268 replies to this topic

[Loomis]

I was told in March that he's "not in the running." That's all I know. Could something have changed? Maybe, but I doubt it.

With respect, is it possible that you're not being told everything by your source(s)? Or that The Powers That Be aren't telling your source(s) everything? Or that TPTB are feeding your source(s) disinformation? Humour me (because I know he seems a hugely unlikely candidate because of his, erm, unconventional good looks), but if Craig had actually landed the role or was close to landing it, isn't it even more likely that TBTB would want it to be kept quiet? Remember when The Sun announced Craig? What if - and keep humouring me, since this is The Sun we're talking about - that paper had actually got it right? If so, Craig's subsequent denials start to make an awful lot of sense - TPTB obviously moved swiftly to put their new Bond back into the box until the official announcement. But Craig's recent comments don't sound like denials at all - quite the reverse. This isn't Clive Owen scratching his chin on a TV chatshow, or grinning on a red carpet while telling the world he's going to be very busy. Seems to me that Craig couldn't be hinting more heavily at Bond if he tried. Maybe he now feels free to make such hints because the official announcement is just weeks away (Brosnan was announced in June, I believe).

Sounds like Craig has some sort of relationship with Babs so they have had a "talk." The talk could have been nothing more than Craig saying over dinner, 'What about me?" and Babs politely saying, "Hmmm, I'll run it past the group." Craig saying publicly that he might not take the role if offered is his polite way of giving Babs an out.

To quote LETHAL WEAPON: sounds a bit thin.... anorexic.

But as you say, zen, who knows what to believe? I'm still half-convinced that Judi Dench knew what she was talking about when she said Brosnan would be returning.

[zencat]

Good points Loomy. I'd say anything is possible.

[Turn]

Is it me or does it seem like half the people who act professionally are friends with Barbara Broccoli? Her name seems to appear linked to more people than any producer this side of Jerry Bruckheimer.

Could it be that she, like Cubby, has here eyes constantly on people who could be potential Bonds and maybe she chatted him up about it in the past and that's where it stems from, such as Zencat suggested?

[doublenoughtspy]

That's a good point, Turn. I know when she attended a play with Hugh Jackman - people automatically assumed it was to look at him as a Bond candidate.

Could it be that she just wanted to see the play?

And with this Daniel Craig thing - I would imagine they've been spotted once or twice together and so people have made the leap that he is the next Bond.

It would certainly make sense - I always wondered how Craig's name was pulled out of a hat if he wasn't in the running.

[Loomis]

And with this Daniel Craig thing - I would imagine they've been spotted once or twice together and so people have made the leap that he is the next Bond.

Well, if these "Craig for Bond?" rumours go any further, I think it'll be because the man himself appears to be dropping extremely heavy hints that he's under consideration, not because a bored showbiz reporter spotted him near Broccoli at a premiere or party and decided to put two and two together. If all the Bond talk is rubbish, you'd have thought that Craig would have been able to string together the sort of perfectly acceptable amused/polite denial that didn't make it seem as though Eon actually had its eye on him after all.

zencat suggests that "Craig saying publicly that he might not take the role if offered is his polite way of giving Babs an out", but I'm not sure that this is all just some elaborate game of diplomacy between Craig and Eon that started when someone made a remark about Craig's suitability for Bond at a dinner party Craig and Broccoli were attending - in other words, that Craig feels he can't explicitly deny the Bond rumours for fear of somehow offending Broccoli or making it look as though he's dissing her films. Or maybe it is - what do I know? Then again, Craig does a lot more than just state publicly that he might not take the role. He mentions being in a group of names (presumably, he's referring to an Eon shortlist rather than, say, a fansite poll on who ought to replace Brosnan) and being in discussions. I'm not just extrapolating all this from reports that Craig and Broccoli bumped into each other at a theatre, or something like that.

[Seannery]

I don't know BUT I tend to agree with Loomis that this article seems to indicate something more than just mere acquaintance with Babs causing rumors.

