165 replies to this topic

[Spoon]

In fact, I don't think even Eon did any serious Bond casting work until this year. 

That makes perfect sense to me. How could they, really? Even if Eon had identified the candidate they wanted, surely the folks signing the paycheck and distributing the film would want to be involved in the selection, and in the financial negotiations. And that couldn't be done until the fate of MGM was resolved.

You would think, though, that even without actually screentesting or negotiating with people, Eon would have had a candidate list (other than the huge one that has like 80 people on it). I'm starting to wonder if they even had that.

First of all, it shows that they're looking to possibly go away from the whole "rookie Bond" aspect.

The CBn article says it would still be Bond's first mission.

Edited by Spoon, 05 September 2005 - 07:57 PM.

[hrabb04]

Still looking at Bond Begins. I wonder if there will be a mentor role for Liam Neeson to fill.

[Seannery]

Spoon it's an early mission NOT the earliest mission at Mi6 and Bond was an experienced Commander beforehand so the expression "rookie Bond" was inappropriate anyway. Eon needs an actor that looks on film somewhere around early to mid 30's. Craig would fit that while Henry Cavill would not. Remember him? Part of the final 4 then 3 that became the "Final Zero".

[tdalton]

First of all, it shows that they're looking to possibly go away from the whole "rookie Bond" aspect.

The CBn article says it would still be Bond's first mission.

If that's the case (and I checked the article again, and it is), then Daniel Craig won't be cast as Bond. I doubt that he would be able to portray Bond on an early mission, and I think that showing his Bond as a rookie who doesn't quite know what he's doing would be an absolute waste of Craig's talent.

[zencat]

First of all, it shows that they're looking to possibly go away from the whole "rookie Bond" aspect.

The CBn article says it would still be Bond's first mission.

If that's the case (and I checked the article again, and it is), then Daniel Craig won't be cast as Bond. I doubt that he would be able to portray Bond on an early mission, and I think that showing his Bond as a rookie who doesn't quite know what he's doing would be an absolute waste of Craig's talent.

Actually, the article says an "early mission." We're hedging a bit considering the script is being rewritten and the lead has not yet been cast.

[Seannery]

Still looking at Bond Begins.  I wonder if there will be a mentor role for Liam Neeson to fill.

\



It's not Bond Begins--it's early Bond as a probably early mid 30's guy with his boss being Dench and Cleese as Q. So it's actually a minor reboot with the same guy but only slightly younger.

[tdalton]

First of all, it shows that they're looking to possibly go away from the whole "rookie Bond" aspect.

The CBn article says it would still be Bond's first mission.

If that's the case (and I checked the article again, and it is), then Daniel Craig won't be cast as Bond. I doubt that he would be able to portray Bond on an early mission, and I think that showing his Bond as a rookie who doesn't quite know what he's doing would be an absolute waste of Craig's talent.

Actually, the article says an "early mission." We're hedging a bit.

I still think that showing Craig in that capacity as Bond would be a waste of his talent. He doesn't look like someone who is new to what he's doing, he looks like the world weary type of agent that Ian Fleming wrote on the page(granted, not in CR though) and that Dalton portrayed on film, not a new agent that doesn't know exactly what he's doing yet. Still, Craig is still my first choice, but I'm apprehensive of this type of film with Craig in it.

[Spoon]

Whoops; sorry, my mistake for misinterpreting that.

[Seannery]

First of all, it shows that they're looking to possibly go away from the whole "rookie Bond" aspect.

The CBn article says it would still be Bond's first mission.

If that's the case (and I checked the article again, and it is), then Daniel Craig won't be cast as Bond. I doubt that he would be able to portray Bond on an early mission, and I think that showing his Bond as a rookie who doesn't quite know what he's doing would be an absolute waste of Craig's talent.

An early mission Bond would be in the 31-35 age range and Craig can play that. As could other mature actors. Again he's a seasoned Commander before getting into Mi6.

[zencat]

Whoops; sorry, my mistake for misinterpreting that.

No prob, Spooner. Ultimately I don't think we'll really know until the movie comes out. They could even shoot the film as Bond's first or early mission, but if it tests badly, they could end up cutting those references and it would just be Bond on a mission.

