85 replies to this topic

[11 11]

This is the reason why Brosnan will stay on for 7 Bonds and into his late 50's like Roger Moore did.

Pierce Brosnan's salary for his Bond films as reported by MGM

GoldenEye 1995 $4,000,000.00
Tomorrow Never Dies 1997 $8,000,000.00
The World Is Not Enough 1999 $12,000,000.00
Die Another Day 2002 $16,000,000.00

Brosnan is reportedly asking for $20 million for Bond 21

This means that obviously Pierce could make $20 million for Bond 21
$24 million for Bond 22 and so on.

He has already said he wants to make 2 more Bonds and EON has already said they will make a Bond in 2007.

That would mean Brosnan would make Bond 22 in 2007.

So then in 2009 or 2010 he would be looking at Bond number 7 for Bond 23 at perhaps $28 million for the film?

I think it is quite obvious that Brosnan is going to be around as long or longer than Moore was.

And remember Roger quit after AVTAK, EON still wanted him to make TLD, and he was asked to do so. They also had offered him a lot more money to do so than Dalton got, so money is not an issue it would seem.

Could Brosnan be a 60 year old Bond?

[zencat]

Originally posted by 11 11
And remember Roger quit after AVTAK, EON still wanted him to make TLD, and he was asked to do so. They also had offered him a lot more money to do so than Dalton got, so money is not an issue it would seem.

Eon asked Moore to do TLD? Where do you get this info from? My understanding was Roger and Cubby decided together that it was time to move on. Roger retired on Dec 3, 1985 (I remember this because it was my 21st birthday ) before we even knew the title of the next film. And Wilson had said in interviews that TLD was written with a "generic" Bond in mind.

But I agree with you on Pierce. He

[Turn]

I'm wondering where the information came that he wants to make two more Bonds. I've only heard him say he is going to do another one, not multiple ones.

[11 11]

The truth is that Roger was repeatedly begged by Cubby to stay on. But this had been happening since after MR.

Roger wanted to retire badly after MR but Cubby kept begging him and offering him more money so he stayed on for FYEO.

This continued on with OP when Roger had basically quit but finally was offered so much he came back. Then with AVTAK once again Roger said he was done, but again they begged and begged and threw out a bunch of money and he came back.

Again this went on with TLD but Moore was done for good and was not going to be talked into it again.

This of course is much the way they handled Connery as well.

So I think we can see that Brosnan is going to be around for a long time.

With that kind of money being thrown at him? He gets what 2 or 3 million for his non-Bond roles?

The fans who keep thinking he is leaving soon are foolish.

[11 11]

On the day DAD came out he announced he would make at least 2 more Bond movies. Since he and MGM have the 3 year gap, that means Bond 21 would be out in 2005, and since EON says they will definetly make a bond in 2007 that means already Brosnan is at 54 as Bond.

[zencat]

Again, 11 11, where do you get this info from? I ask because I've never heard of a Moore TLD connection. And as far as Moore's wanting to leave after MR, well, I think that had to do more with posturing in negotiations than any desire on Moore's part to go onto his glorious post-Bond film career. After MR, Moore's contract was picture to picture so he always claimed he was doing his last Bond to make Cubby ponnie up more cash. And it worked (but I doubt he got all he asked for. Cubby was no push-over). Pierce is starting to do the same thing, which is why I never believe the "last Bond" claim whn it appears in the press.

[11 11]

I've read it in numerous books, news articles, web sites etc.

The only reason why Dalton or Brosnan were ever considered was because Moore would not come back.

[Loomis]

I can see Brosnan doing at least two more. He's already signed up for BOND 21, and it would be no great stretch of the imagination to picture him being tempted back for BOND 22 by an offer he can't refuse - having, obviously, first done a Moore and made noises about getting off the stage gracefully. Brosnan's popularity and the success of his Bond films means that no one's in a hurry to push him out the door.

[level007]

the thing i never heard of is "eon say they will do a bond movie in 2007"
Can anyone confirm ?

[zencat]

Originally posted by 11 11
I've read it in numerous books, news articles, web sites etc.

The only reason why Dalton or Brosnan were ever considered was because Moore would not come back.

Well, that's news to me. But if you say so...