[Forever007]

Rumors, rumors, rumors.... Might as well say Ron Jeremy has been screen tested for 007. It wouldn't kill EON to give us some news. What would really suck is we get a new Bond and Purvis & Wade muck it up with another bad script again and CR bombs. EON is using the free publicity to the extreme here. The last damn 007 flick was in 2002!

Edited by Forever007, 02 May 2005 - 07:00 PM.

[Stephenson]

Rumors, rumors, rumors....  Might as well say Ron Jeremy has been screen tested for 007. 

I'm sure Barbara wouldn't want rumours about her having been seen in public with HIM to come out ....

[Loomis]

Rumors, rumors, rumors....

It seems that, not so long ago, all it took was the word of someone posting on a fansite claiming to be a Hollywood insider, or an actor smiling enigmatically in an interview and saying "Bond? Never really thought about it", or something of that slender nature, for plenty of fans to appear convinced that the new 007 had been cast. An analysis of Owen's body language and the most extraordinary interpretations of the words "I'm very busy" sent people into a frenzy a short while back. Now, though, we've had two particularly juicy "from the horse's mouth" incidents within the space of days: Dench announcing a Brosnan return, and Craig pretty much admitting that he's a Bond finalist. Yet few of us Bond geeks seem to be biting, with people reaching with almost indecent haste for the most random and jerrybuilt notions to explain them away: "Dench is evidently senile and doesn't know what she's saying"; "Doubtful that Dench knows anything about what's going on"; "Craig must have met Babs at a party, got drunk and said he'd like to be Bond, and now he's incredibly embarrassed and doesn't feel he can deny the rumours without insulting Eon" (okay, I'm exaggerating a little ).

To my mind, the Dench statement and the Craig interview are by far the two most concrete pieces of "news" on the Bond 6 casting - well, along with Michael Madsen's remark about an Australian successor to Brosnan, I guess (and, yes, I'm aware that these three stories contradict each other). And I'm surprised they're being so cavalierly dismissed. Mind you, I admit that, as the starter of this thread, I rather hope there's something to the Craig rumours.

But maybe fans are now getting thoroughly fed up with rumour after rumour after rumour after rumour and are adopting the attitude of "Yeah? So? Tell you what, when Eon holds its official press conference, then I'll listen." Which seems very sensible.

[Turn]

EON is using the free publicity to the extreme here.  The last damn 007 flick was in 2002!

And why is this wrong? It's certainly a big change from the 1989-1994 period where we were getting very little news. Because there is more access and more outlets for news doesn't mean it's EON's fault.

[Stephenson]

[quote name='Loomis' date='2 May 2005 - 13:28'][quote name='Forever007' date='2 May 2005 - 18:59']Rumors, rumors, rumors....

[/quote]
But maybe fans are now getting thoroughly fed up with rumour after rumour after rumour after rumour and are adopting the attitude of "Yeah? So? Tell you what, when Eon holds its official press conference, then I'll listen." Which seems very sensible.

[/quote]


[quote name='Turn' date='2 May 2005 - 13:57'][quote name='Forever007' date='2 May 2005 - 18:59']EON is using the free publicity to the extreme here.

[ACE]

Some observations:

1) If you're still in negotiations with a demanding and expensive actor (Brosnan), you do not give an off-the-cuff comment from one cast member (Dench) any credence. Strictly speaking, the new Sony executive is correct to deny any deal with Brosnan because there is none in place. At the moment. But is does not signify lack of intent, at least on Sony's part.

2) Close attention to "When The Snow Melts" (Cubby's autobiography) reveals that Eon tend to want to dispense with the Bond incumbent before the studio. However, the studio has final casting decision on who plays Bond NOT Eon (if this was not the case, Dalton would have played Bond in Goldeneye). If Sony perceive they need Brosnan, they will do the needful to get him. Sony's top brass from Japan have personally visited Eon London HQ last year.

