4014 replies to this topic

[thecasinoroyale]

Thing is, when has anyone ever been accurate about the next Bond? As far as I am aware, did the press have tabs on Pierce Brosnan or Daniel Craig when they took on the role? All this speculation and "leaked" news about people in "final talks", which I've seen both Hiddleston and now Turner....it's nothing but nonsense to me that EON would be that loose with their plans.

 

The big reveal is something globally important for a big surprise, and they've never let info slip this easily, have they?

[Shrublands]

Thing is, when has anyone ever been accurate about the next Bond? As far as I am aware, did the press have tabs on Pierce Brosnan or Daniel Craig when they took on the role? 

 

The Sun (yes, The Sun) said that Barbara Broccoli was fighting for an actor called Daniel Craig about 5 months before anything was made official.

It seemed like made-up gossip at the time and nobody believed it.  

[sharpshooter]

All this speculation and "leaked" news about people in "final talks", which I've seen both Hiddleston and now Turner....it's nothing but nonsense to me that EON would be that loose with their plans.

It depends. The situation always dictates. By speaking with other candidates, they may think it provokes Craig into action. And if he doesn't bite, they proceed with someone else. 

[Surrie]

 

I still hope he will still do the same amount as Sean Connery and Roger Moore. 

I've given up on that happening, to be honest. I'm guessing they wanted a fifth Craig film and hoped a money offer would do the trick. But alas.

 

SPECTRE has all the necessary ingredients to make it Craig's swansong. It brings all the previous three films into one cumulative showdown. And you could view the last two scenes as Craig's coda. The whole "and besides, I've got something better to do" comment, which Mendes thinks is Craig's farewell remark to the series. And the final scene with Q is basically an epilogue. "What are you doing here? I thought you'd gone?". He has. He's just picking up his old car before driving off into the sunset. Which isn't a bad ending. It's more or less how I would've preferred Moore to end with Octopussy. 

 

 

The intention was definitely there. They knew he might not return, so hashed up the script and gave him this ending. For me, the last 5 minutes of SPECTRE did make me smile a lot. 

 

Well, Connery was on a cruise ship with Jill St. John, Lazenby ended up a traumatized widower, Moore got Tanya Roberts in a shower, Dalton jumped into a pool for Cary Lowell and Brosnan got diamonds & Halle Berry...  

 

Yep, I´d say Craig had the nicest ending.

 

100%. 

[Odd Jobbies]

 

Don't if any of you are familiar the scurrilous online gossip mongers Popbitch. Best read for laughs, rather than insight, but it sometimes transpires that there's some fire to their smoke. The latest edition suggests that it's not Hiddlethumb, but Aiden Turner that's in final negotiations. Means no more than the rest of the hogwash at this stage, but it is a Monday!

 

Have you got a link for this? 

 

 

Here it is verbatim:

 

 

------------------------------------
Increasingly, it sounds as if Aiden
Turner not Tom Hiddleston is the
insiders' tip to be the next Bond.
------------------------------------

And here's a link - it's about 3/4s the way down:

 

http://popbitch.com/...1/latest-issue/

 

 

And btw, i'm guessing this headline over at Slashfilm.com may put Dan Stevens out of the running unless there's a lengthy delay before Bond rolls (i hope so as Stevens is my personal top choice after his killer performance in The Guest:

 

FX Orders X-Men Spinoff ‘Legion’ to Series; See the First Photo of Dan Stevens as David Haller

 

Thing is, when has anyone ever been accurate about the next Bond? As far as I am aware, did the press have tabs on Pierce Brosnan or Daniel Craig when they took on the role? 

 

The Sun (yes, The Sun) said that Barbara Broccoli was fighting for an actor called Daniel Craig about 5 months before anything was made official.

It seemed like made-up gossip at the time and nobody believed it.  

 

i believed it in 1998

[thecasinoroyale]

Haha, I must have missed all the tabloid speculation!
 