[BONDFINESSE 007]

I SEEM TO REMEMBER READING THAT MYSELF, I AM GOING TO TRY AND FIND THAT MAGAZINE, BUT HAVING SAID THAT I JUST CANT SEE ROGER DOING TLD AS SERIOUS A FILM AS IT IS, MY MIND JUST CANT SEE HIM PLAYING BOND THAT WAY

[BONDFINESSE 007]

and as for pierce i hope he does stay for as long or longer than moore cause he dont look old and the money aint bad

[kevrichardson]

Brosnan is fully aware of what happen with both Roger Moore and Sean Connery . Connery and Moore where just to elderly for the part . connery should have never done NSNA . Moore was too ancient in AVTAK. Yes i like both film for very different reasons , AVTAK is part of the official canon (EON produced Bond films) . NSNA with Connery was a journey down a favorite path not taken in a long while. i will watch both film on any given day , when compare too other attempt at "spy" films. Still the part does not call for a elderly gentleman . And Brosnan will be more concerned by a Quality Bond film i.e. a FRWl of OHMSS style picture. Even as MGM will want other DAD. I doub t that they will up-set him in that regard. He want to go out a winner . So he has only committed to one more, with a possible opinion for one after that. Still the spectre (sorry) of what happen to Moore and Connery at the end of they Bond run is too much to ignore.

[gkgyver]

I think Brosnan SHOULD stay for at least two more movies, but I DON'T think that the box office will raise proportional to Brosnan's age.
It's obvious that today's Bond movies become physically more and more challenging, even Brosnan said that. And as long as MGM doesn't turn down the physical part of the films, it will become more and more difficult to hide the natural disadvantages of Pierce's age and it will end like AVTAK: with a stunt double for every small jump/stunt.

[Blue Eyes]

Could Brosnan be a 60 year old Bond?

If he is, I'll scream. The character of Bond is anywhere from 30 through to about 45, 60 is just pushing it.

[kevrichardson]

Please let's not keep him around and return to the Moore syndrome. a elder gentlemen attempting to bed a 20 or 30 something female . It does not look great in real life and even worst on film. The romantic leading men like Cary Grant and Clark Gable look stupid too. Connery , look like Catherine Zeta-Jones grandfather in "Entrapment". Nothing romantic about a old man (elderly) and a young women . Brosnan should reaaly do Bond 21 . Then think about it. Also the old Bond , the up-to date over middle age Bond . Is what mde Garnder's Bond hard for some , he was no longer mid-40's . He was close to late 50's. Even Fleming wrote that after 45 Bond will have to retire his 00 number. Brosnan should review his Fleming like Dalton.

[RITZ]

I'd hate to think what Brozza looks like when he's near 60! I think one more for Brozza, possibly two and then call it a day. He's done a great job for the series, but he should go on a high note.

[Adam]

Let's not forget one thing--Bond is pretty much all Brosnan has left. I know that sounds pessimistic and harsh, but it's reality--unless it's De Niro or Nicholson, once an actor hits 60 his career tends to diminish.
I know most of you are going to say "Haven't you seen 'Evelyn' or 'The Tailor of Panama'?" but honestly--how many average (or less than average) movie goers are even aware that Brosnan makes other films? In terms of public notoriety, Bond is probably the only thing that will keep him on the A-list; ergo, I agree w/ 11 11 in that he will probably stick with Bond for awhile.
(See Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton)

[Blue Eyes]

Completely agree Adam.

[Xenobia]

I love Pierce Brosnan. I don't think I am shocking anyone by saying that. I would love to see him and think he has earned the right to be 007 in 2007. All of that being said, Brosnan as Bond at sixty can not and will not happen. Brosnan knows he has to bow out before he gets to old, and he will do that. And no matter how well the man ages, he will look too old by that point.

But let's not talk about three year breaks or two year breaks or what have you, because for all we know, the new owners of MGM might have something to say about all of that.

-- Xenobia

[Mourning Becomes Electra]

Fleming was also dead by his early 50's and he looked at least in his 60's before he died. So yeah for him 45 was pretty much near death and over the hill. It isn't for most people, especially not in this century. Look around, we live much longer on average now than in the 1950's and we also look better longer.

Halle Berry at 36 is the same age Honour Blackman was in GF, and less than 2 years younger than Maude Adams in Octopussy and yet how many people always go on about how they were more "mature" (aka old, LOL) than the usual Bond girls, but that Halle is young and hip. Basically age is just a number and perception is everything.

Brosnan doesn't need to be told to read his Fleming "like Dalton". He's read the books, he read them years ago (pre Dalton), he reads them now and says he does so especially right before he starts filming.