3) Last year Matthew Vaughn did screen "Layer Cake" repeatedly at Eon's London HQ. It is a matter of record that Vaughn was up for the directing job of Bond 21. Daniel Craig as an alternative Bond may be a holdover from this dalliance.
No doubt other actors have screen tested and been in discussions and negotiations. But serious negotiations are sometimes concurrent with parallel talks.

4) However, see 1 above.) If you're still negotiating with Brosnan, it is good to let Brosnan know there are real alternatives. Bond History: John Gavin actually signed to play Bond for DAF. Michael Billington claims many times to have been waiting in the wings and been told to get ready to go to Corfu for FYEO. James Brolin and Maud Adams were together in Paris ready to make Octopussy while they were shooting the pre-title sequence in the US in May 1982.

5) From 4 above), it may be that the actual announcement can come virtually on the verge of commencement of principle photography set for January 2006.

6) Besides, apart from script revisions, Eon are still trying to work out where the Casino Royale production will be based. Pinewood and the UK are not locked in due, probably, to cost considerations. Chitty has just opened on Broadway which I'm sure has been diverting some attention from Bond in the Broccoli camp.

BTW, in case any one of us is any doubt, none of us on this forum have any influence whatsoever on the decision making process. Sad, but true.

We are like eunuchs at an orgy....

"My friends, this is life!"

ACE

[stromberg]

Sounds like Craig has some sort of relationship with Babs so they have had a "talk." The talk could have been nothing more than Craig saying over dinner, 'What about me?" and Babs politely saying, "Hmmm, I'll run it past the group." Craig saying publicly that he might not take the role even if offered is his polite way of taking his friend Babs off the spot. It all seems very...opaque.

And of course, there's still this possibility:
"C'mon Daniel, you know that we'll never be able to sell you as Bond to the audience. But we may be in need of a red herring, so if you want to gain a few headlines and some extra publicity from Bond..."

[Loomis]

Good post, ACE. You seem to know your stuff. One question, though: I thought the studio only had veto power over an Eon Bond actor choice (which is why GOLDENEYE didn't star Dalton), and did not have the power to, well, to force an actor on Eon.

[tdalton]

Some observations:
2) Close attention to "When The Snow Melts" (Cubby's autobiography) reveals that Eon tend to want to dispense with the Bond incumbent before the studio. However, the studio has final casting decision on who plays Bond NOT Eon (if this was not the case, Dalton would have played Bond in Goldeneye). If Sony perceive they need Brosnan, they will do the needful to get him. Sony's top brass from Japan have personally visited Eon London HQ last year.

Dalton was not in GoldenEye because he decided to leave the role, not because EON or MGM decided that it was time for him to go.

[ACE]

Dalton was not in GoldenEye because he decided to leave the role, not because EON or MGM decided that it was time for him to go.

That is the official story.

Good post, ACE. You seem to know your stuff.  One question, though: I thought the studio only had veto power over an Eon Bond actor choice (which is why GOLDENEYE didn't star Dalton), and did not have the power to, well, to force an actor on Eon.

Thank you Loomis. I do not know how the veto actually works. I'm sure creatively, after the studio makes their contractual down payment to Eon/Danjaq etc. to develop the screenplay, Eon is responsive to studio overtures. Any creative relationship is not determined by absolutes (whether legally enforceable or not).

Edited by ACE, 02 May 2005 - 08:26 PM.

[Seannery]

Loomis is correct Eon has the final casting choice--the studio can only veto. And ACE is partially correct that MGM wanted Dalton out and Cubby was resisting them AND then Dalton decided to quit rather than to be in this conflict.

[ACE]

Loomis is correct Eon has the final casting choice--the studio can only veto. And ACE is correct that MGM wanted Dalton out and Cubby was resisting them AND then Dalton decided to quit rather than to be in this conflict.

Not quite, Seannery...

Actually, Dalton's "resignation" was all part of the carefully worked out exit strategy for Dalton.

It is interesting to note that Dalton announced his departure from HMSS whilst on the set of a prestigious and high profile production ("Scarlett" - well, who knew at the time?!) in which he had a major role. The production company that made this mini-series was a quasi-subsidiary of MGM.

