Pierce Brosnan Should Have Stayed as Bond...
- Thread starter firefly_for_you
- Start date
No, the first Bond film was Dr No. Casino Royale (the first Bond novel) was filmed as a 1954 telemovie before that, and once again as a movie spoof in 1967.
The novel is a fairly straightforward affair which would need to be strecthed to even fill 90 minutes. Apparently the plot of the novel with be in the movie's second half. As for the 'prequel' idea, I'm not sure if the producers are sticking with this.
Certainly, continuity-wise, it makes no sense if Dench is in the movie as M. Since she's already been confirmed on the cast list, the only alternative is if she's in it, but not as M.
The novel is a fairly straightforward affair which would need to be strecthed to even fill 90 minutes. Apparently the plot of the novel with be in the movie's second half. As for the 'prequel' idea, I'm not sure if the producers are sticking with this.
Certainly, continuity-wise, it makes no sense if Dench is in the movie as M. Since she's already been confirmed on the cast list, the only alternative is if she's in it, but not as M.
In relation to the Dame Judi Dench question, her and Craig are the only cast members confirmed to star in 'Royale. (Craig confimed as Bond, Dench confirmed as M)
I think it was a mistake by the producers to let Brosnan go, but on Brosnans part, I think he wont suffer from it at all. His new film 'The Matador' has got quite good reviews so far, and has got a great reception on its limited release.
Plus , since hes playing an agent in a few of his future films, I think they could be better agent/spy films as opposed to the next BonRAB.
Dino
I think it was a mistake by the producers to let Brosnan go, but on Brosnans part, I think he wont suffer from it at all. His new film 'The Matador' has got quite good reviews so far, and has got a great reception on its limited release.
Plus , since hes playing an agent in a few of his future films, I think they could be better agent/spy films as opposed to the next BonRAB.
Dino
I got to see 'The Matador' recently and Brosnan was fantastic, just like he was in 'The Tailor Of Panama' mind you.
Even though they have a new Bond I'm far more excited by a third Jason Bourne film than I am the next Bond installment. The Bourne films are what the Bond films SHOULD be. They're gritty action films that are exciting and fun to watch. The Bond films are struggling because they're writing the stories around the action set-pieces. It's like joining the dots.
Even though they have a new Bond I'm far more excited by a third Jason Bourne film than I am the next Bond installment. The Bourne films are what the Bond films SHOULD be. They're gritty action films that are exciting and fun to watch. The Bond films are struggling because they're writing the stories around the action set-pieces. It's like joining the dots.
dont u lot think that bond is a bit sh1t now? i mean its just got worse and worse since roger moore left hasnt it. im all for the b-movie one liners and the pseudo pimpdaddy aspect of mr bond but the new ones seem to be so filled full of stunts its hard to tell the new ones apart.
Zach Strickmuffins
New member
I'm not interested in Bond films but can't see any objection to Daniel Craig. He is an excellent actor and also gorgeous!
Mexpartyboy61
New member
if the film bombs then Brosnan will be back and D Craig will be compared to George Lazenby.
vett-rider
New member
I thought Brosnan was looking a bit old in Die Another Day. Not Moore in a View To A Kill old, but greying around the temples. I think it's a tragedy that the second half of DAD didn't live up to the first half which is just brilliant.
Personally I don't care if Craig does end up getting compared to Lazenby so long as the story lives up to OHMSS where I seriously think Connery would have struggled with the emotional bits - he was a bit of a robot. Can you imagine connery crying at the end when Tracy gets killed?
Although I think Brosnan could have pulled off the emotional stuff that's going to be needed in Casino Royale, I'm absolutely over the moon that Craig has the role. So long as he gets a girl who can act as well as he can, I think it's going to be dramatic dynamite!
Personally I don't care if Craig does end up getting compared to Lazenby so long as the story lives up to OHMSS where I seriously think Connery would have struggled with the emotional bits - he was a bit of a robot. Can you imagine connery crying at the end when Tracy gets killed?
Although I think Brosnan could have pulled off the emotional stuff that's going to be needed in Casino Royale, I'm absolutely over the moon that Craig has the role. So long as he gets a girl who can act as well as he can, I think it's going to be dramatic dynamite!
I'm a massive Bond fan. Brosnan brought back the suave style a bit reminiscent of Moore, but Dalton for me made a more involving gritty character, someone you could feel for rather than just enjoy. The producers actually made Dalton's Bond this way on purpose. Brosnan re-invented the Bond franchise with Goldeneye and its hard to see which way Daniel Craig will go - but having seen his acting in various films, I would imagine a more intense Bond as DC is the kind of actor that draws you in. I think he'll make a good Bond, but a different style, possibly similar to Dalton and for me thats a good thing. Not just action, but more involving.