Different 90s Bond?

OakvaleOakvale Pennsylvania Posts: 155MI6 Agent
If Brosnan declined the role, and Timothy Dalton obviously quit, who would be a top contender or get it?

It always seemed to me like there was a weak bench for the casting before Goldeneye, but that was probably because Brosnan stood head and shoulders above everyone else (literally).

Comments

  • Agent LeeAgent Lee Posts: 254MI6 Agent
    Of the other contenders that were circling the role around the time of GE, I think the most interesting would have been Paul McGann. Would have been much different than Brosnan and probably done something with the role much different than anything we've ever seen from any other Bond.
    Wish I Was at Disneyland, podcast about Disneyland, Disney news, Disney movies, Star Wars, and life in Southern California.
    https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/wish-i-was-at-disneyland/id1202780413?mt=2
  • Sir MilesSir Miles The Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,768Chief of Staff
    James Purefoy was tested for Goldeneye and I think he could have been a good Bond -{
    YNWA 97
  • ToTheRightToTheRight Posts: 314MI6 Agent
    In the polls, the contenders were Pierce, Mel Gibson, Liam Neeson and Hugh Grant. I suppose out of those Liam would have been my pick. Though I do like the idea of James Purefoy. He'd probably be my alternate had we not gotten Craig.
  • superadosuperado Regent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
    IMO, the bench was weak then as it is now.
    "...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
  • OakvaleOakvale Pennsylvania Posts: 155MI6 Agent
    ToTheRight wrote:
    In the polls, the contenders were Pierce, Mel Gibson, Liam Neeson and Hugh Grant. I suppose out of those Liam would have been my pick. Though I do like the idea of James Purefoy. He'd probably be my alternate had we not gotten Craig.

    Hugh Grant physically fits the part as much as Brosnan did, he would probably get a lot of hype, and might be decent.

    Neeson I think ruled himself out but Gibson would be... well... 8-)
  • Gassy ManGassy Man USAPosts: 2,972MI6 Agent
    The 1990s were a slightly more bland, slightly more slick version of the 1980s, which means there weren't too many actors who could have stepped into the role as Bond and brought anything remarkable.

    An actor I wish would have been considered, believe it or not, is Daniel Day Lewis. On first glance, he might not have enough qualities to play the role, but his performances in both The Unbearable Lightness of Being, where he plays a playboy physician not unlike movie Bond in temperament, and The Last of the Mohicans, where he is the heroic Hawkeye, convinced me he could do the role. Unfortunately. the trailer for the former does not do his performance justice;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1zYYWHFRNw

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIPzGBiEE6k

    A method actor like Lewis likely would have created the most faithful version of Fleming's Bond yet.
  • welshguy34welshguy34 Posts: 219MI6 Agent
    ToTheRight wrote:
    In the polls, the contenders were Pierce, Mel Gibson, Liam Neeson and Hugh Grant. I suppose out of those Liam would have been my pick. Though I do like the idea of James Purefoy. He'd probably be my alternate had we not gotten Craig.

    Thank god Hugh Grant did not get the job. Neeson would have been a good choice though.
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,347MI6 Agent
    Leam Neeson, James Purefoy and Daniel Day-Lewis would all have made good Bonds.
    Hugh Grant would have been "too Roger Moore" IMO, but Sam Neil would have been a decent candidate. But Neil has spoken of his bond screentest as one of the worst experiences in his action life, so I doubt he would have taken the role.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight Posts: 314MI6 Agent
    I remember going to see Four Weddings in the Spring of '94 just to see if this Hugh Grant guy could measure up for a potential 007. He certainly had a light Roger Moore quality, but unlike Sir Roger, I couldn't picture him throwing a punch. Also his '90s haircut wasn't remotely Bondian. Had Mel actually got the role it probably would have been seen as more of a Mel Gibson movie than a Bond film. I couldn't picture him in the gunbarrel, either. Funny thing is compared to the so called contenders today, I could still see why these actors might be considered, and might have eventually accepted Hugh or Mel in the role. Still, I feel Pierce is what the series needed at that time to introduce new audiences to the iconic role which had been absent for 6 and a half years.
  • zaphod99zaphod99 Posts: 1,415MI6 Agent
    Gassy Man wrote:
    The 1990s were a slightly more bland, slightly more slick version of the 1980s, which means there weren't too many actors who could have stepped into the role as Bond and brought anything remarkable.

    An actor I wish would have been considered, believe it or not, is Daniel Day Lewis. On first glance, he might not have enough qualities to play the role, but his performances in both The Unbearable Lightness of Being, where he plays a playboy physician not unlike movie Bond in temperament, and The Last of the Mohicans, where he is the heroic Hawkeye, convinced me he could do the role. Unfortunately. the trailer for the former does not do his performance justice;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1zYYWHFRNw

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIPzGBiEE6k

    A method actor like Lewis likely would have created the most faithful version of Fleming's Bond yet.

    I agree, I always thought that he would have been terrific.
    Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
  • Weezer12Weezer12 Posts: 21MI6 Agent
    Jason Isaacs would've been my choice.
Sign In or Register to comment.