388 replies to this topic

[zencat]

[quote name='zencat' date='25 May 2005 - 08:31'][quote name='Yo Jimbo' date='25 May 2005 - 07:15']SecretAgentFan clearly said that [to quote] "we need more than "sources said"."

By this I think they meant that the title 'Sources: Eon, Sony Considering Young Bonds' demonstrated clearly enough that this was just a rumour.

[Yo Jimbo]

Also, it this were just a "rumor" we would say so. It is not a "rumor." It is a dead certain absolute fact that at this moment more than one of the candidates for Bond #6 is in their early 20s.

You'll forgive me - but to me - it's a rumour, circulating around this particular fansite. I appreciate the way CBn is run, and trust that you are as sure as you can be, but I am equally sure that tabloid or not The Sun would not have given a full page spread to Daniel Craig's appointment if they didn't believe they had an authentic scoop. In the end it was false - to me this may also prove to be false. People can be wrong, I don't know who your insider is, so I have to presume that they might be wrong; and to all those who don't know it to be true this is, ipso facto, a rumour.

Apologies to Athena for suggesting this was her story - I was mostly associating it to her following her defence of the editorial stance taken in responding to SecretAgentFan.

Perhaps even the suffix of 'highly reliable' before the word source would add gravitas to the article. At the moment I still find it difficult to distinguish this 'insider' scoop from any other. Though your certainty is noted.

cheers - but strictly speaking it's welcome back (I've been away).

Edited by Yo Jimbo, 25 May 2005 - 04:13 PM.

[Yo Jimbo]

[quote name='Athena007' date='25 May 2005 - 15:37'][quote name='Yo Jimbo' date='25 May 2005 - 02:52'][...]Perhaps Athena could tell us whether this person has been good for anyother scoops in the past.

Edited by Yo Jimbo, 25 May 2005 - 04:34 PM.

[David Schofield]

The notion of two Bond fascinates me. Ok, the pre-cedits is the younger version: do we see his face? Is he dubbed by Bond 2 (i.e the older, real Bond)? Do we see ANYTHING of him at all in which case why not use a stunt-man (22 year old stunt man tested, Athena?). If we don't see him, why not just use the older Bond without showing his face? Is the "older" Bond by implication Brozza or CO? Is the pre-credits all we get of Fleming's CR?

Oh yes, and does the second Bond get a credit - as in Pierce Brosnan AND a young kid as James Bond in CASINO ROYALE"?

[Stephenson]

I'm liking the idea of not showing his face (young or old, although I thnk it would be easier with the older Bond), but it's a gimmick that wouldn't last much beyond five minutes (10 at the most).

[DLibrasnow]

NOT IF JAMES BOND is 22 years old...no way...ruins everything for me.

sucks to be you then...but I am excited about having a younger James Bond.

[Stephenson]

NOT IF JAMES BOND is 22 years old...no way...ruins everything for me.

sucks to be you then...but I am excited about having a younger James Bond.

Now that you've heard some news you're excited about are you still sticking with your theory that it is irrelevant who is chosen as Bond?

[Bondian]

Let's put it this way. How would CBn benefit from making up a pack of lies to make themselves look good?. A flurry of new members, a 'oneupmanship' over the other fan sites, a financial gain?, a holiday home in the Bahama's. Nope, all the staff here give their services for gratis, and they have no financial or professional gain for their hard work.

Being a member since 2001, I can confirm that CBn really DO HAVE AN 'INSIDER' as they've proved so many times. There was an episode a few years ago when I went into a stupor about how they got the information. And guess what?, they were right.

As you may see by some of my posts, I try to take everything with a light sense-of-humour because none of this is worth getting annoyed or wound up with. This is not a your Mother were talking about here.

CBn have a very talented team of staff members who all have their own individual talents to bring us fans 'hands-on' information.

For me, I'll stick by CBn because they're the only reliable source of news and information on Bond, James Bond 007. Not my Mother.

Ciao,


Ian

[doublenoughtspy]

I find it funny that some of the people who push for Brosnan's return by saying "age doesn't matter - it's a state of mind" are now the same people saying "oh my God, a young Bond - the outrage! Bond can't be that young!"

I am amazed that people are shocked and demanding proof (either by naming sources or DVD footage after the fact) that this has happened.

Have you seen some of the final candidates for OHMSS? One was blond, with a bare almost sunken chest. Give me a dark haired robust 22 year old any day over that.

How can you be shocked that the people who almost cast James Brolin or John Gavin would be considering a 22 year old?

My point is that Bond casting has been all over the map. Different nationalities. Different sizes. Different hair colors. Different accents. Different acting backgrounds. And here is the kicker: different ages.

Here they finally have the chance to tell Bond's origin story. Doing so with a 53 year old doesn't make sense.

[Seannery]

[quote name='zencat' date='25 May 2005 - 16:31'][quote name='Yo Jimbo' date='25 May 2005 - 07:15']SecretAgentFan clearly said that [to quote] "we need more than "sources said"."

