93 replies to this topic

[crashdrive]

Bondpurist, could please explain why you dislike Jackman? I also would be interested who is your pick as the next Bond?

Loomis, as you can see, Dougray Scott (picture above) can look handsome enough (he was goodlooking in 'Ever After' if I'm not mistaking), but in most of the pictures (both moving and stills) I see of him, he doesn't strike me as a very handsome looking man. Maybe not scary, but definately not appealing to woman, which, as I pointed out earlier, is one of Bond's key characteristics. But he's definately still in the running.

[rubixcub]

Originally posted by doublenoughtspy
rubixcub you put into words why I want Owen to be James Bond.

"his manner, his strength, his machismo, his 'cool', his presence, his coldness all make me think of James Bond."

I concur.  Everytime I see him I just think "My god, what this guy could do as Bond."

Thanks. Took me a little while to come up with all the adjectives.

I also agree that he would be Dalton Mk 2, whereas Jackman would be Brosnan Mk2.

I actually think he'd be somewhere between Dalton and Connery. I've only seen him in "Gosford Park" but he made a strong impression, not so much on first viewing when I was still trying to figure everything out but on successive viewings he comes through pretty strongly.

His coldness and seeming lack of romantic interest in "Gosford Park" remind me of Dalton. On successive viewings the lack of romantic interest that I thought I saw in my first viewing gave way somewhat. The character was there on a mission, he wasn't there to score but he did have a thing for Mary (Kelly MacDonald), and she returned his feelings. From that one gets a sense of greater sincerity and emotional depth, in terms of love, than James Bond. He seems to be the sort of guy who is struck with attraction for one girl rather than always keeping his eyes open for a new conquest.

On the other hand, his presence, strength, and machismo remind me more of Connery. The later scenes he did with Kelly MacDonald suggested Connery more than Dalton. In fact, all the scenes of Parks in his room made me think of Connery, and truthfully he reminds me more of suave, continental Connery overall more than intense, angry Dalton.

The producers have to weigh many things.  But the biggest thing to consider with Jackman is if he still has other franchise interests.

They don't want Hugh Jackman, star of the X-Men, star of the Van Helsing series, and oh yea, when he's not busy with those two he does a Bond movie.

They want a name - but they want the person to become a huge star because of Bond.  He's said he'll do 3 X-Men movies and then make way for younger stars.  I find that slightly hard to believe that he will turn down the huge paychecks they will inevitibly throw at him to return.

Not necessarily. How many actors stick around for a fourth entry in a franchise? Not very many. How many franchises even make it past three? How many make it past four? Excepting Bond, I can only think of four- Star Wars, Star Trek, Halloween and Police Academy. X-Men I'm guessing won't go far past four, if that far. Wolverine could be a role that they play musical chairs with following Jackman, like they did with Batman.

The real question is Van Helsing. The first is due out in 2004, and has the potential to become a franchise. The biggest question is, how many of those will Jackman make? If it doesn't spawn a sequel (which is unlikely) then he's in the pink. If he only makes two, which would probably put the sequel in 2006 or 2007, then he should still be okay to take on the 007 mantle as soon as 2007 (it would be better if the Van Helsing sequel was in 2006). If he makes three, he'll only make it in if Brosnan does a sixth in 2007 and if the three Van Helsing movies are close together (2004, 2006, 2008). This would still leave him room and time for the transition, because no way will EON allow him to do two franchises at once. They'll only take him once he's done with Van Helsing.

Dave

[Loomis]

Originally posted by crashdrive

(Dougray Scott is) definately not appealing to woman  

Are you sure about that? I imagine there are literally thousands, possibly even millions, of women who'd find Scott extremely appealing. I believe he'd be more than convincing as a ladies' man, and he's certainly got darkness and danger in spades.

I'm sure Scott's name is at number two on EON's wishlist, directly behind Hugh Jackman's.

[crashdrive]

Guys, aren't we getting a little off-topic here? This thread is supposed to be about Hugh Jackman. I know, I'm partly responsible. Let's move this discussion to The Next James Bond?

