Who do you think will be the next Bond?... Brosnan may come

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 29 Sep 2005, 10:01

From IMDB so it must be true!

Bond Decision Likely Next Week, Say Websites

Rumors spread over James Bond-related Internet fan sites Tuesday that a final decision on who will star in Casino Royale, the next 007 film, will be made next week. The CommanderBond.net site claimed that Sony executives will be meeting with Eon Productions execs next week in London, where the decision will be made. It said that while Pierce Brosnan had been removed from the running months ago, he now not only is being considered to star in the 21st Bond film, but that he is regarded as the frontrunner. "A senior Sony executive has told a member of the Casino Royale production team that the new Bond will 'probably' be Pierce Brosnan," the website said. However, it also indicated that actor Daniel Craig remains the "preferred" choice of Eon, the Bond movies' producers. Today's (Wednesday) Daily Variety said that Sony and Eon are completing screen tests for the movie this week and that the frontrunners are Craig, Henry Cavill, Sam Worthington and Goran Visnjic.

Pierce is back!!! (hopefully)

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 29 Sep 2005, 14:41

Goran Visnijc. The Croatian 007?

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 29 Sep 2005, 16:30

Who's he?

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 29 Sep 2005, 16:38

Orlando Bloom can't act.

And I thought Die Another day was all right.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 29 Sep 2005, 17:44

I LOVE the IMDB its just a place to get 100% correct facts

I wonder when they will acctually bother with a new film, doesnt look good at the moment still.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 29 Sep 2005, 18:28

Notice I put a

smiley in my post Romero.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 29 Sep 2005, 20:30

I know you did

thats why I was commenting on it

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 30 Sep 2005, 07:54

Yeah but the sentence seemed to imply I didnt know IMDB is not always the most reliable site

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 01 Oct 2005, 04:50

I hope the next Bond has a strong presence and can act. I also hope that they don't hire some hack director like Lee Tamahori this time around. (His first film Once Were Warriors was fantastic, he started sucking once he went to Hollywood - like the majority of ex-pat kiwi filmmakers.)

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 01 Oct 2005, 05:01

grim_tales wrote:Who's he?

Goran plays Dr Luka Kovach (sp?) on ER. I think he was also the assassination target/love interest in Elektra (which I haven't seen and don't plan to either) and played the lead in some recent TV-miniseries remake of Spartacus (which I haven't seen and don't plan to either).

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 01 Oct 2005, 17:31

It's Kovac and yeah that's the guy.

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 02 Oct 2005, 22:06

I've always said Jude Law should play the role, and I still feel that way...

edit:... although it doesnt really matter who plays the part, as long as they don't fix the writing...
I wouldnt go see a Law-Bond flick if it is the same bad quality as the Brosnan ones.
They should get back to writing proper thriller/spy stories, and THEN work out where stunts and explosions and chases would be suitable, instead of writing a story around some stunt-setpieces and some chicks who cant act...

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 03 Oct 2005, 01:19

Law isn't tough enough. Brosnan has the charm but also looks like he could easily shoot someone in the head.

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 03 Oct 2005, 05:16

Markgway wrote:Law isn't tough enough. Brosnan has the charm but also looks like he could easily shoot someone in the head.

Law is slick, suave, smart, sexy AND can look very dangerous and menacing (Road to Perdition, Enemy at the Gate).

Brosnan always reminds me of a Ken-barbie-doll, ALWAYS in the suit, and just smirking the whole movie. To me, Brosnan is just a git. Also because I feel he is quite limited as an actor, although ofcourse the awfull scripts for the movies don't help much either.

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 03 Oct 2005, 05:25

Yi-Long wrote:and THEN work out where stunts and explosions and chases would be suitable, instead of writing a story around some stunt-setpieces and some chicks who cant act...

A lot of those HK movies that we like (eg Police Story) are made that way and I don't anyone complaining.

Erm, actually that's why I hated Hero and HoFD, their lack of decent writing, so nevermind.

Dude, just give up on Bond and watch the Jason Bourne movies, they're top-notch spy-thrillers IMO.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 03 Oct 2005, 07:45

Brosnan is NOT always in his suit

I agree Eva, Bourne Identity was superb IMO (about to watch Supremacy).

IronMonkey · Post by **IronMonkey** » 03 Oct 2005, 09:55

EvaUnit02 wrote:Dude, just give up on Bond and watch the Jason Bourne movies, they're top-notch spy-thrillers IMO.

My thoughts exactly. Although I enjoy the odd Bond film for mindless fun, if I want a serious spy thriller I go straight to the Jason Bourne films (not the original though, I haven't seen that).

The reason they are so good is because they are based on books which were written with the story in mind, and not all the stunts / action, etc.

Top stuff!