 

Well, Connery was on a cruise ship with Jill St. John, Lazenby ended up a traumatized widower, Moore got Tanya Roberts in a shower, Dalton jumped into a pool for Cary Lowell and Brosnan got diamonds & Halle Berry...  
 
Yep, I´d say Craig had the nicest ending.

 
100%.

Sorry? Do you not remember the winking fish Dalton got? Craig didn't get a winking fish. Winking fish, or go home.

[SecretAgentFan]

 

Thing is, when has anyone ever been accurate about the next Bond? As far as I am aware, did the press have tabs on Pierce Brosnan or Daniel Craig when they took on the role? 

 

The Sun (yes, The Sun) said that Barbara Broccoli was fighting for an actor called Daniel Craig about 5 months before anything was made official.

It seemed like made-up gossip at the time and nobody believed it.  

 

 

 

Yes, I remember that!  And really, nobody thought it was possible for that guy.

[sharpshooter]

I'll just say, while I'm really excited about the possibility of Tom becoming 007, I better keep my expectations in check. An announcement probably isn't likely for a while, and it may not even be him. Which would make things a crushing disappointment, and unfair on whoever does get the part.

[Odd Jobbies]

 

 

Thing is, when has anyone ever been accurate about the next Bond? As far as I am aware, did the press have tabs on Pierce Brosnan or Daniel Craig when they took on the role? 

 

The Sun (yes, The Sun) said that Barbara Broccoli was fighting for an actor called Daniel Craig about 5 months before anything was made official.

It seemed like made-up gossip at the time and nobody believed it.  

 

 

 

Yes, I remember that!  And really, nobody thought it was possible for that guy.

 

Speak for yourself! As soon as i saw Love Is The Devil (which granted was released in '98, but i didn't see until the early 'naughties') i was telling friends there is this guy from left field that i think would be a great Bond. Like most they said 'Who? Naaa!'

[SecretAgentFan]

I'll just say, while I'm really excited about the possibility of Tom becoming 007, I better keep my expectations in check. An announcement probably isn't likely for a while, and it may not even be him. Which would make things a crushing disappointment, and unfair on whoever does get the part.

 

True.

 

But, to be honest, even more disappointing for me would be if Craig indeed were lured back for one more film.  It would mean more waiting, more of the Craig era brooding, and basically another swan song.

 

I loved Craig.  And I even came around on SPECTRE.  But for me, it would be perfect to accept that film as an ending.

 

Time for a new approach.

[sharpshooter]

I loved Craig.  And I even came around on SPECTRE.  But for me, it would be perfect to accept that film as an ending.

My sentiments as well. SPECTRE did present an ending, especially if Craig is happy with leaving the franchise on that note. That's where all this begins and ends. With that in mind, I think the chance to get underway with a new era is very appealing. By the time a Bond 25 with Craig is done and dusted, Bond #7 could have feasibly been preparing for his second appearance. 

[SecretAgentFan]

Yes, please!

[univex]

Yes, my feelings exactly!

[Odd Jobbies]

I think the proof will be in the pudding. If we get a new Bond and 25 is pleasing, then happy days. But if Bond#7 doesn't meet the high standards set by Craig, then we'll all be ruing the day that Craig walked. I know that's all pretty obvious and i don't wish to patronise anyone, but there you go

[SecretAgentFan]

I don´t think so.   I believe every Bond actor has his time.  Even if I won´t like the next one as much I won´t believe that Craig should have stayed on.  

 

Quite the contrary.  I guess an actor can overstay his welcome, especially in this role.  Repetition is the enemy here.  Bond has to evolve and refresh.

[univex]

Yep, hear hear for democracy   No one should overstay their welcome. Connery should have made 4, Lazenby...the one, maybe another; Moore, 5, perhaps; Tim...well 4, maybe; and Pierce, 3. Craig had a wonderful finale to his wonderful Bond tenure.

[Odd Jobbies]

I don´t think so.   I believe every Bond actor has his time.  Even if I won´t like the next one as much I won´t believe that Craig should have stayed on.  

