which other Bonds could pull off 'Casino Royale'?

Andy007

Got me thinking, out of all the Bond's so far, other than Craig - who could have pulled off 'Casino Royale'? i think this movie has lengendary status in the Bond series. But out of the other Bond's who could have pulled this off. Well Moore & Brosnan couldn't imo. But I could imagine Connery or Lazenby doing well in this. i think Connery and Dalton both have the tension & focus required for the casino scenes. Both would fit in with the tough edge & fight scenes included. I actually think Lazenby could have done ok. His scene in the poker (hotel) & fight after is similar to scenes from 'Casino Royale' - just not as brutal or long. Dalton had scenes in LTK at the poker table and looked the part. You could imagine his tension & determination at wanting to beat Le Chiffre. - In any case i'm so pleased with Daniel Craig's performance in this. It's fantastic and right up there with Connery in his early films, (Dalton in both films), Brosnan in GE. Dalton himself has stated that Craig did a great job.

Richard--W

1957.

Sean Connery co-stars in HELL DRIVERS, ACTION OF THE TIGER (for Terence Young), and ANOTHER TIME ANOTHER PLACE. In the latter film he is well-groomed and suited, playing a broadcast journalist romantically involved with the female lead. He looks just like a very young James Bond.

John Michael Hayes has scored three big hits with his literate, suspenseful, and witty screenplays for Alfred Hitchcock, REAR WINDOW, THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH, and TO CATCH A THIEF. The latter has a lot in common with Ian Fleming's Bond and will influence EON's approach to the character in 1962.

David Lean has won accolades for SUMMERTIME and BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAII, but has not yet found his next project, which he would not begin until 1959. In terms of storytelling a David Lean film is mature and sophisticated, and in terms of craftsmanship his films are considered the Rolls Royce of movies. The tough, passionate, atmospheric melodramas Lean directs in the 1940s and the dynamic action he will direct in his later epics demonstrate he has the right temperment and style to direct Ian Fleming's first novel.

Speaking in terms of a "what if fantasy" I wish David Lean had directed Casino Royale in 1957-58 from a screenplay by John Michael Hayes with young Sean Connery as James Bond. When I ask myself, how would they adapt the novel into a movie? the answer always comes up right for the 2000s.



I reject EON's 2006 version.
I reject it absolutely and unequivocally.
It is illegitimate and unacceptable.


Richard

Thunderpussy

I really think any of the Bonds could of done Casino Royale. they're all competent actors. Also no actor would say bad things about another actors take on a role they themselves played (even if they thought it was crap) as it would seem like sour grapes. They're all "Lovies" for a reason.

pyrat

I'd think Connery or Brosnan, although the flavor of the interpretation would have been a bit different.

Thunderpussy

as an example here is TMWTGG, Fan Trailer cut to the CR style. :007)

http://youtu.be/cXhBmEloYxE

Makes me want to watch it tonight. )

Thunderpussy

In his interview in Entertainment weekly, Craig said "He didn't care much for Connery or Brosnan " so I persume he thinks Sir Roger could of Done a great Job with CR. ) Might mean a change for Bond 23 Craig might be going to do an Homage to Moore's eyebrow lift in a couple of scenes.

Thunderpussy

Here's an alternative ending to CR, :v

http://youtu.be/iZxe8geo61A

SilentSpy

Thunderpussy wrote:

In his interview in Entertainment weekly, Craig said "He didn't care much for Connery or Brosnan " so I persume he thinks Sir Roger could of Done a great Job with CR. ) Might mean a change for Bond 23 Craig might be going to do an Homage to Moore's eyebrow lift in a couple of scenes.

Is this quote in the new issue of Entertainment Weekly? That would explain why Craig's Bond is the way he is. Also, why he will most likely never have the style, elegance, or refinement of the classic Bonds. I hope I'm wrong and the next movie is awesome given the director who should be a fan of the classic Bond films.

Richard--W

SilentSpy wrote:

Thunderpussy wrote:

In his interview in Entertainment weekly, Craig said "He didn't care much for Connery or Brosnan " so I persume he thinks Sir Roger could of Done a great Job with CR. ) Might mean a change for Bond 23 Craig might be going to do an Homage to Moore's eyebrow lift in a couple of scenes.

Is this quote in the new issue of Entertainment Weekly? That would explain why Craig's Bond is the way he is. Also, why he will most likely never have the style, elegance, or refinement of the classic Bonds. I hope I'm wrong and the next movie is awesome given the director who should be a fan of the classic Bond films.

Daniel Craig really said that?
Now that I've started to respect his work in other films, and for his Sean Connery impersonation in Quantum of Solace, I read a quote like that.
How utterly devoid of class, good manners, and professional courtesy.

Perhaps my initial impression was the right one after all: Craig's interpretation of James Bond in Casino Royale was utterly clueless, inexcusable and unforgivable.


Richard

Blackleiter

They probably all could do it, although I have serious problems seeing Roger Moore doing justice to that film, particularly the grittier aspects. For example, the torture scene - so hard to imagine Moore being believable. We'll never really know.

