4014 replies to this topic

[Odd Jobbies]

It´s rather improbable that Hardy will return for another Mad Max - rumour has it George Miller had the worst time with him on set, another reason why the film featured relatively little Max and made Furiosa the real center.  Of course, now the film has garnered so much positive attention, Hardy publicy says he would be open to another one.

 

But the fact that Miller (in his 70´s) will not commit to another Mad Max film points to another obstacle: the shoot was a nightmare, and why would he want to put himself through that again, at that age?  Also, no sequel will ever be greeted with that much enthusiasm.  AND - the main problem:  the film did not that well at the world wide box office.  It actually underperformed.

 

So, in that regard Hardy would be free for Bond.  But would EON want to put up with an even moodier actor?

 

I hope not.

 

Of course, I´m not a Hardy fan at all and consider him a one-trick pony with a very limited acting range and no charme or sense of humour.

Interesting! I had no idea Miller had a bad time with Hardy. Embarrassing for Hardy if true since he's currently doing the rounds saying that he's signed up for 3 and waiting on George's call. Either way i thought he nailed the role - a tall order after Gibson.

[Orion]

The problem with ANY of these sort of rumors is - It doesnt take into account that these people are human. They where working on a film in a less than hospitable climate, there WILL have been arguements but neither will have taken it personally as they were all in the same boa and all of them are professionals. The idea that someone would hold a grudge after working in those circumstances is utterly ludicrous and easily disproved with one simple thought - Would you hold a gruge under those circumstances?

 

A tabloid hack trying to sell a newspaper or his clickbait "article" exaggerating or making things up just for money and attention on the other hand... so let's not give them any by circulating rumor.

[Dustin]

I'm fairly sure their bad reputation has prevented both Oliver Reed and Lewis Collins from coming closer to the role...

Collins defo, but according to something i've seen in a doco (i'm sure it was one of the JB dvd extra docos) Reed lost out because he got into a bar fight in the midst of casting and the facial scaring he was left with on his left cheek made him a little too villainous in appearance. Their loss.

From what one can gather after all this time the trouble was - partially at least - also the fact that it wasn't by any stretch the only fight in a bar and that evenings without such sports were rather the exception than the rule.

Granted, this wasn't exactly uncommon in those days - supposedly Burton was up to the rafters full of spirits when they shot his escape from East-Berlin and hardly able to climb that wall - but there's a reason Reed didn't do that many memorable films in spite of his talent. And that reason was simply that he drowned that talent himself.

I think the one missing out was Reed, probably on many great roles.

[Odd Jobbies]

Indeed! I stand corrected - it was not just 'their loss' (Eon's), but also ours  and most tragically, his.

 

It's a testament to the depth of that wasted potential that we are aware of such potential despite the limited chances he allowed himself to fulfil it.

[Agent 76]

Reed had so much charisma. It's a shame he never got the role.

[Dustin]

Thinking of the somewhat ill-fated ROYAL FLASH of 1975 where Reed was miscast with the part of Otto von Bismarck I feel sure he would have made a much better Flashman himself some years earlier.

But then again he was perfect as Athos...

[Odd Jobbies]

His Athos carried those movies - an underrated series

[MISALA1994]

Reed had so much charisma. It's a shame he never got the role.

Lewis Collins is a another.

Edited by MISALA1994, 23 January 2017 - 05:07 PM.

[Odd Jobbies]

 

Reed had so much charisma. It's a shame he never got the role.

Lewis Collins is a another.

 

Collins is the biggest missed op of them all imo. I appreciate he might've been a handful, but i believe he'd have owned the role to an extent none others could've come close in the 80s.

[SecretAgentFan]

I actually know Collins´ work only from "The Professionals" and "Who dares wins".  In retrospect it seems he would have been a Craig like "working class Bond", a brute with some charme.

 

I´m glad, however, that they went with Dalton.  I prefer Bond not to be a brute but to be someone who does not have a temperament.  Instead, my Bond should be cool under fire, outwitting others with his mind and only using violence if he absolutely must.

[Dustin]

Collins' character 'Bodie' was at first conceived as a more refined character, wearing suits, drinking wine and eating well. At the same time he was also supposed to be an ex-mercenary (something I think they also had in mind for The New Avengers' Mike Gambit). Gambit kept his suits and a Jaguar (when it actually would start; not a given back then...) but The Professionals quickly evolved into Britain's version of Starsky & Hutch. And now both Bodie and Doyle were just tough lads you could practically see go round to the pub after the episode, with Doyle being just a tad more street wise since he used to be a copper.

Collins performance in WHO DARES WINS is probably the best we can judge him with regard to Bond. It doesn't strike me as if there would have been that much more to see. Collins did have appeal, no doubt about it. But a lot of that appeal came from the respective time when Moore started to get bad press for being too old for the role supposedly. That was when he would do another three Bond films...

[TheREAL008]

I remain at anyone but Nolan and Hardy. Outside of that Batman Trilogy Nolan is fine, he makes great movies, but Nolan is arrogant. For me TDK was a pretentious film towards the end and TDKR was just a mess. I find Tom Hardy to be a very wooden actor who has no gravitas or believability on screen. 

I honestly don't know why these two are popular choices for Bond, but to me they should stay well away.

If Daniel Craig doesn't come back, find another unknown that would suit the role. 

[Dustin]

Same here, I don't see Hardy as Bond or Nolan as director. Of course both would create massive buzz in the media, which might help BOND 25 break into the billion dollar club again. But I suspect the result would not have that much substance.

