A 50 year old Craig is nothing like a 50 year old Moore. He'll still be doing stunts and will still be the fittest Bond ever. Hopefully he won't opt for the botched Moore facelift either.
A 50 year old Craig is nothing like a 50 year old Moore. He'll still be doing stunts and will still be the fittest Bond ever. Hopefully he won't opt for the botched Moore facelift either.
I think that a 2 yr schedule s unlikely to pan out, and as such feel that 5 is too many for any actor unless they cast young next time. Also even their most ardent fans would be unlikely to attest that Connerry or Moore gave of their best in the last movie. it's not just the physical element that limits longevity, but they get bored and jaded with the role and just seem to lose the spark somehow. Also Craig has set the bar very high for himself and for whoever follows him from a physical perspective.
Brosnan may have had one movie left in him (we will never know) I think 3 with an option for 4 is right providing the actor can still pull off the demands of the role, and that will vary from actor to actor. As others have pointed out Moore was relatively young looking at 44 whilst Connerry was looking 'past it'
I think that a 2 yr schedule s unlikely to pan out, and as such feel that 5 is too many for any actor unless they cast young next time. Also even their most ardent fans would be unlikely to attest that Connerry or Moore gave of their best in the last movie. it's not just the physical element that limits longevity, but they get bored and jaded with the role and just seem to lose the spark somehow. Also Craig has set the bar very high for himself and for whoever follows him from a physical perspective.
Brosnan may have had one movie left in him (we will never know) I think 3 with an option for 4 is right providing the actor can still pull off the demands of the role, and that will vary from actor to actor. As others have pointed out Moore was relatively young looking at 44 whilst Connerry was looking 'past it'
Sounds like they haven't signed anything concrete on that 5 number yet, so perhaps they will decide that it isn't the best fit.
BIG TAMWrexham, North Wales, UK.Posts: 773MI6 Agent
I think four or five films is about right for any actor these days. Craig may have more scope though, given they've set up a new villain's organisation for him to do battle with.
I'm interested in the producers' outlook to recasting. Cubby Broccoli had a certain loyalty to his leading man which Babs appears to have less so. He was matey with Moore & seemed very supportive of Dalton in light of a certain opposition. Babs seems more ruthless, perhaps looking at the bigger picture. Brosnan had a big fan base, his films delivering healthy box office figures but she & Wilson seemed content to let him go while on top. Though I like Craig very much, there's no reason CASINO ROYALE couldn't have been made with Brosnan. Just a bit of tinkering needed doing to the script.
I think this is very good news even if you are not a DC fan. I think its good for the series to have a long running 007. It adds to the legacy and the build up for the "next" Bond will be really intense. RM is my least favorite but I respect the work he did, even in his latter films, to keep the franchise a float and relevant. Though I could have done with out the quiche
I think Agent007jamest summed up My thoughts too. I'm not a D Craig fan
But think at least having an actor in place and able to do Five films gives some
stability to the series after the last few years of money worries and other
problems with distributors.
It's also nice to hear a kind word for Old Roger.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Notice it's rather tartly suggested that the reason DC's signed up sharpish is because the rest of his career's down the pan....
Good for DC. The guy's got sense enough to smell the coffee and ride that Bond horse for what it's worth. Unlike what many feared, DC is apparently no prima donna "arteest" who was going to jump ship asap on that "silly Bond role". He sees the "art" in a well crafted Bond film and in the case of "Skyfall" was also able to attract a director of Mendes stature to a Bond film.
After Bond 25 Craig can hang up his PPK, count his millions, and take on all the "character" parts he wants. -{
Notice it's rather tartly suggested that the reason DC's signed up sharpish is because the rest of his career's down the pan....
Good for DC. The guy's got sense enough to smell the coffee and ride that Bond horse for what it's worth. Unlike what many feared, DC is apparently no prima donna "arteest" who was going to jump ship asap on that "silly Bond role". He sees the "art" in a well crafted Bond film and in the case of "Skyfall" was also able to attract a director of Mendes stature to a Bond film.
After Bond 25 Craig can hang up his PPK, count his millions, and take on all the "character" parts he wants. -{
A half-way-house, to be honest.
I THINK Craig was slumming it taking on Bond as an "arteest". Maybe he even saw it as a one-off shot and huge cash injection?
BUT I do think he enjoys playing the part, is welcomed in the role by EON very warmly (hence Mendes, etc) and, even more importantly, by the public. He appreciates that and has consequently warmed to the role and its responsbilities.
And its benefits. Which is why he has very savily signed on for two more for the long term career benefits you describe.
Hopefully with Sony supplying the Money we might get back to a Film every two years.
"Felix Leiter, a brother from Langley."
