14 replies to this topic

[mattbowyer]

From mi6 who are notoriously bad with details...but I hope it won't be another three year wait. If its cause of Brosnan then bring on Clive..

Bond News - 05-11-02

Brosnan and producers confirm his role for Bond 21...

Army Archerd, Daily Variety Senior Columnist, reports that Pierce Brosnan has confirmed he will be returning in Bond 21:

"The invitation has been accepted," a very polite Pierce Brosnan tells me of "the invitation" from producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson to do a fifth James Bond movie - just as his contract expires with the completion of "Die Another Day."

The untitled - and as yet unscripted - Bond picture probably will not start filming until early 2005. Since his first three outings have grossed more that a billion dollars, I asked Brosnan if the new negotiations would include a raise for him.

"I would like to think that fair play will be involved," he smiled. "I have the highest expectation of fairness and good spirit." And, he added, "I have all of CAA behind me!"

Beyond this fifth Bond film, Brosnan predicts, "I think it has mileage to go another 20 years." Not with him, he assures - he survived the fourth Bond with "a bit of a knee injury. That was it."

[brendan007]

i really hope that date is wrong, i absolutely dont think i could stand another three year wait. its just way too long.

[Blue Eyes]

2005? At this stage, unlikely. There's absolutely no reason to delay it. There's no annivesary, Pierce will only be another year older than 2004, and why would they bother to delay when they can churn them out as they have always planned?

[Tanger]

I say do it in 2004 make it a smaller film and then take 2years, out of the 3 available to make a DAD beater for the year 2007.

[JimmyBond]

So are you saying MI6 is wrong Daniel? I think you are!

Seriously though, I personally dont think they will wait, there is no reason to, like Daniel said. Besides, I hope Brosnan does 6, and if he waits to do his fifth film in 2004, I will accept the three year wait for the next film. Imagine the voice over. Pierce Brosnan IS James Bond, one last time in the year of Bond, 2007

[Loomis]

There's also reports of BOND 21 being in some ways a followup to DAD, with one or more recurring characters (other than M, Q and so on), including the rumoured return of Michael Madsen. Therefore, it would seem likely that the filmmakers will "get on with it" and soon begin work on a BOND 21 for release in 2004.

Hmmm.... Sounds ages away, but I suppose they'll now be looking (if they haven't put the feelers out already) for a director. Wonder if P&W have started to thrash out a story yet.

[SeanValen00V]

In a way MGM need Bond alot, I think if they were more desperate, then they should push for 2 years. I think when your on a roll, with Bond since 1995, they should maximise it, then again it is a big challenge, none of us write and make these films, a huge 20 films to follow on from, maybe output every 2 years is too less time for them, Bond can span a decade, with 3 films really, every 3 years, and people will say Bond span a decard, or 5 films in one decade every 2 years for 10 years.

Personally I think Brosnan and MGM would be wrong to wait it out, especially if DAD is popular, you got a momentum going, you got a aging actor playing Bond, maximise this era, and then if they want a 3 year wait for a new Bond, so be it.

But we'll see. But 3 years is huge time. 1999 to 2002, was a long time for a new Bond film, Pierce shouldn't be so confident in advance of playing it in 2005, be 51 or 52 then I think, I just think if he wants to do 6, then he'll be 54/55 for his 6th, and as great he keeps youthful, I think his 5th will be his last, he'll want to leave looking non Connery Diamonds are Forever like etc.

[Evil Doctor Cheese]

Gotta be 2004. I think he's fine doing it soon... and I personally think we will have the same bad guy for Bond 21 in a Blofeld type way. (I have my suspicions who it is... just a guess) Hope so because it'll cut down on casting and also give the Brosnan era a memorable bad guy. Late 2004... start filming 2004 January?

BTW if Pierce wins an Oscar oddly I think he'll be happier to slip back into Bond... he'll have achieved alot from his Irish Dreamtime pictures... get what I mean... it's a pinacle... like Connery who aint looking for Oscar glory now he has his little gold man. I mean he's playing Alan Quartermain in TLOEG for goodness sake... hardly Shakespeare is it? Commence the onslaught from Comic book and LOEG fans!!

[JackChase007]

Agreed - 2004 or bust.

That three-year-wait was painful for me, as I'm sure it was for all of you. The more time they take, the older Brosnan gets, and I want him at least tying Roger Moore's record.

As for Michael Madsen returning, I just figured that it was going to something of a "General Gogol" type role, where he will continue to make appearances. Although, it would be interesting to see how they do a follow-up. I guess we'll just hafta find out when they, the powers that be, tell us.

[daman3755]

Originally posted by Evil Doctor Cheese
Gotta be 2004. I think he's fine doing it soon... and I personally think we will have the same bad guy for Bond 21 in a Blofeld type way. (I have my suspicions who it is... just a guess) Hope so because it'll cut down on casting and also give the Brosnan era a memorable bad guy. Late 2004... start filming 2004 January?

BTW if Pierce wins an Oscar oddly I think he'll be happier to slip back into Bond... he'll have achieved alot from his Irish Dreamtime pictures... get what I mean... it's a pinacle... like Connery who aint looking for Oscar glory now he has his little gold man. I mean he's playing Alan Quartermain in TLOEG for goodness sake... hardly Shakespeare is it? Commence the onslaught from Comic book and LOEG fans!!

I think they'll want a new Bond for 2007. A new start for a new Bond in 2007. As for this Oscar - what are the odds Pierce could win?

[B007GLE]

I hate the wait as much as anyone, but three years seems to be a reasonable amount of time.

All other series are on a three year schedule (Star Wars, Austin Powers) the extra year gives them time to come up with a good story, which is the heart of the best Bond films. (Wouldn't we all prefer a different type of plot instead of a rehash of Goldfingers, "I'll destry this so mine is worth more" or the "Watch me bring the superpowers to the brink of war" plot?

Don't get me wrong, those are fun plots, but would you love to walk out of the theater and say "That was different and it was great!"?

[Blue Eyes]

Thought I should add this in. A report in Australia, that was from LA, had the reporter mentioning Bond 21 going in to production late 2003. Meaning a 2004 film.

Presumably the reporter got this from someone official as they did intervie wPierce and Halle etc...

[SeanValen00V]

Originally posted by Blue Eyes
Thought I should add this in. A report in Australia, that was from LA, had the reporter mentioning Bond 21 going in to production late 2003. Meaning a 2004 film.

Presumably the reporter got this from someone official as they did intervie wPierce and Halle etc...

It if its a official, I would be celebrating the date as a seperate party, I would. 3 year wait is like being in prison.:cool:

But I'll wait for the official date.

But I think it will end up being 2005 shoot, to be released 2005 fall, which makes it close to the start of 2006:eek:

[chronicliar]

Well I though the TWINE to DAD wait would be horrible and it was in ways though the idea of 3 years has settled it. I hope we see it in 2004 but if they want 2005 I could handle it. I just want a Bond in 2007!!!

[Peaceful]

I think they shoul be 2004, 2006, 2008 - for the 100th anniversary of Ian Fleming