[hrabb04]

Well, Zen, if that happens, then Stuart Baird will have his work cut out for him, and this movie may still be in big trouble.

[zencat]

They say "editing is the final rewrite." It's so true.

[Seannery]

Well they might not even in the end reference that this is an early mission--they might imply it or barely state it in a throwaway line or two.

[zencat]

Let's just hope they are putting as much thought into the character of the villain and the villain's caper because that's the real backbone of a great Bond film. I do think they've somehow forgotten this. All these "personal" missions... Starting with LTK, Bond films suddenly started being about James Bond. I really think they have it -backwards and that's one of the reasons the Brosnan era films have not been up to snuff.

Thus far, everything I've heard about CR tells me they have not figured this out and we will have yet another Bond film that strives to be a Drama.

[Seannery]

Let's just hope they are putting as much thought into the character of the villain and the villain's caper because that's the real backbone of a great Bond film. I do think they've somehow forgotten this. All these "personal" missions... Starting with LTK, Bond films suddenly started being about James Bond. I really think they have it -backwards and that's one of the reasons the Brosnan era films have not been up to snuff.

Thus far, everything I've heard about CR tells me they have not figured this out and we will have yet another "personal" story. 

You mean more narcisstic navel gazing? I think that a sign of our self-obssesed times unfortunately.

[zencat]

[quote name='Seannery' date='5 September 2005 - 13:52'] [quote name='zencat' date='5 September 2005 - 21:49']Let's just hope they are putting as much thought into the character of the villain and the villain's caper because that's the real backbone of a great Bond film. I do think they've somehow forgotten this. All these "personal" missions... Starting with LTK, Bond films suddenly started being about James Bond. I really think they have it -backwards and that's one of the reasons the Brosnan era films have not been up to snuff.

Thus far, everything I've heard about CR tells me they have not figured this out and we will have yet another "personal" story.

[K1Bond007]

So what is the best Daniel Craig film out there to perhaps get a glimpse of him as a potential Bond? Layer Cake? I have Road to Perdition and he was fantastic in that, but no-where near a Bond (majorly different character). From his picture and from what I know of him, he seems as talented as Dalton, but will play the role more like a Lazenby. That's how I percieve him. None of what I just said is bad, IMHO - I'm sure he has the ability to play a decent Bond if given the opportunity.

[Sam Fisher]

if it HAS to be Craig at least have the story done right.

[zencat]

He's in the first Tomb Raider movie.

Athena and I have Layer Cake on our Netfix queue, but there's now a wait. He's suddenly very popular.

[Seannery]

[quote name='zencat' date='5 September 2005 - 21:58'][quote name='Seannery' date='5 September 2005 - 13:52'] [quote name='zencat' date='5 September 2005 - 21:49']Let's just hope they are putting as much thought into the character of the villain and the villain's caper because that's the real backbone of a great Bond film. I do think they've somehow forgotten this. All these "personal" missions... Starting with LTK, Bond films suddenly started being about James Bond. I really think they have it -backwards and that's one of the reasons the Brosnan era films have not been up to snuff.

Thus far, everything I've heard about CR tells me they have not figured this out and we will have yet another "personal" story.

[Alex Zamudio]

So unless The Powers That Be are prepared to refashion the Bond franchise with such an extraordinary amount of "grit" and "realism" and "darkness" and "down-to-earthness" as to make the Bourne films look like Austin Powers spoofs, I'd be amazed if they chose Craig. It'd be like the contrast between Moore and Dalton times a hundred.

YES!! I want a dangerous 007, a real SPY in a dangerous world, I loved Brosnan as Bond, but if he won

[spynovelfan]

Preach to me brother!  I'm with you here.  And what you describe is flexible--the charming, cool unconflicted Bond can be done in Bond films(or parts of the same film) of varying tones from lightly comic to rather serious(it doesn't have to be psychobabble to be the more serious side).  And mostly serious can still have a lot of cheeky fun in it ala early Connery.

Well said, that man!

[zencat]

And you can still play a "personal" beat in a Bond film. TSWLM does it very effectively, but it is only ONE SCENE (with the film bookended by a setup for this scene and a payoff at the end). That's all you need! In most films it only take three scenes placed correctly to execute a full "personal" character arch (but now I'm giving away secrets of the trade ). Overdue it and suddenly you're not in a Bond film anymore, but you're in a Drama and that kills the Bond experience.

[Jazzy Bond]

I just wanted to chime in on the Bond begins talk that this tread has gone down. Just because the director or the writers say that this is what defines ore creates his character doesn't mean one of his first missions. I mean what I'm trying to say is that the film is not going to have credits saying "Bond's early years" Or "Hey, audience this is one of Bond's first missions" I mean they are going to go with a 30-40 something Bond anddo their film,the creating of his character will be used in telling the actor "This is your motivation" "Use this in your thought process as you do this scene" Stuff like that! I think we are taking it too literal in its meaning. Does that make sense?

[zencat]

Yeah, that makes sense. Like I said, I really don't think we'll know for sure how much the "Bond begins" aspect will play out in the final film until we see it on the screen. My fear is it will be vague. Even though I hate the "Bond begins" approach, I would say it's gotta be all or nothing. And by "all" I mean period.

[Emma]

One of the dailies in Toronto Canada (where I live) did a peice on the problem finding a new 007. And from what I gathered the real problem here seems that Ms. Brocoli and step brother Michael Wilson can not get in agreement. Or personally both of them seem to be engaged in a bout of sibling rivalry and are determined not to go with the others choice.

I may be showing my bias here. But how anyone can discount candidates like Eric Bana or Hugh Jackman is beyond me. Both men are capable actors, good looking, charming and can draw a crowd.

Sony should just step in and take over, and put this non sense once and for all. Really they should have bargained Brosnan down to 25 million and gone ahead instead of drawn this squabbling into the public.

[zencat]

[quote name='Emma' date='5 September 2005 - 15:12']I may be showing my bias here. But how anyone can discount candidates like Eric Bana or Hugh Jackman is beyond me.

[MarJil]

Eon needs to have a look at Everything or Nothing. Great locations, stunts, girls, megavillain with a good caper and bad- henchmen...and a confident, charming unconflicted 007 walking through it. THAT is what I consider to be a "back to basics" Bond.

You couldn't be more right here about the character of Bond. He needs to ooze an aura of the 4 C's; charm, confidence, charisma, and cool. What makes him interesting is not how sophisticated he is, but how above it all he is, and how easy everything seems to come for him. That doesn't mean that he's a snob or arrogant, but it does mean that he's so confident in himself that he is totally unflappable. A most telling comment from him was from TB, after Largo asks him if he's a good loser, his retort was "I don't know. I've never lost." I mean it's ok to have him show some feelings, but they've gone way overboard with Pierce. Everything is about emotion with him, he takes everything personally. That's not Bond.

I saw a movie the other night (Sahara) that showcased Matthew McConeghy (sic)as a Bond type character, and he played it just the way I would like to see Bond portrayed. He was all about confidence, charm, charisma and cool, and I have to believe that there is somebody from the UK like that. I do think that maybe EON might be changing their minds about casting an unknown and they must have decided to go with the kind of guy they should have been looking at all along, the ones who's career is at the stage that Clive's was a year ago, guys like Butler and Craig, both who have the 4 C's. I'm hoping the tide has turned in favor of those guys, and this latest report suggests it might have.

Edited by MarJil, 05 September 2005 - 10:32 PM.

[tdalton]

I just don't see what EON has to gain by having CR as one of Bond's early missions set in the present day. Maybe I'm way off base here from the rest of the Bond fan community, but what I would like to see from Casino Royale would be a strong cast (starting with Daniel Craig), a good, realistic villain caper that fits in realistically with the CR source material, and most of all, Bond the way that Cubby would want him, which would be experienced, and not looking back into the past. It's always seemed as though EON's policy was to look forward, not backward, but it appears as though Wilson and Brocolli are going back on that.

I think that the direction that EON wants to take with Casino Royale may have put the franchise at a serious crossroads. The origin story will be a major shock to the franchise, as would the casting of Daniel Craig in the role. I don't think that the series could survive both of these shocks to the system.

[Loeffelholz]

It will be hilarious if anyone from the Final Four (or Three) ends up going through another round of screen tests along with Craig and whomever else passes through this next round...