By this I think they meant that the title 'Sources: Eon, Sony Considering Young Bonds' demonstrated clearly enough that this was just a rumour.

[tdalton]

Oh yes, and does the second Bond get a credit - as in Pierce Brosnan AND a young kid as James Bond in CASINO ROYALE"?

No, the younger Bond should not get billing in the "Albert R. Brocolli's EON Productions Presents..." line on the poster and in the title sequence. He should get his billing after Judi Dench's credit in the title sequence. "With Judi Dench as 'M' and introducing some young kid as Young Bond" or something like that. Otherwise, there should be no mention of it in advertisements.

[Genrewriter]

Makes sense. After all, River Phoenix was billed as Young Indiana Jones (or a close approximation) in the third movie, the main character billing was reserved for Harrison Ford. It's all a matter of screentime.

[DLibrasnow]

NOT IF JAMES BOND is 22 years old...no way...ruins everything for me.

sucks to be you then...but I am excited about having a younger James Bond.

Now that you've heard some news you're excited about are you still sticking with your theory that it is irrelevant who is chosen as Bond?

Oh it is irrelevent....but this is news that shows that EON are willing to take risks and shake up the franchise. Thats what I am excited about.

[Loomis]

Yes, it's a ripoff of Indiana Jones, but with 17 years between the two movies I'm sure they'd get away with it. 

I don't know. INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE is still a very widely-watched film, and will get even more exposure if (as seems possible albeit not especially likely) INDY 4 ever gets off the ground.

Granted, it would be "only a small leap from Goldeneye's pretitle" (which, of course, was also directed by Campbell), but, still, I don't see how they could do it without appearing to blatantly rip off LAST CRUSADE.

If they must have a flashback featuring the young Bond, they'd probably be better off sticking it in the middle of the film, IMO.

[DLibrasnow]

I'd have more trouble with his accent than his looks. And although I enjoy his work on ER, he was a black hole on the screen in Elektra.

Yeah...he was, but he was quite good in SPARTACUS.

I think its funny that his name has surfaced because over at the Dirk Pitt thread Brett asked me a bit back who I would like to see play the British agent Shaw in a movie based on NIGHT PROBE and it was Visnjic that I immediately thought of.

Oh, for those who are poo-pooing CBns ability ti run a truthful rumor, lets not forget that it was CBn that broke the news that Brosnan would not be returning, If memory serves me right the CBn team were ridiculed at Mi6 at that time for making such a claim....

If I was CBn I would have sent Paige and his Mi6 crew a nice slice of humble pie after it was confirmed...but thankfully they have a little more class.

[Mister Asterix]

Oh, for those who are poo-pooing CBns ability ti run a truthful rumor, lets not forget that it was CBn that broke the news that Brosnan would not be returning...

To be fair, it was mkkbb who broke that news first. Still we were pretty happy to be able to be the second.

[Stephenson]

I think its funny that his name has surfaced because over at the Dirk Pitt thread Brett asked me a bit back who I would like to see play the British agent Shaw in a movie based on NIGHT PROBE and it was Visnjic that I immediately thought of.

Don't you think he would have been a little young to play Shaw? Actually, I thought if he could pull off a passable U.S. accent he would make a good Pitt.

As for CBn being able to put together a "truthful" rumour, I'm sure the sources here are excellent. I just have a natural aversion to investing too much thought or emotion into any rumour (as Athena said, things change awfully quickly!). I'm happy to discuss it as long as it remains entertaining, but I still don't believe we know any more about Bond than we did a couple of weeks ago. In fact, doesn't the article imply that?

[Qwerty]

Oh, for those who are poo-pooing CBns ability ti run a truthful rumor, lets not forget that it was CBn that broke the news that Brosnan would not be returning, If memory serves me right the CBn team were ridiculed at Mi6 at that time for making such a claim....

Quite right D.

Shows where accuracy lies IMO.

[Athena007]

Oh, for those who are poo-pooing CBns ability ti run a truthful rumor, lets not forget that it was CBn that broke the news that Brosnan would not be returning, If memory serves me right the CBn team were ridiculed at Mi6 at that time for making such a claim....

If I was CBn I would have sent Paige and his Mi6 crew a nice slice of humble pie after it was confirmed...but thankfully they have a little more class.

It's funny because earlier in this thread when I was talking about CBn's track record I wanted to say I was having flash backs of "License Revoked".

[Seannery]

[quote name='Seannery' date='25 May 2005 - 18:03'][quote name='zencat' date='25 May 2005 - 16:31'][quote name='Yo Jimbo' date='25 May 2005 - 07:15']SecretAgentFan clearly said that [to quote] "we need more than "sources said"."

By this I think they meant that the title 'Sources: Eon, Sony Considering Young Bonds' demonstrated clearly enough that this was just a rumour.