[Bondpurist]

I agree completely with doublenoughtspy and rubixcub. Jackman isn't brutal looking enough (if you know what I mean) and seems far too similar to many other Hollywood actors. Anyway, casting a big name from elsewhere would be a mistake - he needs to BE James Bond, not someone who is Wolverine AND James Bond. Clive Owen has a uniqueness, an enigmatic, mysterious quality, a sort of quinessentially British machismo. Plus, he's less well known and will be known as Bond and no-one else.

[Loomis]

Originally posted by Bondpurist

Anyway, casting a big name from elsewhere would be a mistake - he needs to BE James Bond, not someone who is Wolverine AND James Bond.  

I don't know. A number of actors have had more than one franchise. Look at Harrison Ford (Han Solo in the STAR WARS films as well as Indiana Jones, and also Jack Ryan for two pictures). Then there's Stallone, who was both Rocky and Rambo, and Mel Gibson, who played both Mad Max and Martin (LETHAL WEAPON) Riggs. Schwarzenegger gave us both Conan and The Terminator. I don't believe Jackman would be too typecast as Wolverine to play Bond, and I'm sure that if he did play Bond he'd do so after his involvement with the X-MEN series had ended.

What do you think of Dougray Scott, BP?

[Bondpurist]

Dougray Scott is OK I suppose - at least he's British and a reasonable actor. Certainly has the looks, and is no household name, which isn't a bad thing.
I really think that the Bond actor needs to be known as primarily Bond ; it wouldn't be right having the Bond actor not identified mainly with Bond. If he is thought as the bloke who plays so-and-so and so-and-so and also Bond, then it's going to deflect attention to their other roles, away from Bond. Most Bond actors are known as Bond and not much else, at least until they've stopped doing Bond. This is in Scott's favour.
However, I wonder whether Scott has the charm and class to be Bond.
I prefer Clive Owen anyway, and to a certain extent James Purefoy.

[Bondpurist]

I'm sure Scott's name is at number two on EON's wishlist, directly behind Hugh Jackman's.

I'd guess that Owen is probably ahead of Scott in the running any day.

[Loomis]

Originally posted by Bondpurist

I really think that the Bond actor needs to be known as primarily Bond ; it wouldn't be right having the Bond actor not identified mainly with Bond. If he is thought as the bloke who plays so-and-so and so-and-so and also Bond, then it's going to deflect attention to their other roles, away from Bond. Most Bond actors are known as Bond and not much else, at least until they've stopped doing Bond. This is in Scott's favour.

You're right. Come to think of it, the analogies I gave in my above post are false. The Rocky, Mad Max, Indiana Jones, Rambo, etc. franchises were not established by the time their lead actors signed on. Moreover, Ford, Schwarzenegger, Stallone and the rest are superstars. On the other hand, Bond is an established icon and series, and the actor playing Bond isn't supposed to be a megastar. I see what you mean by Jackman's role as Wolverine being damaging were he to be cast as 007. Personally, I don't wish to see Jackman play Bond, and I have a strong feeling that he'll be too big a star by the time the role is next up for grabs, thanks to films like SWORDFISH, the X-MENs and the upcoming VAN HELSING.

Originally posted by Bondpurist

I'd guess that Owen is probably ahead of Scott in the running any day.

I hope so.

[Roebuck]

Playing devil's advocate here...
Wasn't Roger known from Ivanhoe, The Alaskans, Maverick,The Saint and The Persuaders before he signed on as 007?
Yet cinema goers in the Seventies readily accepted him in the role.

[Bondpurist]

All of Roger's roles post Bond that you mention weren't big film roles, and were really reltively minor roles. I'm referring to big, career defining roles like Jackman in X-men, and, ofcourse, Bond.

[Loomis]

Originally posted by Roebuck

Wasn't Roger known from Ivanhoe, The Alaskans, Maverick,The Saint and The Persuaders before he signed on as 007?
Yet cinema goers in the Seventies readily accepted him in the role.  

Was Moore as big a film star prior to Bond as Jackman is now? (And Jackman seems to be on the cusp of real stardom. I wouldn't be surprised if he became as big as, say, Russell Crowe within the next couple of years.) TV fame is one thing, making it big as a movie star is another (just ask Tom Selleck).

