he was brilliant.


Bana maybe the same, how can you lot really be so sure until after he's done it, thats what I say, if is the next Bond.


Michael Madsen maybe right, months ago he said "there looking for this unknown australian actor." well Hulk made him known, but not much above that.

[Qwerty]

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that Bana would be an absolutely horrible choice for Bond, just about the worst of the "candidates" whose names are often bandied about.

If they're going to go with Bana, then I'd really and honestly prefer them not to bother. I'd rather have no more Bond films at all than Bana as 007.

There really aren't any good things I, and you also obviously, can say about him for getting the role of James Bond. Tired, bland, overdone, and just plain boring. At, or very near the bottom of the list.

[SeanValen00V]

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that Bana would be an absolutely horrible choice for Bond, just about the worst of the "candidates" whose names are often bandied about.

I can see Bond potential in pretty much all of them: Bale, Brosnan, Butler, Grant, Jackman, Owen, Purefoy.... heck, even the controversial likes of Bloom and Paul. But Bana's just a dead loss as a Bond candidate. He'd be very slightly better than Robbie Williams, but that's all he's got going for him, IMO.

If they're going to go with Bana, then I'd really and honestly prefer them not to bother. I'd rather have no more Bond films at all than Bana as 007.

Hugh Grant potential as Bond!! thats a joke, Grant is too smugish in a wrong way, you want to laugh at him, rather then respect him etc, he's no Bond.

[Qwerty]

Michael Madsen maybe right, months ago he said "there looking for this unknown australian actor." well Hulk made him known, but not much above that.

That would be such a shame though, sure not to please all Bond fans. Even so though, we'll see how Madsen's word holds up lately.

[Loomis]

Grant is too smugish in a wrong way, you want to laugh at him, rather then respect him etc, he's no Bond.

And how exactly does that make him different to Roger Moore?