Thunderpussy

I think Sir Roger would not only of raised an eyebrow but crossed both his eyes for that scene. )

Blackleiter

No doubt!

Thunderpussy wrote:

I think Sir Roger would not only of raised an eyebrow but crossed both his eyes for that scene. )

Agent Sidewinder

Blackleiter, I'm surprised to see you not reject Moore out of hand completely....did you suffer a bang on the head or something?

PPK 7.65mm

Tim Dalton could have done it back in the day, if Eon productions had gotten the rights then. I have read many articles authered by fans saying that Dalton was very much the James Bond, that Ian Fleming created in his books.

When I read Casino Royale for the second time, I kept seeing Dalton in my minds eye. He would have made the lines really stand out to the viewers long after the film had ended, espcially "The B*tch is Dead."

PS: If Casino Royale was made with a different actor playing Bond, I would also like to feature a male M.

Mr Beech

Richard--W wrote:

SilentSpy wrote:

Thunderpussy wrote:

In his interview in Entertainment weekly, Craig said "He didn't care much for Connery or Brosnan " so I persume he thinks Sir Roger could of Done a great Job with CR. ) Might mean a change for Bond 23 Craig might be going to do an Homage to Moore's eyebrow lift in a couple of scenes.

Is this quote in the new issue of Entertainment Weekly? That would explain why Craig's Bond is the way he is. Also, why he will most likely never have the style, elegance, or refinement of the classic Bonds. I hope I'm wrong and the next movie is awesome given the director who should be a fan of the classic Bond films.

Daniel Craig really said that?
Now that I've started to respect his work in other films, and for his Sean Connery impersonation in Quantum of Solace, I read a quote like that.
How utterly devoid of class, good manners, and professional courtesy.

Perhaps my initial impression was the right one after all: Craig's interpretation of James Bond in Casino Royale was utterly clueless, inexcusable and unforgivable.


Richard

You are going overboard with disrespectful insults to a film and actor that the majority of the public including myself find to be an overall positive experience. Say you don't care for it just as Craig says what he personally didn't care much for. You are coming off as unnecessarily hostile by trashing the approach the both EON and Craig took to the character. I personally think Casino Royale is great and is one of the best in the series. Your initial impression is an opinion, not right for anyone but yourself as all opinions are (same goes for my opinions). Different doesn't equal bad.

As for the OP, I can only picture Brosnan really. Maybe just because he is more modern, but any others doing the movie wouldn't be the same or good in the same ways. Craig is a different Bond. He is the close quarters, gritty, and modern Bond. Now if you just mean which Bond could have done the story, not the same film from 2006, well then any of them except Moore. Moore isn't serious enough.

Thunderpussy

I think too much is made of the torture scene, after all it's just an actor sitting on a chair and going !Ohhh and AHHHH! at the right moment, ( a bit like porn, whatever that is :v ) I think it's called acting. ) Craig is lucky as The Grimmace he dose works as a "Pain face"

DangerMouse

Thunderpussy wrote:

I think Sir Roger would not only of raised an eyebrow but crossed both his eyes for that scene. )

Not to mention letting out his traditional "OOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!" scream from his last two films.

Alex

Regarding the EW interview with Craig and his comment about Connery and Broz. I got the strong impression he was being facetious with that remark. Ford had lightened up the interview with an amiable self deprecating style and Craig joined in. His comment was a last second punctuation after Ford had answered he'd never seen either of DC's Bonds. It was whispered under his breath with a "come again?" reply .. "Nothing" (grin) I really thought he was trying to get a rise out of the interviewer. Especially since the guy had ruffled his feathers earlier by asking why he'd decided to hold a private wedding. "Well the question answers itself, doesn't it?"

Then again, maybe he really was putting down another professional actor (and legend). But what with the serious approach this guy seems to take to his profession, I seriously doubt that.

Thunderpussy

DangerMouse Wrote.


Not to mention letting out his traditional "OOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!" scream from his last two films.


Well in AVTAK poor old Rogers Jollies did take a Beating from that ariel

CmdrAtticus

In my mind, the actors in line of succession who could have done CR would have been Dalton, followed by a tie between Brosnan and Lazenby. Here's the quirky thing with me. As much as I enjoyed Connery's films, and I think he is a terrific actor, I never bought into him as Fleming's Bond. He always seemed to me to be a well groomed thug in a suit, as opposed to a well groomed gentlemen who could outthink and outfight a thug. I could never seem him going to Eton. Poor Roger - well, he was the opposite. I could see him at Eton, but not as an assassin. He could play the charming part of someone like Mathis (or the polite Swiss banker), but could you see him tied naked in the chair, sweating bullets? Dalton, yes. Lazenby, yes. Brosnan, yes. Connery? Sure, but again, not refined enough. Yes, some might make that argument against Craig, but I can picture a teenage Craig at Eton, not a teenage Connery (sorry Sean). When I read the novels, I actually picture the late Stewart Granger (he looked like Fleming somewhat, was suave, but could also hold his own in a fight). From the films, I can picture Dalton or Lazenby. I also think Hugh Jackman or Christian Bale would have done well in CR.

