27 replies to this topic

[Jinx's Bikini]

The title of the thread says it all really. My only point here is that if Bond 21 comes out in 2004, then I'd say let him do one more. On the other hand, if it's a 2005 release, and the films continue to be produced on a three year basis, Bond 21 should be his last - I really don't Pierce looking like Connery in DAF or like Moore in his last 3 films, because it really would spoil all has done for Bond.

[YOLT]

I think he must do 21 in 2004 22 in 2006 and 23 in 2007, his last. There is only 5 years. And in 2010 a new Bond 2012 is the year, 50 years and 25 films.

[rubixcub]

There is no way they can pull off three films in five years, leaving only a one-year gap between #22 & #23. Back when the action wasn't as complicated to pull off and they could be shot in half the time, yes, they made them each year. Now I really don't think they can. The next one in 2004 or 2005, Bond 22 in 2007, either serving as Brosnan's last or the next guy's first.

Dave

[B5Erik2]

I hate to say it, but Pierce is starting to look his age. In some of those close-ups he's starting to look more and more like Roger Moore in the early 80's. The wrinkles and gray hair make him look to old to really be pulling off all of that physical stuff.

If they were going to bring Bond down to earth and focus on character and detective work (like Dr No and FRWL) then he could also do Bond 22, but if they're going to continue in the xXx vein then Brosnan can't do Bond 22 and look believable at all. Not at age 54 or 55 he can't.

Brosnan has been great, but I hope that this doesn't become another Roger Moore situation where he sticks around one or two films too long.

Like I said, I hate to say all of that, but Brosnan isn't getting any younger. Unfortunately....

[M_Balje]

Bond 21 - Shaken not Stired

2004 or 2005 Look to this thread: Release of Bond 21 in Europe (The Netherlands)

Bond 22 - 2007 With Brosnan as Bond for the last time.
He is than 54 years old en it's enough for him.

Bond 23: I say it and deliever
But Forget that i say there that i wil see Robbie Coltrane as Vlademir Zhukovsky return and that i wil see Bond 23 in the year 2009.

Bond 21 (2004) Bond 22 (2007) Bond 23 (2011) But i come back from my desion, i wil see Bond 23 in 2010 or 2011 with a new bond,Who: I don't noundefined

I am think that Brosnan play the role of the Secret agent for the last time in Bond 22.

[SeanValen00V]

Bond 21 will be his last, its nice to play with numbers, and say oh its fitting to do this and this, but its quality that matters, not quantity. Pierce will know, and remember him saying to Johathan Ross, 6 would be pushing it.


Alot of you will understand when your around 49, and entering your 50s, just what condition you'll be in, Pierce is youthful for his age, but he can't stop the agining process, 4 years is a long time, the way some talk about 4 years when were young, it means little, but once your nearing your 50s, its a different ball game.

[Agent Lee]

I say the franchise should borrow a page from the MATRIX films, or the LORD OF THE RINGS series. That would to be make two films at the same time. Essentially, it would be a four hour movie, with the first two hours released in November 2004. That would be the official Bond 21.

The last two hours would be released in the summer of 2005, and that would be the offical Bond 22.

If memory serves me correctly, the BACK TO THE FUTURE film franchise did basically the same thing, back in the 20th century.

I am certain the general public could handle it. After all, in 1983, there were two 007 films. One had Roger Moore, and the other had Sean Connery...

[SeanValen00V]

Originally posted by Agent Lee
I say the franchise should borrow a page from the MATRIX films, or the LORD OF THE RINGS series. That would to be make two films at the same time. Essentially, it would be a four hour movie, with the first two hours released in November 2004. That would be the official Bond 21.

The last two hours would be released in the summer of 2005, and that would be the offical Bond 22.

If memory serves me correctly, the BACK TO THE FUTURE film franchise did basically the same thing, back in the 20th century.

I am certain the general public could handle it. After all, in 1983, there were two 007 films. One had Roger Moore, and the other had Sean Connery...