[tdalton]

Getting back on topic, I think that we're going to see an announcement sooner rather than later if it is going to be Daniel Craig. Layer Cake is released in the U.S. on May 13 (I think, it's sometime this month, anyway) and if it is indeed him, then EON/Sony will probably want to announce it sometime after it's released, very much the same way were all speculating about the supposed Clive Owen announcement that was to immediately follow the U.S. release of Sin City

[doublenoughtspy]

The studio holds veto power and purse strings, but EON can still fold their cards and go home if they feel like it.

Technically the studios didn't want Connery, Lazenby, or Moore in the beginning - but EON convinced them.

From what I have heard regarding the Dalton situation - the studio wasn't that wild about Dalton and said - sure you can make another film with him. But the budget will be very low.

If you go with someone we like - the budget will be higher.

Dalton didn't want the Bond franchise to suffer and so he bowed out.

[Seannery]

The studio holds veto power and purse strings, but EON can still fold their cards and go home if they feel like it.

Technically the studios didn't want Connery, Lazenby, or Moore in the beginning - but EON convinced them.

From what I have heard regarding the Dalton situation - the studio wasn't that wild about Dalton and said - sure you can make another film with him.  But the budget will be very low.

If you go with someone we like - the budget will be higher.

Dalton didn't want the Bond franchise to suffer and so he bowed out.

This is what I heard about Dalton's exit also--though this could still fit in with it being orchestrated as ACE says.

[ACE]

Technically the studios didn't want Connery, Lazenby, or Moore in the beginning - but EON convinced them.

From what I have heard regarding the Dalton situation - the studio wasn't that wild about Dalton and said - sure you can make another film with him. But the budget will be very low.

If you go with someone we like - the budget will be higher.

Dalton didn't want the Bond franchise to suffer and so he bowed out.

I believe this version of events is not correct. MGM would NOT greenlight another Bond film with Timothy Dalton. Unfortunately, budgetary concerns were not decisive.

BTW, Timothy Dalton is my personal favourite James Bond.

I'm new to posting but I think we are going off topic. Can we move this debate somewhere else or start a new thread. I fear Daniel Craig fans are going to be rather upset if they read these posts!

Computer illerately yours

ACE

Edited by ACE, 02 May 2005 - 08:47 PM.

[Loomis]

ACE, I believe you're right on Dalton. From a post by Simon on 2 October 2001 (http://debrief.comma...1561):

Dalton was fired, or "let go". I was offering competition prize Garth Pearce written books on the Making of GE while I was working for a TV station. He came in to sign the books and he said that he was the first person Dalton called to say that while the official version was that he stepped down, he was asked to leave.

But, yes, back on-topic, please, folks (he says pulling rank and invoking the mighty authority of the thread starter ).

[Xenia_Onatopp]

I can only hope that if Daniel Craig is in Casino Royale, he is another character - NOT James Bond.

[Seannery]

With all due respects to my man Loomis--let me ask ACE a question in which I can at least tie somewhat in with this thread.


ACE you seem to have some possible insider access(and i'm a sucker for those who claim such to the degree i'll listen with an open mind) and you mentioned they may be talking and negotiating with Craig and others concurrently:

My question to you is--Do you have any knowledge or idea who else may be a serious candidate that Eon/Sony may be looking at concurrently along with the possibility of Craig and Brosnan?

[ACE]

With all due respects to my man Loomis--let me ask ACE a question in which I can at least tie somewhat in with this thread.


ACE you seem to have some possible insider access(and i'm a sucker for those who claim such to the degree i'll listen with an open mind) and you mentioned they may be talking and negotiating with Craig and others concurrently:

My question to you is--Do you have any knowledge or idea who else may be a serious candidate that Eon/Sony may be looking at concurrently along with the possibility of Craig and Brosnan?

You flatter me, Seannery.

I am not an insider. I occasionally get thrown titbits of information because of the nature of my job and my contacts in various industries. However, I am just a James Bond scholar and have been for rather too long! There are a handful who post and a handful who run the various Bond websites like me. People who have not only studied but have insight into the history of the Bond and also (vitally important this) the film and publishing industries in general.

I have no idea other than educated guess work who the serious candidates are.

"This my friend, is life!"

ACE

[Seannery]

With all due respects to my man Loomis--let me ask ACE a question in which I can at least tie somewhat in with this thread.


ACE you seem to have some possible insider access(and i'm a sucker for those who claim such to the degree i'll listen with an open mind) and you mentioned they may be talking and negotiating with Craig and others concurrently:

My question to you is--Do you have any knowledge or idea who else may be a serious candidate that Eon/Sony may be looking at concurrently along with the possibility of Craig and Brosnan?

You flatter me, Seannery.

I am not an insider. I occasionally get thrown titbits of information because of the nature of my job and my contacts in various industries. However, I am just a James Bond scholar and have been for rather too long! There are a handful who post and a handful who run the various Bond websites like me. People who have not only studied but have insight into the history of the Bond and also (vitally important this) the film and publishing industries in general.

I have no idea other than educated guess work who the serious candidates are.

"This my friend, is life!"

ACE

Oh well I had to try for the longshot. I guess it's just a waiting game now. By the way I agree with you that nothing any of us do here will effect who will be the next Bond. Hopefully Eon won't muck it up!

[trumanlodge89]

Rumors, rumors, rumors....

It seems that, not so long ago, all it took was the word of someone posting on a fansite claiming to be a Hollywood insider, or an actor smiling enigmatically in an interview and saying "Bond? Never really thought about it", or something of that slender nature, for plenty of fans to appear convinced that the new 007 had been cast. An analysis of Owen's body language and the most extraordinary interpretations of the words "I'm very busy" sent people into a frenzy a short while back. Now, though, we've had two particularly juicy "from the horse's mouth" incidents within the space of days: Dench announcing a Brosnan return, and Craig pretty much admitting that he's a Bond finalist. Yet few of us Bond geeks seem to be biting, with people reaching with almost indecent haste for the most random and jerrybuilt notions to explain them away: "Dench is evidently senile and doesn't know what she's saying"; "Doubtful that Dench knows anything about what's going on"; "Craig must have met Babs at a party, got drunk and said he'd like to be Bond, and now he's incredibly embarrassed and doesn't feel he can deny the rumours without insulting Eon" (okay, I'm exaggerating a little ).

To my mind, the Dench statement and the Craig interview are by far the two most concrete pieces of "news" on the Bond 6 casting - well, along with Michael Madsen's remark about an Australian successor to Brosnan, I guess (and, yes, I'm aware that these three stories contradict each other). And I'm surprised they're being so cavalierly dismissed. Mind you, I admit that, as the starter of this thread, I rather hope there's something to the Craig rumours.

But maybe fans are now getting thoroughly fed up with rumour after rumour after rumour after rumour and are adopting the attitude of "Yeah? So? Tell you what, when Eon holds its official press conference, then I'll listen." Which seems very sensible.

well that is my attitude at this time. there have been so many false reports and rumors that i am pretty fed up with all the speculation. the fact is, i will be really excited when A james bond is announced. as far as i am concerned, someone playing james bond is better than no james bond. (and can i claim insider status by saying that casino royale will have a character called "james bond" in the central role?)

i am too young to remember to gap between LTK and GE, so i have nothing to compare this too. but lets just cast the role and make the darn movie.

[ACE]

[quote]Oh well I had to try for the longshot.

Edited by ACE, 02 May 2005 - 09:42 PM.

[Seannery]

Personally I think Lazenby failed because he couldn't act at the time and Dalton was slightly miscast though respectable enough(aware that you disgree ACE since he's your favorite). And yes of course all we can do is leave it up to them--I just think their track record is good BUT hardly spotless. I do agree when it comes to casting we could be in worse hands. Time will tell.