Right now Brosnan is younger than Moore was TSWLM, and Moore did FOUR films after that. So why some claim that Brosnan's next film, or even the one after will be like AVTAK is beyond me. Unlike Moore he's a physical Bond, he thinks it's important to his interpretation of the role, and he trains specifically and rigorously for it. Moore in comparison wasn't a physical Bond from his first film on so yeah by AVTAK he was really slowing to a crawl, physically. So no Brosnan won't have stunt doubles running up the stairs for him, he'll retire well before that. As he's said numerous times he'd doing the films one at a time and he'll know when to leave. And if it makes some feel better he recently said, he's not sure if there will be a 6th but there won't be a 7th.

I think people got tired of Gardner because all his plots were the same (triple quadruple crosses over and over) and his Bond became a boring character, regardless of age because Gardner was bored writing him.

Lastly, Connery was 68 (about 20 years older than Brosnan is now so why the comparison?) in Entrapment, Jones was 29, yeah the age discepency was too big and the realtionship unbelievable (more because I found her annoying and cdn't understand why he'd bother with her aside from looks) but still I'd much rather sleep with the still sexy Connery at 70+ than Michael Douglas at any age. Oh and I thought Cary Grant looked fine and believable with Audrey Hepburn and Grace Kelly.

[kevrichardson]

Connery looked like a "dirty old man" . Viarga on ones sex organ , not on making one look appealing. If you ever seen a pphoto of Ian Fleming prior to his death , well he look like a man with Heart disease , plus kidney trouble. Yes Brosnan is younger than Moore , when TSWLM was made but . After Moonraker he want to retire ,and certainly after FYEO. What should happen if Brosnan "want to go out on top" .he should "gently push" EON it "secretly" search for a sucessor . To spare the fans the "horror" of what happen with him and Dalton. The only thing that made that entire process not as painful as it could have been ,i.e. 1 guy got it then loses it to the other. Was the fact that they "claimed to be friends" and both when on to some degree of sucess in the role . And each was a Bond for his own time. Dalton move Bond back form the Moore slapstick years and Brosnan has moved him even further.

[Mourning Becomes Electra]

Sorry I can't agree that Brosnan will hold on to Bond as long as he can because he won't have a career after. Whether the average public knows of Tailor or Evelyn, I'm sure they recall TCA or even Dante's Peak.

Brosnan has said himself that the big celebrity will probably pass with Bond and he's OK with that because he's considers himself a working actor. He's been talking about getting older and doing "character parts" since he was on RS. Every actor knows this will happen to them if they're at all smart. George Clooney was recently talking about the short shelf life of a leading actor and why he was preparing for the "after". If you haven't noticed, that's what Brosnan IS doing with smaller films like Tailor and Evelyn. He's showing the industry he can actually ACT, that he can do things outside of Bond. Of course if it was up to some he wouldn't be allowed to make other films outside Bond and then when Bond was up he'd have nothing to build on. But thanks to Bond and all the deals he's received from Bond he can afford to be a regular actor, to do smaller films if he wants, or even just produce. I don't see him grasping on to to Bond when he's nearing 60 because he has nothing else in his career.

[Mourning Becomes Electra]

EON aren't going to hire a successor while Brosnan still has the job. It would make him a lame duck of a Bond. It would be unfair. I'm sure though they've already compiled a short list. They have more than enough time to find and hire someone between Bonds. If they're smart they'll make it a 3 year break. As for what happened in '86 that had to do with contracts and making something public before they should have. I'm sure they've learned their lesson.

All I can say about Connery is that I was watching The Rock last night, and as someone young enough to be his grandaughter I found him very sexy and physically appealing. Something I could not say for the more age appropriate Nicolas Cage.

[Adam]

Oh yeah, I'm sure he won't become a huge joke like Dalton or Moore...with such successful and prestigious hits like "The Beautician and the Beast" & "Possessed" (Dalton) and "Spice World" & "The Quest" (Moore), I can completely see why Brosnan would willingly end his tenure as Bond early...*



*Note sarcasm

[kevrichardson]

The myth that Connery had a career during Bond is untrue . He had to rebuild a film career . Look at the movies he made. "The Offence" , "The Anderson Tapes" , "The Red Tent", "Murder on the Orient Express" , "The Man who would be King" , "The Great Train Robbery" . The stupid movie about the space rock that hits earth. Poor old Moore after Bond drop -off the face of the earth . Name one film that he made after Bond. Brosnan has to be smart. Dalton has make so junk since then too. Remember , this is Brosnan second go around at the Bond dance . He knows that no one remembers a former Bond after the "license to kill" has be revoked . In has case he can be remember as the guy who save 007 . But i think that as a actor , which surprises many that he can . He will go out with more "class" than either Sean Connery or Roger Moore . Why look at DAF of AVTAK. The answer is right there . I feel that there will be more pressure on Bond 21 in terms of quality of script and use of material . More so than on DAD ,simply because Brosnan "really want to go out with a winner" . We can debat which of his films is better than the other, still he need to feel that he "hit one out of the ballpark" as Bond . Both Moore and Connery have great(classic) Bond films . FRWL ,GF , TB , for Connery , Moore has TSWLM , FYEO ,OP ,LALD . We all debate the merits of each . Even Lazenby has OHMSS, the cult favorite . Dalton has TLD and the jury is still out with regards to LTK . So pressure will be even greater .