HowardB

Connery may not have perfectly reflected Fleming's Bond but if another actor had portrayed Bond in Dr. No, IMO cinematic Bond and Bondmania would never have taken off (especially in the USA). Cubby and Harry were not stupid but did take a big gamble with Connery. They believed that a rough tough guy groomed into a gentleman would be more appealing and convincing than taking refined and molding it into tough. Connery redefined the British leading man for American audiences which had been generally fed a steady stream of stereotypic working class ruffians and somewhat fey effete upperclass heroes by the Hollywood studios. This may be an oversimplification on my part but in retrospect Connery's Bond was pretty much Mike Hammer with a better education, good manners, cooler cars and nicer clothes. ...and it sure worked for the millions of people who lined up around the block to see those films in the 60's....and believe me I was always in the front of that line.

Blackleiter

It sure worked for me! (I was right there next to you on line!)

HowardB wrote:

Connery may not have perfectly reflected Fleming's Bond but if another actor had portrayed Bond in Dr. No, IMO cinematic Bond and Bondmania would never have taken off (especially in the USA). Cubby and Harry were not stupid but did take a big gamble with Connery. They believed that a rough tough guy groomed into a gentleman would be more appealing and convincing than taking refined and molding it into tough. Connery redefined the British leading man for American audiences which had been generally fed a steady stream of stereotypic working class ruffians and somewhat fey effete upperclass heroes by the Hollywood studios. This may be an oversimplification on my part but in retrospect Connery's Bond was pretty much Mike Hammer with a better education, good manners, cooler cars and nicer clothes. ...and it sure worked for the millions of people who lined up around the block to see those films in the 60's....and believe me I was always in the front of that line.

CmdrAtticus

"If another actor had portrayed Bond in Dr. No, IMO cinematic Bond and Bondmania would never have taken off (especially in the USA). "

Not necessarily true. We identify with the early Bond as being Connery becasue he was the first and put his iconic look so much on the role that people still saw him as Bond even after the other actors portrayed the role. I was also one of the millions of young lads who saw him as the only Bond - then Lazenby showed up and I realized another actor could also do it. Then Moore showed up and I thought, oh please!..give me back Sean or George! Kidding aside, the producers definitely hit the jackpot by picking Connery. However, if they had found another unknown with as much presence and charisma as Connery, yet was a bit more refined like Brosnan or Lazenby. I think there still would have been a Bondomania, because it had as much do with Bond as it did with the style of film and genre the producers and director had created. If any of the other actors had been at the right age at the time (or in Craig's situation, had been alive at the time!), and had been the first Bond, I'm certain the public would have accepted them as the iconic figure just as they had Connery.

"They believed that a rough tough guy groomed into a gentleman would be more appealing and convincing than taking refined and molding it into tough."

True. Does not necessarily follow that they were right. Dr. No succeded not only because of Connery's presence, but because this was a totally new type of action film with a new type of genre combining the spy/adventure/spectacle films with a new type of editing. As I mentioned above, if someone like Brosnan had been picked and had done the "gentleman in a suit" who could kill, instead of an upperclass Mike Hammer, I still believe the film would have take off as it did, because of its other attributes. Also, an "upper class Mike Hammer" was totally opposite of Flemings idea. As M said in CR, "any thug can kill". Fleming made his creation unique by taking an Englishman educated in upper class schools (though definitely not an "effite upper class" type - Bond seems to have come more from a professional middle class - though perhaps upper middle class background), and had him become a trained spy and assassin. Remember, Bond was kicked out of Eton (like Fleming), and Fleming wrote about how though Bond was a white collar professional, he still looked out of place in surroundings like Blades (Moonraker) amoung the upper class set.

HowardB

Really can't disagree with anything said in the above post by CmdrAtticus. When I think of other actors who might have been the first Bond I should qualify that by meaning actors during that time period. There certainly were actors at that time who could of been Bond and been successful. I just think that Connery though a relative unknown at that time had a certain natural command of the screen along with a unique look and maybe even more important....the way he moved; even when just walking through an airport in Dr No he looked like a panther stalking its prey. Of course, I'd really be remiss in not mentioning director Terence Young's contribution. In many ways he was Professor Higgins to Connery's Eliza Doolittle in grooming Connery into a believable English gentleman albeit one with a very cold and brutal side. Many point to Connery's charactorization as much a reflection of Young's own persona as Fleming's relatively sketchy descriptions of Bond. EON certainly had it all lined up...the right director, art director/set designer, editor, groundbreaking portrayals of violence and sex, etc.....but I still believe Connery was the final ingrediant that took it from what would have proved a successful film series to a cinematic and cultural phenom. I feel fortunate to have been able to experience "Bondmania" first hand in the 60's. Growing up in the 60's with Bondmania and Bealtlemania, how cool is that.

CmdrAtticus

Agree...and how many out there tried to copy Connery's "panther" gait as a youth (probably more than one might think!)?

HowardB

Picture a bunch of 8 year old boys from South Jersey (that's USA not the UK Jersey) trying to walk like Connery and speaking in bizarre fractured impersonations of Connery's unique hybrid British/Scotts accent.

CmdrAtticus

Wouldn't it make a great comedy skit?