The Next Bond

[Tina 0]

You got served

[Stephen of Borg 2]

they still haven't been able to choose the next Bond, but Brosnan says that he'll be happy to play Bond one last time, all they have to do is call

[Madame Butterfly 0]

I'm really shocked by this Craig guy as being the next Bond.

 

He's homely, and he looked older then Pierce and he's what, nearly 20 years younger?

 

I will not watch these Bond movies.

[Stephen of Borg 2]

a bad choice indeed. It would have been better if Pierce did come back

[Madame Butterfly 0]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Does anyone think this guy looks 38? B)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think they look the same age really.

 

I mean, was the purpose of getting a younger player who looks old, just so they can use him for the next 20 years or so?

 

Ugh.

 

They've ruined the franchise.

[sea trooper 0]

His face looks like a yam... B)

[Stephen of Borg 2]

he might not be too bad the more I think of it. I have been seeing interviews with him and he could possibly pull it off. He reminds me a lot of Roger Moore, who was another non-black hair Bond. Moore is my personal favorite Bond before Brosnan, so Craig could have potential. I'll wait and see when the movie comes out

[A l t e r E g o 9]

 

My initial reaction was: B) , but Gamera may be right; we should wait and see...

[BakulaBabe 2]

I saw part of an interview with him on the news earlier today. After seeing and hearing him, I'm very pleased with the choice. He's not Pierce, but he seems "Bond-ish", and I'm looking forward to seeing him take on the roll. I'm betting he'll be good. B)

[Tina 0]

I am really sad

 

HE IS SO UGLY! :lol:

[Odie 0]

There are so many choices out there for Bond! B) Why him? :lol: Sorry he doesn't look like Bond at all! I hope they do a make-up jog on him!

[Matt 0]

It's a shame they didn't let Pierce Brosnan do one more.

[TransporterMalfunction 1]

There has been some dodgy pics of Mr Craig branded about. Here is one that might convince all those non-believers:

 

 

Having seen Layer Cake I think this Bond will very edgy, going back to the Connery days. Craig is very intense in his portrayals and I think it will suit this particular story.

[Tina 0]

No I STILL WANT JULIAN

 

*whines*

[TransporterMalfunction 1]

No I STILL WANT JULIAN

 

*whines*

359820[/snapback]

 

Julian? Who's that?

 

I think they look the same age really.

 

I mean, was the purpose of getting a younger player who looks old, just so they can use him for the next 20 years or so?

 

Ugh.

 

They've ruined the franchise.

 

Anyway here is a nice pic that highlights why it was time to make the change:

 

[Stephen of Borg 2]

dyed hair and make up with the beard gone could fix that :( .

 

Even though it's not an "official" Bond movie, you have to remember how old Sean Connery looked in Never Say Never Again. So having an older looking Pierce could still work

[Tina 0]

uh Julian Mcmahon

 

DO i have to repost pics?

[TransporterMalfunction 1]

dyed hair and make up with the beard gone could fix that :) .

 

Even though it's not an "official" Bond movie, you have to remember how old Sean Connery looked in Never Say Never Again. So having an older looking Pierce could still work

 

Alternatively we could just get Sean back and cgi his face to make him look younger. Anyone got the number of ILM?

[Madame Butterfly 0]

Pierce was always meant to be Bond.

 

Hair dye can fix the gray and of course he'd shave the beard.

 

This dude was in Road to Perdition and I hate his character. Scum bag coward he played.

 

Totally wrong for the part. I give him 3 movies tops before he's gone.

[bluescreen1 0]

Pierce was always meant to be Bond.

 

Hair dye can fix the gray and of course he'd shave the beard.

 

This dude was in Road to Perdition and I hate his character. Scum bag coward he played.

 

Totally wrong for the part. I give him 3 movies tops before he's gone.

 

Sounds like you are trying to grasp on to something that has passed.

 

Pierce is too old, he is an old man now (and he really looks it - even in the last movie where he was very heavily made-up). If you had read the books you would know that 52 is way too old to play Bond - he should be between 28-47 tops.

 

If you hated this new guy because he played a scumbag in the only movie you have seen him in, then doesn't that make him a good actor? The fact that he has created an emotional response in the audience. Just because he played one role like that does not mean that is how he is going to play Bond.

 

Anyway, I think a lot of these Pierce groupies will hate the new movie because Bond takes a good kicking in it and there are no gadgets or crappy invisable cars. It is actually a spy thriller!

 

All the gadgets and gimics in the Pierce Bond movies are what made his films pot-boilers. Nothing in the way of plot needed as long as we can have a new invisable car or make Bond fall faster than a diving plane.

Edited November 5, 2005 by bluescreen1

[Stephen of Borg 2]

Pierce took a pretty good beating on DAD, but I've seen the OOOOLLLLLLDDDD TV version of Casino Royale so I know what you say when you talk about beatings.

 

Everybody likes Q, people likes Q's gadgets. Part of the coolness of Bond came from the new gadgets he would use on each movie. The dialogue between Q and Bond I would never trade away, classic stuff

 

I do agree with one point you made, he must be a very good actor if you hated the new guy in the movie you saw him in. I say that to everytime some one says, man that guys was a punk in that movie. It shows good acting abilites that you hate his character. I think he would make a GREAT Bond if he can get that kind of response out of people

[TransporterMalfunction 1]

Pierce took a pretty good beating on DAD, but I've seen the OOOOLLLLLLDDDD TV version of Casino Royale so I know what you say when you talk about beatings.

 

Everybody likes Q, people likes Q's gadgets. Part of the coolness of Bond came from the new gadgets he would use on each movie. The dialogue between Q and Bond I would never trade away, classic stuff

 

I do agree with one point you made, he must be a very good actor if you hated the new guy in the movie you saw him in. I say that to everytime some one says, man that guys was a punk in that movie. It shows good acting abilites that you hate his character. I think he would make a GREAT Bond if he can get that kind of response out of people

 

I agree with you, Q was a great character and I enjoyed when he would introduce a jazzed up version of the DB5 or dart cigs, but for me gadgets can also ruin that aspect of the film if taken too far. Things like the invisible car are completely unbelievable and make Bond more of a superhero than a spy. A completely indestructible Bond who can do anything does not add to the creation of tension and removes the suspension of disbelief.

 

For me a gadget should be potentially realistic and understated - look at From Russia with Love or even Goldfinger for good examples.