 

Quite the contrary.  I guess an actor can overstay his welcome, especially in this role.  Repetition is the enemy here.  Bond has to evolve and refresh.

When it comes to evolving and refreshing the role via acting imo Craig is head and shoulders above all of names mentioned so far and whatever his off-screen comments are i want the best actor, rather than a compliant, or moreover a politically nuanced one.

 

Acting isn't about politics, but like so many things the politics gets in the way of the real work; press junkets may recoil at his candour, but i'll wager the film crew and director will honestly say good things about his on-set attitude. Acting's about truth - telling the truth of the character in every moment and this seems to be a gift that Craig doesn't care to turn on and off. As an actor Craig wipes the floor with the list of potential successors.

 

So despite, and if i've been clear perhaps because of what he says about the role, i think B25 will be a better movie with his acting chops in it. If he stays we get to keep moving forward on this arc, for which there's no evidence that it's played out - especially with a new director on the horizon, rather than another go-back-to-go re-branding exercise (all in good time).

[Shrublands]

Craig is going to be very busy come next year. Let's say it takes 3 to 4 weeks to shoot one episode of this kind of high end TV. 

I'd say it's going to be shot as two blocks of about 8 months each over 2017-18.
 

Showtime Lands Daniel Craig, Scott Rudin Limited Series ‘Purity’

Showtime has given a straight-to-series pickup to the drama with a hefty 20-episode order, which will air over the course of two years. Production begins in 2017.

 

 

http://variety.com/2...din-1201753115/

[Surrie]

 

I don´t think so.   I believe every Bond actor has his time.  Even if I won´t like the next one as much I won´t believe that Craig should have stayed on.  

 

Quite the contrary.  I guess an actor can overstay his welcome, especially in this role.  Repetition is the enemy here.  Bond has to evolve and refresh.

When it comes to evolving and refreshing the role via acting imo Craig is head and shoulders above all of names mentioned so far and whatever his off-screen comments are i want the best actor, rather than a compliant, or moreover a politically nuanced one.

 

Acting isn't about politics, but like so many things the gets in the way of the real work; press junkets may recoil at his candour. I'll wager the film crew and director will honestly say good things about his on-set attitude. Acting's about truth - telling the truth of the character in every moment and this seems to be a gift that Craig doesn't care to turn on and off. As an actor Craig wipes the floor with the list of potential successors.

 

So despite, and if i've been clear perhaps because of what he says about the role, i think B25 will be a better movie with his acting chops in it. If he stays we get to keep moving forward on this arc, for which there's no evidence that it's played out - especially with a new director on the horizon, rather than another go-back-to-go re-branding exercise (all in good time).

 

 

Couldn't agree with you more - but I don't think the odds are on our side with Craig returning. 

[Odd Jobbies]

 

 

I don´t think so.   I believe every Bond actor has his time.  Even if I won´t like the next one as much I won´t believe that Craig should have stayed on.  

 

Quite the contrary.  I guess an actor can overstay his welcome, especially in this role.  Repetition is the enemy here.  Bond has to evolve and refresh.

When it comes to evolving and refreshing the role via acting imo Craig is head and shoulders above all of names mentioned so far and whatever his off-screen comments are i want the best actor, rather than a compliant, or moreover a politically nuanced one.

 

Acting isn't about politics, but like so many things the politics gets in the way of the real work; press junkets may recoil at his candour, but i'll wager the film crew and director will honestly say good things about his on-set attitude. Acting's about truth - telling the truth of the character in every moment and this seems to be a gift that Craig doesn't care to turn on and off. As an actor Craig wipes the floor with the list of potential successors.

 

So despite, and if i've been clear perhaps because of what he says about the role, i think B25 will be a better movie with his acting chops in it. If he stays we get to keep moving forward on this arc, for which there's no evidence that it's played out - especially with a new director on the horizon, rather than another go-back-to-go re-branding exercise (all in good time).

 

Couldn't agree with you more - but I don't think the odds are on our side with Craig returning. 

