39 replies to this topic

[DLibrasnow]

can't we all just get along???

[kevrichardson]

That is a foolish reason to cry foul. That was the great Connery whinning problem . The role was too much as well as the shot it self. Let him have the extra year. You are very wrong the extra year worked wonders.

[DLibrasnow]

Let Pierce have his extra year. He should be allowed to pursue other acting opportunities since his part as 007 has a limited shelf life.

[11 11]

Well I guess I am wrong then, but I can tell you if I was running EON and he pulled that 3 year thing he would have been released out of his contract if it was me.

[kevrichardson]

It cost to be the boss , and who will you replace him with . The man regardless of how you feel about his talent . Brosnan's Bond has generated over $1 billion dollars (US) . Please just tell me how you could do it. Keep in mind , this GoldenEye saved the Bond series , TND brought MGM / UA from being bankrupt , TWINE pumped in more money and DAD has once again save the studio . And each has brought a profit to all involved . Look as fans we live in a dream workd . Reality movies have all way been made too make money . It's a business ,unless something horroible happens to both Eon and MGM . The 3 years wait is in . I would love to see the final totals for all 4 of Brosnan 's Bond in the overall amount of money made . Has to be close to $ 2 billion dollars (US)

[Contessa]

You bring up interesting points, 1 11, but I'm not quite sure what you mean in a few of them. "Remington Steele" (1982-1987) would have certainly been made and Brosnan most likely would have been cast regardless of whether he had ever met Cubby Broccoli. In fact, it's Brosnan's contract with the series and the fans' enthusiasm for a final season that kept him from becoming Bond the first time around.

Also, the fact that Brosnan wants to make Bond movies less often than Connery or Moore made them doesn't mean he thinks himself superior to the two actors. The movie business today is quite different from the 60s and 70s, and making big budget flicks (which Bond has become) is a more time-consuming undertaking from pre-production to the press junkets. Brosnan spent 6 months shooting the movie, and, as he was in just about every scene, was on set virtually everyday. He's spent the last few months publicizing it. It's rare to see actors starring in more than two movies per year anymore; the production process is too time consuming.

As Brosnan is not a friend or family member of mine, I don't feel he "owes" anything to me. He's simply a human being with a family and career to balance.

Of course, I do wish DAD had been much better with the extra year,
and I think a lot people expected it to be. But, as Brosnan wasn't responsible for the script (or the lack thereof), I don't hold him responsible.

[kevrichardson]

Excellent points . after over a year ,shooting and the promotion of the films . it would be good to give at a rest . a recharge the batterys, excellent. and that should be the end of it.

[General Koskov]

Personally, I think that a defined gap between films is just pure marketing benefit and nothing else. If MGM just let Eon come up with a really good Bond film no matter how long it took them (and I can't see it taking them ten years), then we'd have some non-rushed, high quality films.

Fleming was an amazing writer who came up with fourteen wonderful plots in consecutive years. None of today's writers seem to have that talent, so why put a '60s time limit on the films?

Not only would this 'guarantee' us a good film, it would make them all the more likeable (because you can't just say, oh there'll be another one out at this time next year).

PS. To make my point moot is the fact that the Bonds of the '80s were all good Bond films (in my opinion), and they were done with very little Fleming.

[kevrichardson]

You have a interesting point . one should be examined throughly. one thing is true Fleming is dead . And the producers have used up his creative output. Richard Maibaum is dead , he was part of the original Bond creative team . He was fully aware of the characters limtations. The new spin is too take Bond where he has never been. The production team finds it less costly to write new stories than buy one all ready written . The reason why no Garnder , Markham or Benson will never appear on the silver screen.

[DLibrasnow]

They need to take some cues from the Gardner and Benson novels. I know that AVTAK plundered so many Gardner elements that it bordered on piracy by EON, but there are still many interesting elements in the novels that could be used to good effect by the production team.