Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

ironchapman

New James Bond Chosen

Recommended Posts

ironchapman    1

While searching for news updates in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, I stumbled upon this

Daniel Craig is to be the new James Bond. He is the first blond actor to fill the role. He is alsop only the second Englishman to take on the role.

For the record, the next Bond movie (the 21st of the series) will be called "Casino Royale" and is to be directed by Martin Campbell, who directed Pierce Brosnan's first movie as Bond, "Goldeneye" back in 1995.

New Bond Chosen (AJC)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


vdogg    327

Sorry, but this is simply not a very good choice.

Agreed. I was like "Daniel who?" <_< I keep thinking of Jenny Craig for some reason, are they related? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
satalac    491

i'd rather see jason stratham be bond then some blonde guy. sure he's got that lower class british accent going on, but he's a badass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Recchia    0

i'd rather see jason stratham be bond then some blonde guy. sure he's got that lower class british accent going on, but he's a badass.

Jason Statham would be the most kickass Bond ever. Maybe I'd actually see one of the Bond movies if he was in it. Imagine a James Bond combined with the crappy acting and ridiculous action of the Transporter. Ha, it'd be great!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ironchapman    1

too soon. Pierce still has a few more years in him

True, but some I've talked to think Pierce is starting to show signs of aging past what Bond should look like.

He could've at least made one more movie for us though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Veronica    0

i'd rather see jason stratham be bond then some blonde guy. sure he's got that lower class british accent going on, but he's a badass.

so color his hair brown! haven't seen much of this guy's acting style but if you ask me, and even if you don't ... no one beats Sean Connery. Roger Moore was good when young, then he got too jowly. :sick:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
monsoon    0

Casino Royale was a 60s movie that was a satire of Bond. Can't they produce an original movie these days?

The 60s Casino Royal starred the excellent David Niven. A classical actor well known actor. The musical score was by Herb Albert. My guess is the new movie won't be nearly as high quality if the last few Bond movies are an example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ironchapman    1

Casino Royale was a 60s movie that was a satire of Bond. Can't they produce an original movie these days?

The 60s Casino Royal starred the excellent David Niven. A classical actor well known actor. The musical score was by Herb Albert. My guess is the new movie won't be nearly as high quality if the last few Bond movies are an example.

I believe they are reproducing Casino Royale because it isn't considered a true Bond movie (or something like that) because it didn't have the "official" Bond actor of the time, Sean Connery, and it also didn't have the "official" production company, Broccoli behind it.

IMDB gives this as the reason:

The rights to Fleming's first 007 novel, "Casino Royale" - sold by him separately very early on - now reside with Eon Productions. The book was filmed for television and later as a big-screen spoof, since Connery was unavailable.

See here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aessotariq    1

I give it a wait-and-see... I guess I don't have much position one way or the other.

I will say, I am really saddened to hear that John Cleese won't be appearing as Q in the next movie. He's absolutely one of my favorite British actors and has the role of eccentric down to a science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

monsoon    0

I believe they are reproducing Casino Royale because it isn't considered a true Bond movie (or something like that) because it didn't have the "official" Bond actor of the time, Sean Connery, and it also didn't have the "official" production company, Broccoli behind it.

IMDB gives this as the reason:

I personally think it is because Hollywood lacks the creativty to do anything original these days, so they rechurn out old scripts, movies, tv shows and cartoons and often it is much worse quality in terms of talent. Its all about the CGI now, not much else.

A somewhat related piece of trivality, Sean Connery did his own unofficial Bond Movie in the 1980s long after that role had been turned over to his successor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ironchapman    1

^ I do see your point there.

I will say, I am really saddened to hear that John Cleese won't be appearing as Q in the next movie. He's absolutely one of my favorite British actors and has the role of eccentric down to a science.

And he was good too. I guess he just must be getting up in age or something.

Oh well, at least I still have Fawlty Towers and Monty Python...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aessotariq    1

^ Don't mention the war!

here's something I found on Cleese and Q:

The director, Martin Campbell, sees no part for the Python star to play in what he intends to be a grittier, more realistic affair than recent Bond movies. Campbell said: "Casino Royale will be a grittier, tougher and more realistic Bond movie. "We'll be getting away from the huge visual effects and comic relief."

from here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ironchapman    1

^ Don't mention the war!

here's something I found on Cleese and Q:

The director, Martin Campbell, sees no part for the Python star to play in what he intends to be a grittier, more realistic affair than recent Bond movies. Campbell said: "Casino Royale will be a grittier, tougher and more realistic Bond movie. "We'll be getting away from the huge visual effects and comic relief."

from here

I mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it. ;)

That just doesn't seem like a good idea for the series. It just seems like they'd be ruining what has become the established formula for the movies. Of course, perhaps it could use the breath of fresh air.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TennBear    0

I believe they are reproducing Casino Royale because it isn't considered a true Bond movie (or something like that) because it didn't have the "official" Bond actor of the time, Sean Connery, and it also didn't have the "official" production company, Broccoli behind it.

IMDB gives this as the reason:

See here

The movie was a total spoof with multiple James Bonds. The primary James Bond in the movie was David Niven. Now David Niven is a good actor and known for a number of things, being James Bond is not one of them. His best quote was during the Oscars when he said something like "He shouldn't get an Ovation for showing off his shortcomings in Public" after a man streaked the Oscars while he was on stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danclever    0

i'd rather see jason stratham be bond then some blonde guy. sure he's got that lower class british accent going on, but he's a badass.

I didn't know who Craig was either, but check out Layer Cake or Munich. He's not as badass as Stratham, but he's cool nonetheless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.