 

Indeed, as Shrublands  just pointed out, Craig is in demand.

[Dustin]

In terms of acting Craig doubtlessly did a lot with Bond and for Bond. I can see why some hesitate to expect the same from those candidates currently crowding the headlines. But Craig also had the benefit of one solid Fleming story and one film where they dared to tell at least for once a story that would function just as well without Bond. The rest of the time even Craig's best acting could not compensate some of the problems QOS and SPECTRE had. Whoever takes over will largely have to deal with what material he is served by the script.

[Odd Jobbies]

In terms of acting Craig doubtlessly did a lot with Bond and for Bond. I can see why some hesitate to expect the same from those candidates currently crowding the headlines. But Craig also had the benefit of one solid Fleming story and one film where they dared to tell at least for once a story that would function just as well without Bond. The rest of the time even Craig's best acting could not compensate some of the problems QOS and SPECTRE had. Whoever takes over will largely have to deal with what material he is served by the script.

 

I agree that Craig's run had it's share of issues and the next movie will undoubtably have it's own, but surely that make the calibre of actor even more important, since a lessor actor would compensate less for those problems inherent in filmmaking.  Isn't less always less  in terms of acting talent?

[Dustin]

It very much depends what we want to see in the end. Prior to CR we wanted some vaguely posh looking (or what passes for posh between New York and Moscow) guy in a dinner jacket and with a gun and a martini leering at women like a pubescent and saving the world. CR showed us we actually want this guy to sweat and bleed and shake and we would damn near have seen him beaten up on a stretcher too. Suddenly an actor showed how much more could be gotten out of the character.

But since then the pressure was always on to get back to the status ante, back to the animated dress man. Partially we already got that with SPECTRE. It's still unclear as yet what kind of Bond we will get in the next instalment.

[Odd Jobbies]

Very unclear indeed, which is no doubt why Craig may be asking to see a script before committing.

 

In terms of your summery of what the general audience have been led to expect over the decades from a Bond actor i couldn't have put it better myself. But i'm sure i'm not alone in having pined for many a year after Fleming's authentic Bond in actor & script and so i suspect some may still be looking for acting qualities other than those you so wittily summed up.

[Major Tallon]

Nicely said, Odd Jobbies.

[Single-O-Seven]

I cannot help but wonder what exactly Craig wants from the next script. Would be interesting to know what sort of story might attract him back.

[plankattack]

I cannot help but wonder what exactly Craig wants from the next script. Would be interesting to know what sort of story might attract him back.

Maybe just one that's actually finished, which wasn't the case with QoS and SP!

[SecretAgentFan]

I am surprised (or should I really be?) that Craig seems to be regarded as the greatest actor ever and the only one to do Bond justice.

 

Which he is not.  Craig - as his predecessors - has a certain skill set, yes.  And his persona (brooding, violent, sardonic) brought out some of the characteristics that Connery showed first.  Since the last decade invited more darkness Craig was even asked to underline that Bond was human, and he responded to that brilliantly.

 

But Craig is not the only actor who can do that.  Nor is he an actor who can do everything.  To cling to him as the best choice to move forward is absurd, especially for a role that stretches only so far and needs different approaches to stay interesting.

 

As for the question of what he wants to see in a new script - I´m guessing this is just the typical actor bullshit.  Whenever an actor says this he/she does not want to do it and rather lays the blame at the writer.  When, in fact, it is the actor´s wishes that a writer has to bow down to and incorporate them in the script.  Believe me, so many times a great script gets muddled because an actor has outrageous ideas that throw everything off balance.  Yet, the public keeps on adoring the actor because he/she is so bright and talented.

[Toxteth_OGrady]

Well that's that then 

 

http://www.theportly...s-the-new-bond/

[Surrie]

Well that's that then 

 

http://www.theportly...s-the-new-bond/

 

Holy Hell - is this legit? If so, BB obviously thought along the lines of an early 30s actor which we have been discussing previously... interesting if true. Perhaps story arcs could be on the horizon...