| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
pat362 (0)
|
^I would say none of these. I'll use as my point of reference my favorite Bond...Sean Connery. He was 32, a talented actor who was still relatively unknown so no previous roles that could overshadow his performance. Idris is 44 years old so his life expectancy as a viable Bond character is quite short. Tom is young enough but has played the character of Loki too many times for people to overlook that. especially when he will play it at the same time as he would Bond. Tom I find looks too brutish to pass as a decent Bond. Henry is too wooden and will be known as the failed Superman long after he wishes it weren't so. That leaves us with Michael Fassbender who if he wasn't so well known might have been a good Bond and might be able to pull it off but he is too popular an actor to be asked or be interested.
What is far more important than who plays Bond is that they have to start making fun Bond movies. At his core Bond was a womanizing tough guy who had a brain and knew when to have fun. Daniel never looked like he had any fun and they certainly never shot any of his Bond movies as tough fun should be part of it. It's not like the Pierce Brosnan Bond movies were decades before Casino Royale. It was four years. We went from funny banter to dour no Bond girl.
|
11-03-16 03:30pm
Reply To Message
|
2
|
Toadsith (0)
|
REPLY TO #1 - pat362 :
I 100% agree with your second paragraph. Daniel Craig's Bond reboot never sat well with me. It was like they tried to turn Bond into a humourless Jason Bourne — we didn't need that. Bond can have badass action and a sense of humour, the two aren't mutually exclusive.
I must say that Connery is an awesome Bond, but I'm one of those crazy Lazenby fans. He's my favorite. I just wish George wasn't an asshat and had instead agreed to do another movie. Instead he worried about being type-cast.
I personally feel like Idris Elba would be a fantastic choice. He has the elegance, he is comfortable with humour and he has that size and tough-guy power that would make him for a formidable Bond. As for the age, Roger Moore was 46 when he started as Bond. Timothy Dalton was 43. Pierce Brosnan was 42. Only Connery (32), Lazenby (30), and Craig (38) were in their 30s. Dye Elba's hair black and you've got an easy 15 years out of him.
An unknown could be nice, but with the money behind the current Bond films, I don't see it happening.
|
11-03-16 07:09pm
Reply To Message
|
3
|
Cybertoad (Disabled)
|
I think the late Paul Walker could have pulled this off well. It was a very physical actor with a a unique niche in his acting that makes me think he could have done this pretty well.
|
11-04-16 12:32pm
Reply To Message
|
4
|
pat362 (0)
|
REPLY TO #2 - Toadsith :
I didn't realise that Roger was in his 40's when he started playing Bond. He looked younger but he played the role for way too long because by the time he did Moonraker. He looked too old and the age difference between him and his female co-stars was a little too creepy for my taste. That's why as much as I like the concept for A View to a Kill. I get shivers looking at a man nearly 60 pretending to be a sex magnet to a 30 years old woman.
I liked Lazemby's versions of Bond but the critics didn't and they were quite cruel to him at the time. I think it also didn't help that he was a Bond who was mostly not working for the British government and got married.
Timothy's first Bond movie was amazing but his second one is best forgotten. Bond fights the drug Cartels for the US government was not just a bad idea but a ridiculous one as well. It was also the first time that I did not like the Bond song.
Pierce was great in all of his Bond movies and should have been the template to make the Craig bond movies but the powers that be stuck their heads up their asses thinking they could re-invent the wheel.
Casino Royale is a decent movie but the death of the Bond girl leaves a bad taste in the mouth. His second foray is a continuation of the previous movie and worse he doesn't get a Bond girl except the one destined to die a la Goldfinger. I know Skyfall is the most profitable Bond movie of all time and the title song is really good but I detest the level of stupidity through out the film to the point where I refuse to watch Specter.
I'm not alone in detesting the Craig Bond movies because he refused to do more. Mind you I know they offered him 150 million to do another one so not sure if he will choose to do another one. I certainly won't watch it.
|
11-04-16 03:41pm
Reply To Message
|
5
|
Toadsith (0)
|
REPLY TO #4 - pat362 :
I agree that Skyfall was truly atrocious. The only positive was killing off Judi Dench's M because she had been really mailing it in for the past few movies. The movie was just very long and wasted so much talent (I mostly mean Albert Finney — Javier Bardem is mostly overrated in my opinion.)
It also never ended, 143 minutes was about 53 minutes too long.
Spectre is 148 minutes, because apparently Sam Mendes felt 143 was really cramping his style. I've yet to see it either.
Daniel Craig keeps hedging his bets on if he'll do another one or not. I'd rather he don't but I wouldn't be shocked if he turns around and signs up for Bond 25. He's currently listed as the Odds-On Favorite by the strange folks betting on the casting for Bond 25. We shall see.
Regarding Brosnan: Apparently he was all set to do a fifth Bond film, was told they'd be starting pre-production soon and all that, and then got a call from the producers saying they were going in a different direction. Word is was that they got scared by the Bourne Identity (Budget of $60m) with it's June 2002 release to a $27m opening and a $121m final gross after 5 months. The odd thing is that November 2002's Die Another Day (Budget $142m) had a $47m opening and grossed $161m in only 4 months. Sure Bourne's profit margin was much higher, but Bond was pulling in a ton of money none-the-less.
They are such different films and when they retooled Bond to be younger, leaner, and meaner — they didn't save any money. Casino Royale (2006) cost $150m and grossed $167m, and it's opening was smaller than Die Another Day at $40m.
The simply need to go back to what made the Connery, Lazenby, and Brosnan films fun and get rid of the idea of James Bond being a brash, barely-harnessed, thug. Bond is the secret agent with a sparkle in his eye and a one-liner always ready-at-hand.
|
11-04-16 08:18pm
Reply To Message
|
6
|
pat362 (0)
|
REPLY TO #5 - Toadsith :
I was okay with Dench and I think that the reason why she was phoning it in is that she quickly realised that her role as "M" would be even less important to the story to the point where they could have cut it out and I'm not sure that it would have been much of an issue. That and she in in her 70's so the enthusiasm may no longer be there.
I can't stress how much I liked the Brosnan Bond films. For one thing you can see that he really wanted to play the role and the producers made sure that everything that made the Connery and Moore films fun to watch was in those movies. Die Another day budget 143 millions, box office 431 millions. The World is not enough budget 135 millions, box office: 361 millions and Goldeneye budget 58 millions, box office 352 millions. The rule of thumb is that you double production cost to include cost of promotion and each movie made over 100 million in profit except for World is not Enough which only made 90+. That of course does not include profits from dvd, blu-ray and tv deals.
My perfect world would include remakes of some of the classic Bond films but with better effects, a different take on the story. Of course they can't all be remade but I would love to see a remake of the the Spy who Loved me, Thunderball(I know Never say Never is a remake) but those two can easily be adapted to the modern time and still be fun.
|
11-06-16 10:44am
Reply To Message
|
7
|
Toadsith (0)
|
REPLY TO #6 - pat362 :
Let's hope they listen to the die-hard fans and do just that!
|
11-06-16 01:35pm
Reply To Message
|
8
|
pat362 (0)
|
REPLY TO #7 - Toadsith :
They don't even have to do that because I seem to remember reading somewhere that Daniel lamented the fact that her wished he could have appeared in a Bond movie more like those older ones. Thank God for dvd and Blu-Ray because I watch at least one JB movie per month and I'm not too picky on which one except for License to Kill, Octopussy and a View to a Kill. Sadly those I have a hard time watching.
|
11-07-16 02:13pm
Reply To Message
|