[crashdrive]

Personally, I have no problem that Jackman may already be known for one or two franchise characters. Bond is so different from a character like Wolverine. Many people don't even know how Jackman looks like without his Wolverine hair and make-up. Imagine how he would look in tux with a martini in his hand. I'm sure hardly anyone would recognize him. And I'm sure EON won't mind. The only thing I'm worried about is that Jackman may become too big a star to play Bond if his 'Van Helsing' franchise becomes a hit with moviegoers.

But don't forget that Owen is gaining in popularity fast. His next film 'King Arthur' could be the next 'Gladiator' for all we know. Don't forget the producer is Jerry Bruckheimer and the director Antoine Fuqua got Denzil Washington the Oscar for best actor ('Training Day'). It's very likely Owen will become a star as big as (or even bigger then) Jackman.

[Roebuck]

What you have to appreciate Bondpurist is that during the Fifties and Sixties movie houses were fighting a loosing battle with television for audiences. The regard in which TV stars were back then was phenomenal. By the time LALD was released Roger had had a small screen career spanning three decades and was one of TV's most famous (not to mention best paid) faces. He was strongly identified in the eyes of the public with roles such as Simon Templar and Lord Bret Sinclair (nothing minor about those roles I assure you), but now he is mostly remembered as James Bond.

Jackman in comparison has only played Wolverine twice. It's much less of an obstacle to surmount.

[Loomis]

On the other hand, isn't Jackman an even bigger star now than Moore was in his TV prime, thanks to the internet?

If Jackman were to sign to play Bond, I can picture press cartoonists drawing pictures of him as Wolverine, complete with claws and wild hair, in a tuxedo, holding a gun and sipping a martini.

[Bondpurist]

OK, perhaps Moore was well known, but what about the other Bonds? Connery = unknown
Lazenby = unknown
Dalton = little known outside the UK
Brosnan = Apart from Remington Steele, nowhere near as big as Jackman
If an actor has a Tabula Rosa in the (big) stardom stakes and can establish himself firstly and foremostly as Bond then it avoids his other roles deflecting attention from Bond.

[crashdrive]

Originally posted by Loomis
On the other hand, isn't Jackman an even bigger star now than Moore was in his TV prime, thanks to the internet?

I don't think so. I'm sure Roger Moore was a lot more famous than Jackman is now. He still has not carried a hit film by himself. 'Van Helsing' will be the real test. And so what if cartoonist draw Hugh with claws? I'm sure they made fun of the casting of Moore with halo's.

And BP, Clive Owen won't be an unknown actor anyone one year from now when 'King Arthur' opens. He'll be more famous than Connery, Lazenby, Dalton and perhaps even Brosnan.

[Loomis]

I don't deny that Moore was famous prior to Bond, but was his fame really comparable to that of Jackman, especially given all the internet fuss over the X-MEN films? And the following extract from Moore's IMDB biography suggests that he may not have made such a big splash in the States before he donned the tuxedo:

"Moore went into television in the 1950s in shows like "Ivanhoe" (1958) and "Alaskans, The" (1959), but probably got the most recognition from "Maverick" (1957), as cousin Beau. In 1962 he got his big breakthrough, at least internationally, as "Saint, The" (1962). The show made him a superstar and he became very successful thereafter. Moore ended his run as the Saint, and was one of the premier stars of the world, but he was not catching on in America. In an effort to change this, he agreed to star with Tony Curtis in ITC's "Persuaders!, The" (1971), but although hugely popular in Europe, it did not catch on in the US and was cancelled."

As for Owen becoming "more famous than Connery, Lazenby, Dalton and perhaps even Brosnan" in the not too distant future, I have my doubts, but who knows? I can't picture him becoming as big a star as Jackman, though, simply because Jackman's potential as a leading man would seem to be so much greater. He's had franchise success already, and I'm sure he'd be a shoe-in for a new LETHAL WEAPON/DIE HARD-style action movie series. I'm not sure the same is true of Owen.

[crashdrive]

I should rephrase, I meant Owen will be more famous than Connery, Lazenby, Dalton and probably Brosnan when EON first hired them to play James Bond. BP was trying to make a point that Bond should be an unknown, but it looks like Owen is not an unknown actor anymore.