PPK 7.65mmSaratoga Springs NY USAPosts: 1,253MI6 Agent
I am very pleased to hear that Craig is going to be around for sometime. Casino Royale was just what the series needed after the over the top Die Another Day. As far as typecasting I think he proved that he can play other dramatic parts well with his turns in Definance and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.
I am looking forward to Skyfall, I just wish that it was opening sooner in the US.
I am very pleased to hear that Craig is going to be around for sometime. Casino Royale was just what the series needed after the over the top Die Another Day. As far as typecasting I think he proved that he can play other dramatic parts well with his turns in Definance and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.
I am looking forward to Skyfall, I just wish that it was opening sooner in the US.
To me, Casino Royale was what the series had needed for about 20 years. The Bond films had more or less just been expensively but half-heartedly going through the motions, to the point that the formula for many people was a joke (lampooned countless times by comedians and others). Casino Royale made Bond films -- Timothy Dalton's well-intentioned misfires notwithstanding -- serious contenders as stories again, and Craig made the character fresh once more. The casting of Craig in the role was instrumental in making that happen.
The Olympics (including the Paralympics) are finally over, its time for the Skyfall premiere countdown! --
Going to watch all the Bond movies again starting from Dr. No to QOS.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Fantastic news! -{
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Glad to read he'll be around for much longer. The best Bond since Dalton IMO. Hopefully they'll get back to doing a Bond film every 2 years now so by the time Bond 25 hits the screens in 2016, there might be a chance Craig will do one more in 2018. That way, there next new Bond can take over in the new decade.
Let's hope that the franchise won't suffer any legal or financial problems just like in 1989-1995 and 2010.
Well, Kevin McClory has been dead since 2006 so he's not around anymore to take EON to court and try to re-make "Thunderball" again; Sony is partners with EON and MGM so they shouldn't be a problem and hopefully, MGM can stay solvent for at least the next 5 years. I wonder if after this latest MGM mess, EON has any contingency plan in the event that MGM goes belly up once again to still be able to make Bond films?
Comments
Or botox
Brosnan may have had one movie left in him (we will never know) I think 3 with an option for 4 is right providing the actor can still pull off the demands of the role, and that will vary from actor to actor. As others have pointed out Moore was relatively young looking at 44 whilst Connerry was looking 'past it'
Sounds like they haven't signed anything concrete on that 5 number yet, so perhaps they will decide that it isn't the best fit.
I'm interested in the producers' outlook to recasting. Cubby Broccoli had a certain loyalty to his leading man which Babs appears to have less so. He was matey with Moore & seemed very supportive of Dalton in light of a certain opposition. Babs seems more ruthless, perhaps looking at the bigger picture. Brosnan had a big fan base, his films delivering healthy box office figures but she & Wilson seemed content to let him go while on top. Though I like Craig very much, there's no reason CASINO ROYALE couldn't have been made with Brosnan. Just a bit of tinkering needed doing to the script.
http://www.imdb.com/news/ni35785370/
http://www.deadline.com/2012/09/daniel-craig-confirmed-for-2-more-bond-films-which-sony-pictures-co-financing-with-mgm/
Notice it's rather tartly suggested that the reason DC's signed up sharpish is because the rest of his career's down the pan....
I think Agent007jamest summed up My thoughts too. I'm not a D Craig fan
But think at least having an actor in place and able to do Five films gives some
stability to the series after the last few years of money worries and other
problems with distributors.
It's also nice to hear a kind word for Old Roger.
Good for DC. The guy's got sense enough to smell the coffee and ride that Bond horse for what it's worth. Unlike what many feared, DC is apparently no prima donna "arteest" who was going to jump ship asap on that "silly Bond role". He sees the "art" in a well crafted Bond film and in the case of "Skyfall" was also able to attract a director of Mendes stature to a Bond film.
After Bond 25 Craig can hang up his PPK, count his millions, and take on all the "character" parts he wants. -{
A half-way-house, to be honest.
I THINK Craig was slumming it taking on Bond as an "arteest". Maybe he even saw it as a one-off shot and huge cash injection?
BUT I do think he enjoys playing the part, is welcomed in the role by EON very warmly (hence Mendes, etc) and, even more importantly, by the public. He appreciates that and has consequently warmed to the role and its responsbilities.
And its benefits. Which is why he has very savily signed on for two more for the long term career benefits you describe.
I am looking forward to Skyfall, I just wish that it was opening sooner in the US.
Report from the Daily Hate. May be interesting. It's old news Elliot.
Going to watch all the Bond movies again starting from Dr. No to QOS.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Yes indeedy....very happy girl
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Well, Kevin McClory has been dead since 2006 so he's not around anymore to take EON to court and try to re-make "Thunderball" again; Sony is partners with EON and MGM so they shouldn't be a problem and hopefully, MGM can stay solvent for at least the next 5 years. I wonder if after this latest MGM mess, EON has any contingency plan in the event that MGM goes belly up once again to still be able to make Bond films?