[Adam]

Originally posted by kevrichardson
The myth taht Connery had a career during Bond is untrue . He had to rebuild a film career .

That's a good point, but I usually consider him successful...The Great Train Robbery, The Untouchables, The Rock, Entrapment...he's had both some good movies and some hits. Plus he did win an Oscar for The Untouchables...

But he also had more time (age-wise) post-Bond than his fellow actors.

[Simon]

Originally posted by 11 11
I've read it in numerous books, news articles, web sites etc.

The only reason why Dalton or Brosnan were ever considered was because Moore would not come back.

To be honest, Roger announced his retirement before the release of AVTAK. I believe you may be confusing Eon's request that Roger return with two things.

1. That John Glenn has stated that he would have liked to have seen Moore in another Bond, and

2. That the TLD script was written a la Roger - but that can only be attributed to how the scripts were written then and no other actor was in mind at the point of writing to do any efficient tailoring.

Ref Brosnan sticking around, I agree with all that MBE has said. Brosnan plays the role more physically than Moore, so physically, he won't be able to remain as Moore did, as he played it in a more relaxed fashion. Connery may be the only actor to have a successful career after Bond, but then he has had more time to get there. His career immediately post Bond was as up and down as Moore's and Dalton's. I believe Brosnan won't care as, as has been said, he is already doing the smaller films.

[Mourning Becomes Electra]

Connery, won an Oscar for The Untouchable in the late 80's, more than 15 years after he left Bond (not counting the abortion that was NSNA). As said he had to rebuild his career after Bond, it's why he has to do a film like Zardoz (Boorman joked it's the only reason he could get him them he was hard up for a role). But he did have a career during Bond, he did do other films llike Marnie and The Hill. It just took another 20 years of making films like The Man Who Would be King, The Great Train Robbery, Robin & Marion, all relatively small films that didn't make much if any money before he got an Oscar in the Untouchables in a supporting role that later led to larger roles in bigger budget films like Hunt For Red October.

To compare Brosnan's career trajectory to Dalton's or Moore, you might as well compare him to Lazenby and say he'll be making Emanuelle films when he's done. Moore was making other films during his early years as Bond, good films like Gold, but by the end he was doing things like a a cameo in Cannonball Run. I don't know if he even wanted an acting career outside of Bond anymore and it's maybe why his transition to UNICEF was so easy for him.

Dalton I don't believe did any films while he was Bond, but then he was only really in the public eye as Bond from 87-89. He may have been the Bond of record but he didn't have a lot of press or buzz then as I recall. His Bond films also didn't that well in the U.S where he decided to stay and do much of his work. And later rightly or wrongly he was tarred with being a B.O. failure as Bond. So he wasn't getting much of a career lift off of Bond at all, the opposite in fact. If he'd gone back full time to England where his stock was higher he might have had an opportunity for better roles.

So no I don't think Brosnan who has continued working on expanding his career while in Bond and who is also seen as a B.O. as well as critical success as Bond will be doing cameos in Spice Girls when he leaves the role.

[freemo]

Hmm, smells like Broz will probably cling to the Bond role forever, using it to maintain A list status and purse his dreams of being a "serious actor". Pity that leads him to taking the Bond role too seriously, pity it also leads to 3 year gaps between films. Would I prefer a Broz Bond film every 3 years, or a NonBroz Bond film every 2 years ? I liked DAD, but it didn't look like a film three years in the making. I question wheater the extra year improves the product, I also question how "popular" Broz is. Outside this forum that it, I don't question his popularity in here, but out in the real world, not everyone regularly sacrifies a goat in his honour. My mother refers to him as "Pierce Bronson". And he ain't getting any younger either. Not that that's a bad thing, but it does mean that future Broz Bond films, apart from starring an actor who takes it too serious and being released every 3 years, are destined to include title songs, cast members and action scenes there purely and simply to give teh film a certian "hipness" and "inness" (real word ?) that a 60 year old lead can't provide.

PS, I actually don't dislike Broz.