[zencat]

I think it's safe to assume that any age is possible. I like how Seannery put it; "They are obviously casting a wide net." Seems that net extends from at least 20 to at least 40, although I think there's a desire to go as young as is credible. Not just because the material this time is tailored for a younger Bond, but because I think they want someone with longevity.

I don't know what to think about this two Bonds theory. The only place I've ever heard about this is speculation in fan forums. Sounds pretty wacky and unlikely to me.

Now stop asking me questions. I don't want to looked at as CBn's Casino Royale guy. I didn't even want to comment in this thread. My territory and real area of interest is the literary Bond. It's much safer.

[Loomis]

Now stop asking me questions. I'm not really CBn's Casino Royale guy.

Just one, if I may:

I know that "everything is possible", and that you can't predict the future, etc., etc., but do you think a Brosnan comeback is remotely likely? In other words, are The Powers That Be looking at potential Bond actors because they are determined to get a new Bond, or are they doing it only to have someone to fall back on if negotiations with Brosnan ultimately fail?

[Seannery]

I think it's safe to assume that any age is possible. I like how Seannery put it; "They are obviously casting a wide net." Seems that net extends from at least 20 to 40, although I think there's a desire to go as young as is credible. Not just because the material this time is tailored for a younger Bond, but because I think they want someone with longevity.

I don't know what to think about this two Bonds theory. The only place I've ever heard about this is speculation in fan forums. Sounds pretty wacky and unlikely to me.

Now stop asking me questions. I don't want to looked at as CBn's Casino Royale guy. I didn't even want to comment in this thread. My territory and real area of interest is the literary Bond. It's much safer.

Thanks Zen that clarifies it some--not bad for a "Lit Guy". That leaves a lot of possibilites open for Bond #6.




Any other Mods with any more info OR clarification please feel free to add your say.

[zencat]

Now stop asking me questions. I'm not really CBn's Casino Royale guy.

Just one, if I may:

I know that "everything is possible", and that you can't predict the future, etc., etc., but do you think a Brosnan comeback is remotely likely? In other words, are The Powers That Be looking at potential Bond actors because they are determined to get a new Bond, or are they doing it only to have someone to fall back on if negotiations with Brosnan ultimately fail?

You all know as much as I do about Pierce. My feeling is Pierce really is done. But, who knows? Never say never.

[Loomis]

You all know as much as I do about Pierce. My feeling is Pierce really is done. But, who knows? Never say never.

Thanks. I guess we'll just have to see what happens, eh?

[Sam Fisher]

This just goes to prove that the producers of the franchise really don't care anymore about Ian Fleming OR James BOnd. They're out to make a quick buck and will do anything they can to sap the life out of the franchise and then turn it into a HUGE cash cow.

Just more proof that Eon is selling Bond out more and more. I wouldn't mind a thirty-something Bond but a twenty'ish? No way...no one will believe it, ESPECUALLY if they're not set before 1962.

[B5Erik]

OK, I haven't posted much in the last year, but this story has me just rolling my eyes in amazement and disgust.

That there is even the remotest possiblity that they would even consider an actor under 29 or 30 just shows a lack of respect for the character of James Bond and makes a mockery of Ian Fleming's creation.

At least Fleming knew how old you HAVE TO BE in order to be a Commander in the British Navy, and then work your way up to becoming a covert agent, and THEN becoming a "00." You'd have to be at least 28 or 29 - and that would make you an overachiever!

I skipped The Aviator simply because Leonardo DiCaprio was way too young to play Howard Hughes in the 30's and 40's. It was something that would keep distracting me throughout the movie. It would be like Macaulay Culkin playing a professional football player when he was 15 - it wouldn't be believable at all.

A 20-something Bond would have the same problem - NO gravitas. No believability. It would become just another stupid action movie with nothing special and no tradition separating it from the rest of the mediocre pack.

Now, this may end up being nothing - or it may be something that is seriously being considered, I have no idea. They may just be looking ahead for a future Bond (as has been suggested), but if they really are thinking about a 20-something Bond then they need a good slap upside their heads!

This story is simply way too ludicrous for me - I just hope it turns out to be nothing.

[DLibrasnow]

I wouldn't mind a thirty-something Bond but a twenty'ish? No way...no one will believe it, ESPECUALLY if they're not set before 1962.

Yeah 29 year old George Lazenby gave us one of the worst Bond movies ever with On Her Majesty’s Secret Service...

Get a grip!

[Athena007]

Yeah 29 year old George Lazenby gave us one of the worst Bond movies ever with On Her Majesty’s Secret Service...

Get a grip!

Hey... ...I like that film.

[DLibrasnow]

Sarcasm dear Athena.

Everyone is talking doom and gloom about a 20-something actor playing 007, yet On Her Majesty’s Secret Service starred a 20-something actor.

People need to get a grip...Deal with it and if you hate the idea so much then nobody is going to force you to see the movie. The fans are only a very small minority of the people that go to 007 movies anyway.