And just because Jackman is famous on the internet does not mean that a general audience will automatically see him as Wolverine. Ask people on the street and they probably don't even know who Jackman is. My girlfriend only found out recently that 'the guy from 'Swordfish', 'the guy from 'Kate and Leopold' & 'Wolverine' are the same actor. That's what I call versatile.

[Roebuck]

When Pierce Brosnan was cast as Bond I was horrified that EON couldn't come up with anyone better than him to replace an actor like Tim Dalton. Brosnan was Remington Steele to me, and I'd hated Remington Steele with a vengeance.The guy was so shallow; a floppy haired pretty boy. Certainly not my idea of 007...
Until I saw the pre-titles of GoldenEye, of course! Then I realised the franchise was going to be in good hands. Bond is one of the all time great movie hero roles. Much bigger than Wolverine could ever hope to be. So if Jackman did clinch the role then I'm willing to bet fans would have put all associations with the X-Men franchise out of their minds by the end of the pre-titles.

[Loomis]

Originally posted by crashdrive
I should rephrase, I meant Owen will be more famous than Connery, Lazenby, Dalton and probably Brosnan when EON first hired them to play James Bond.  

Well, I won't disagree with you there.

Originally posted by crashdrive

My girlfriend only found out recently that 'the guy from 'Swordfish', 'the guy from 'Kate and Leopold' & 'Wolverine' are the same actor. That's what I call versatile.  

That's what I call forgettable.

Originally posted by Roebuck

The guy was so shallow; a floppy haired pretty boy. Certainly not my idea of 007...

Exactly my current impression of Jackman. You're right, though, Roebuck, the proof of the pudding....

[Bondpurist]

If anyone's a floppy haired pretty boy it must be Jackman. He has 'machismo' and 'masculinity' in the way Leonardo di Caprio has it. He just gives the impression of being a vain half wit. I'm sorry, but it's just my impression.

[crashdrive]

I wonder, have you even seen of movie where Jackman starred in?

[BONDFINESSE 007]

crashdrive, i think you have jackman on the brain like i have denise on the brain

[crashdrive]

I'm quite sure not in the same manner

[BONDFINESSE 007]

although it is looking more like jackman may get it

[taxman2001]

Another fact that you may like to take into account is the involvement of Hugh Jackman with the proposed film version of the Clive Cussler book Sahara.

According to Dr Cussler's PR woman who posts on the Clive Cussler Discussion Board, Jackman had for years almost begged for the role of the hero, Dirk Pitt.

Everyone was happy with him playing the role, especially most of the fans and the author.

So what does Hugh do? He wants the film postponed so he can go and act on Broadway.

Now I've got nothing against Jackman (either as an actor or as Bond - personally I think there are better actors out there who could take on the mantle of 007) but I post this as a taster of what may happen ...

[Roebuck]

Originally posted by taxman2001
According to Dr Cussler's PR woman who posts on the Clive Cussler Discussion Board, Jackman had for years almost begged for the role of the hero, Dirk Pitt.

Everyone was happy with him playing the role, especially most of the fans and the author.

So what does Hugh do?  He wants the film postponed so he can go and act on Broadway.

Well all that will come as something of a shock to Matthew McConaughey, who apparently thinks he's playing Dirk Pitt in Sahara.

Look, when the producers finally got round to offering Jackman the role of Pitt he couldn't accept as he was already contractually obligated to X2 and the schedules conflicted. While the part was being offered round all the usual suspects (Cruise, Clooney, etc) the film ran into production problems. So with all the other actors on their wish list asking for a big paycheck the producers went back to Hugh, who would have been delighted to play Pitt but had signed up for the theatre gig.

Bad luck and bad timing on the producers part, but I really can't see why Jackman should be expected to shoulder the blame?

[taxman2001]

However Roebuck if you were to ask Clive Cussler's PR lady she wouldn't agree with you.

McConaughey has also almost begged for the role and is the front runner (the announcement of who will play Pitt should be soon) but Jackman allegedly wanted the role even more.

Feel free (if free doesn't mind) to go and visit the Cussler Discussion Board.

[Roebuck]

Think you're going on out of date info there taxman2001. In the third week of April Paramount announced McConaughey would be the lead in Sahara. It's a done deal.