Agreed, I writ something similar a while ago, check my thead on this:

http://forums.comman...76939#post76939

[deth]

Originally posted by Agent Lee
After all, in 1983, there were two 007 films. One had Roger Moore, and the other had Sean Connery...

oh god, don't even remind me of that horrible horrible NSNA........*shudders*


BTW, I think your idea would be a great plan of action.

[Loomis]

I hope BOND 21 won't be Brosnan's last as 007. I'd like him to do a few more, and hopefully be around for the 50th anniversary in 2012. Okay, he'll be knocking on by then, but that didn't stop Connery doing NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN or Moore doing A VIEW TO A KILL.

[Jinx's Bikini]

Oh please Loomis! Your suggestion is utterly outrageous! Yes, age did not stop either Connery in NSNA or Moore in Octopussy and AVTAK, but let's be honest, they are THE poorest films of the James Bond series (yes I know NSNA doesn't really count). The fact that 007 is nearly getting his pension in AVTAK and yet he still manages to handle himself on the Golden Gate Bridge looks awful - sorry.
Let Pierce do Bond 21 and then bring in a fresh face as 007 in 2007. All in favour of Dougray Scott please stand up...

[Loomis]

Originally posted by Jinx's Bikini
Yes, age did not stop either Connery in NSNA or Moore in Octopussy and AVTAK, but let's be honest, they are THE poorest films of the James Bond series  

Are they? With respect, Jinx's Bikini, that's your opinion, not necessarily everyone's.

Personally, I think Connery showed much more charisma in NSNA than he did in either YOLT or DAF, age notwithstanding. In fact, his age made the character of Bond much more interesting (IMHO) in NSNA.

[1q2w3e4r]

Well Im with him. Bond's supposed to be a commander in the RN and a Double O. Connery and Moore don't look like it in those three films. As a matter of fact, I think Roger's red haired stunt double did quite a fine job as James Bond in those two films.

Brosnan should go after 21, he's starting to look his age. And they should get someone this time in their mid 30s and aim to start pushing them out at 45, not 55.

I disagree about Connery's age, he looked like a pensioner, where in all the earlier films even DAF he looked dangerous and a jungle cat in NSNA he looked like a pussy cat.

[Loomis]

I just looked up Brosnan's age on the IMDB, which gives it as 49, meaning that he'd be a couple of years off 60 at the time of shooting a Bond film for release in 2012, to commemorate the 50th anniversary.

Not too old in my book. Also, makeup and lighting techniques could make him look a few years younger in the film.

I really don't think we should be too hasty to get rid of Brosnan. I for one can't think of anyone to fill his shoes as Bond (which obviously doesn't mean that there's no one out there), and I sometimes wonder whether they shouldn't just end the series with his departure, letting the Bond franchise quit while it's ahead, to paraphrase Xenia Onatopp.

[1q2w3e4r]

I disagree. I see what your saying. But Bond at 60? I don't see it. Give the man a wheel chair.

21 sure, I don't think he'll stay past it anyway to be honest. I had no doubt he'd make a fourth and fifth. But a sixth I don't see it, he's already dropping hints at 5 only. I don't think they should end the series with him, people most likely thought that with Connery and they're still making money.

[JackChase007]

...Or, why don't we just let Pierce decide for himself???

Pierce loves playing Bond, but has admitted that he is getting older and the part is physically demanding. I think he'll bow out when the time is right.

Personally, I think he can still do another three (match the big record).

[Sir James]

It will be sad to see him go, but Bond 21 will and should be Brosnans last...

[gkgyver]

Personally, I believe exactly the same thing will happen with Pierce Brosnan like with Roger Moore.
Moore did two movies too much and then Timothy Dalton came who wanted to bring something new to the Bond movies. He failed and then Brosnan came in to save 007.
I think Brosnan will do six in 2007, then everyone's sad that he's gone and since Pierce did a wonderful job, the next Bond, whoever it may be, won't be accepted so well. He'll do two films or so and then another Bond will come who will be as popular as Brosnan was then.