[SecretAgentFan]

I wonder whether Nolan actually would be interested.  He does come with his own production entity, and I don´t think EON would accept that.

 

As for his directing buzz - it will be interesting to see how his next film "DUNKIRK" will fare.  After "INCEPTION" he was probably at the high of his career so far.  The third Batman and "INTERSTELLAR" were not greeted with that enthusiasm anymore but rather with disappointment and derision.  I doubt that his War epic will change that.  True, he creates great images - but the stories often implode in the last act.  He also isn´t particularly great with actors - they either are great by themselves or under-/overact.  Plus: humour has not been his strength so far.  So how could he actually do a great Bond film?

[MISALA1994]

I remain at anyone but Nolan and Hardy. Outside of that Batman Trilogy Nolan is fine, he makes great movies, but Nolan is arrogant. For me TDK was a pretentious film towards the end and TDKR was just a mess. I find Tom Hardy to be a very wooden actor who has no gravitas or believability on screen.

I honestly don't know why these two are popular choices for Bond, but to me they should stay well away.

If Daniel Craig doesn't come back, find another unknown that would suit the role.

Unknown "Lazenby" day's are long time gone.

[DavidJones]

I wonder if the next film will be about 'fake news'.

[Toxteth_OGrady]

Aidan Turner snippet:

 

http://www.digitalsp...tas-red-carpet/

[Agent 76]

Well it's an intriguing answer that's for sure.

[SecretAgentFan]

Well, now even not answering the question gets credibility?

[Orion]

We're going in circles - This same discussion happened about three pages ago! There really is nothing happening in regards to Bond films is there, or at least nothing of note (depending on how interested you are in share holder meetings).

[Agent 76]

Well, now even not answering the question gets credibility?

desperate times 

[Dustin]

We're going in circles - This same discussion happened about three pages ago! There really is nothing happening in regards to Bond films is there, or at least nothing of note (depending on how interested you are in share holder meetings).

It's well possible only such a shareholder meeting will bring in some momentum into the situation - whenever that may happen to be. For now there is no news and not even a realistic possibility this would change in the near future.

[Odd Jobbies]

Collins did have appeal, no doubt about it. But a lot of that appeal came from the respective time when Moore started to get bad press for being too old for the role supposedly. That was when he would do another three Bond films...

That's exactly the time Collins would have been a great move. HR jumped the shark and as much a i love Moore and respect the good job he did in FYEO i think gambling on Collins back then would've pepped things up perfectly. Instead we got a steady decline as they frankly bottled it on the next 3 movies, opting for the tired, but nevertheless bankable Moore.

 

If Collins worked out we wouldn't have needed Dalton (which would be a shame), nor the necessary post Dalton reboot with Pierce (also would've been a shame to have not had). So on one hand i think Collins would've made far more exciting early 80s Bond movies, but on the other hand the whole they dug themselves into with Moore and again by giving Dalton hackneyed service, did ultimately give us Campbell, GE and Craig.

 

Would i risk swapping Campbell, GE and Craig for an early 80s Collins run?  Probably, yes, but then i've always been a crap gambler - no matter how much i win i'll keep playing til i lose

[SecretAgentFan]

I believe the hiatus after LTK actually helped the franchise.

 

Audiences just had grown tired of Bond, no matter who played the role.  If Collins had taken over earlier this apathy towards Bond would have hit him as well.  Even if a new actor had taken over two years after LTK it would not have worked.  The Bond market was saturated.  People needed to develop a craving for this kind of entertainment - and that´s why GOLDENEYE worked so well.  

 

Maybe that´s even the real reason why EON is holding back BOND 25 right now.  They feel that audiences would rather shrug off "another Bond film" if it weren´t an event.

[Agent 76]

Your post makes sense, and I would add that considering that Eon is actually going for another 4-5 years hiatus in the franchise makes for the perfect opportunity to return in Bond 25 with a new Bond. If it is to make it a big event, then go all the way.

[MISALA1994]

Your post makes sense, and I would add that considering that Eon is actually going for another 4-5 years hiatus in the franchise makes for the perfect opportunity to return in Bond 25 with a new Bond. If it is to make it a big event, then go all the way.

+1

[SecretAgentFan]

The longer the wait, the less likely it will be for Craig to return.  His window of opportunity is closing.

[Dustin]

I suspect Bond films with Lewis Collins post-1981, OCTOPUSSY or AVTAK, would not have been so terribly different from the Moore versions. Some different stunt work, sure. But overall probably far from fundamentally reinventing Bond. It is true - in my opinion at least - by FOR YOUR EYES ONLY Bond was a tradition, cherished but hardly sensational any more. The whole shtick had seen better times and the audience gave other heroes their attention.

Could well be that the-powers-that-be had a longer gap in mind after SPECTRE anyway. Usually Eon are the ones to step on the brake and keep studios from getting taken away by their own enthusiasm. And at least in more recent years they were not so wrong in keeping MGM's appetite in check.

[Orion]

The longer the wait, the less likely it will be for Craig to return.  His window of opportunity is closing.

I'd say that window is slightly bigger than it was in previous eras simply because Craig's era has made a point of time actually passing, so Craig's age, and how long it's been since he left the service, can be used as a narrative point. How long Craig is physically up to it is, of course, another matter.

[SecretAgentFan]

That´s what I meant.  At some point the marketing people will say: Bond can´t be over 50.  What is this, the early 80´s?

 

And with Craig´s knee injury indicating that even his best athletic days might be over it becomes less likely that he again will want to subject himself to a grueling shoot for a Bond film.