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 03 Oct 2005, 10:31

EvaUnit02 wrote:
Yi-Long wrote:and THEN work out where stunts and explosions and chases would be suitable, instead of writing a story around some stunt-setpieces and some chicks who cant act...
A lot of those HK movies that we like (eg Police Story) are made that way and I don't anyone complaining.

Erm, actually that's why I hated Hero and HoFD, their lack of decent writing, so nevermind.

Dude, just give up on Bond and watch the Jason Bourne movies, they're top-notch spy-thrillers IMO.

Actually, that's pretty much the main criticism Chan's movies get: Good beginning with a good action scene, then an hour of romantic comedy with some small action bits thrown in, and then a brilliant finale. Same thing with Ong Bak, TYG, and lots more azn movies. Weak story, great action. But in the case of these azn movies, the action-scenes makes up for the weak story, and in the last Bond movies, they don't.

Don't get me wrong, I like action as much as the next guy, but the Bond movies usually have pretty basic stuff in them: Big huge ass explosion and big noises and stuff, but it doesnt quite have the impact of say, an old-skool Jackie Chan fight, or a flying knee to the chest by Tony Yaa...

Also, I think people complain about the Bond movies, it's cause in the old ones it was a bit more about the whole setting, the story, the villain, and just Bond being Bond. I feel Connery did a great Bond, and both Moore and Brosnan kinda went over the top. Made Bond into a comicbook character, instead of human (which is why I'm also so fond of Dalton as Bond, as he portrayed a very human, yet lethal Bond)

You're dead-on about the Bourne movies, although part 2 for me was totally and utterly ruined by the director's insistence on using a shaky-cam and about 3 cuts a second, during the action scenes. Bourne Identity is classic though. That's how spy-movies should be made. Gritty, realistic, people with double/hidden agendas, etc etc. Too bad about those crappy shot action-scenes in pt 2 ...

I quite liked Hero btw. The first time I saw it I felt it was lacking a bit, but since then I've seen it once or twice more, and gotta say I liked it better after rewatching it. But it isn't a good action flick, and it isnt the best dramatic movie either.So it kinda falls flat on it's face between the genres it's trying to be, yet the sound and vision almost makes it into a whole new genre: eye-candy... and as such it does a great job.

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 03 Oct 2005, 12:37

You're dead-on about the Bourne movies, although part 2 for me was totally and utterly ruined by the director's insistence on using a shaky-cam and about 3 cuts a second, during the action scenes. Too bad about those crappy shot action-scenes in pt 2 ...

I first saw Supremacy projected onto the lower-half of an IMAX screen and the shaky-cam cinematography completely fucking ruined the film for me. Afterwards my mate and I joked calling it "The Osbourne Epilepsy" and saying stuff like "they shouldn't have hired Ozzy as the cameraman."

Later on when I rewatched the film on DVD on the family's 32" telly, the "seisure cinematography" I found was quite bearable and followable. I couldn't process the imagery when I saw in theatres cuz the screen was so fucking massive. On a normal-sized I could actually appreciate the plot and actually follow what the fuck was happening on screen.

For The Bourne Ultimatum I fucking hope they don't hire a filmmaker who has a boner for "shaky-cam documentary-style" filmmaking like that fuck Greengrass had. It's bloody annoying. I don't care that it gives the "documentary feel" and makes the film feel edgy/gritty.

yet the sound and vision almost makes it into a whole new genre: eye-candy... and as such it does a great job.

Exactly, but the writing in Hero was mediorce at best; HoFD was fucking absymal - a complete fucking mess. That's why I reckon CTHD shits onto both of Zhang's films from great heights, the story and characters are excellent.

EvaUnit02 wrote: The reason they are so good is because they are based on books which were written with the story in mind, and not all the stunts / action, etc.

Actually the films are hardly anything like the books. The books were very much Cold War spy-novels (like Ian Flemming's stuff) and set in year they were written (early-mid '80's for Identity and Supremacy, early 90's for Ultimatum). Identity only shared the premise with Robert Ludlum's book and Supremacy shared only the original book's title.

Did you mean the "spirit" of novels is captured by the films?

IronMonkey · Post by **IronMonkey** » 03 Oct 2005, 13:19

Well actually I've never read the books, but I was under the impression that the films were based directly on the stories in the books. Obviously I was wrong...

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 03 Oct 2005, 17:19

I thought THE BOURNE IDENTITY was average. Haven't bothered with the sequel yet.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 03 Oct 2005, 17:26

Brosnan is a great Bond IMO, so there!

If you look at his first 3 films he has the whole package - menace, sly gags and some vulnerability (look at GE, TND and the first half of DAD for example). And if he looks like a Ken barbie doll, so what? Bond is supposed to be a lethal Playboy spy isnt he?

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 14 Oct 2005, 20:00

it's daniel craig-odd choice imo.

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 18 Oct 2005, 14:04

They should have gotten this guy...

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 18 Oct 2005, 14:12