[Loomis]

Originally posted by gkgyver
Personally, I believe exactly the same thing will happen with Pierce Brosnan like with Roger Moore.
Moore did two movies too much and then Timothy Dalton came who wanted to bring something new to the Bond movies. He failed and then Brosnan came in to save 007.
I think Brosnan will do six in 2007, then everyone's sad that he's gone and since Pierce did a wonderful job, the next Bond, whoever it may be, won't be accepted so well. He'll do two films or so and then another Bond will come who will be as popular as Brosnan was then.

That's an interesting theory, gkgyver. Brosnan will be an enormously hard act to follow. There's also the perception that he's hugely popular at the box office, the so-called Billion Dollar Bond. The problem of selling a new actor as Bond may be compounded by the possibility that the filmmakers will at the same time attempt too radical a change of direction for the series so that the new guy can put his stamp on it. I can definitely see history repeating itself for the franchise, with the next actor being something of a Dalton figure.

[00Twelve]

I think five will be plenty, even though I am thoroughly pleased with Brosnan's performance. Connery did six, Moore did seven (and should have been done after five), and the last thing Brosnan wants is to look old and be less limber for his coup de grace as Bond, a la Moore. Although, my girlfriend thinks Brosnan looks better w/ age...

[Spectre001]

I think he will to 21 and then call it quits. He is starting to look a bit old now.

[YOLT]

I think Brosnan can make 3 more, 2004 2006 and 2007. IT MUST BE 25 İN 2012. And yes to Dougray Scott, 2010 will be his year. I dont know his age but hope he wont be over 40 by 2010. 60 years for Bond 50 in 2062.

[B5Erik2]

Ain't no way, no how that you'll see Bond 25 in 2012. It ain't gonna happen.

And Bond 21 really should be Brosnan's last.

[Adam]

Nah, let him do 21 and then find somebody else...I don't want to see any corpses playing the characters like Moore & Maxwell in AVTAK

[Double-Oh-Zero]

Pierce will obviously do Bond 21. He may possibly be able to do Bond 22, but I think beyond that is enough. And I can guarantee you he won't be doing the role for the 50th anniversary. He'll prolly just get tired of doing it, or want to be with his family more, or won't be able to handle the stunts (or all three). He's also got his other films that he does (gasp!) and his producton company to take care of, even though a lot of the funds from the Bond films goes to the production company. The difference betweeen Brosnan and Moore is that Pierce does a lot more films other than Bond, while Moore basically stuck to the Bond films, other than Cannonball Run and a few others. Moore didn't have a lot of other projects going on, though I could be wrong. So Bond 21 is definite, but he's done after Bond 22, I think.

[BONDFINESSE 007]

i dont think brosnan is looking "old" at all, some people dont age as fast as others, and just because moore looked old and yes he sure did,does not mean brosnan will when he,s that age (of moore in a view to a kill). and i really think it is a dis service to pierce for all the hard work that he has put into the role, to talk of who will replace him..........the body is not even cold yet and here we talk of who will replace him >thats really in bad taste. lets enjoy pierce while he still has the part, when he steps down then we can talk about it

[JackChase007]

Hell, let Brosnan play Bond for the rest of his life. I used to want Hugh Jackman as the next Bond if anyone, but now that I think about it, nobody, to me, could be Bond after Brosnan leaves. NOBODY.

[SeanValen00V]

Originally posted by JackChase007
Hell, let Brosnan play Bond for the rest of his life.  I used to want Hugh Jackman as the next Bond if anyone, but now that I think about it, nobody, to me, could be Bond after Brosnan leaves.  NOBODY.

I thought that way with Connery, liked him, then came Moore, liked him, then Dalton-brave as Pierce described him of going to bonds roots, like Dalton, he was Bond for me, and still is the Flemming Bond, but now we have Pierce who is great also,although I'm still hooked as well to past Bonds, but as history as proven, never underestimate the future face of Bond. Someone could of looked at Pierce or Dalton when they were 24 or younger, and said haha, your no Bond, then looked what happened, same could be for other future Bonds, they maybe out there, huge population now, alot of genes, some must be 007_born to play him.

:cool: