Brosnan's Fifth

[BobJM]

I don't know about you guys, but after seeing Die Another Day (a great Bond film, IMHO) I expected to see Pierce Brosnan for a fifth trip in his Aston Martin. I didn't even think that he would stop at five films, as I read an article that Brosnan wished to to match up to Connery.

With that said, what do you, the fans, think Brosnan's fifth Bond film would have been like. Would producers go over the top like they did with their BO success, Die Another Day? Or would they tone things down, decide to take a risk and allow Pierce to truly let his acting skills shine? Would Damian Falco and Jinx return, setting up a loose sequel to DAD as rumoured?

I have no idea, but I will tell you what I expected.

I did not expect another Die Another Day sequel as many tabloids and websites speculated. I would have loved to see Jinx return, even the director mentioned that the two spies would meet again, but I knew that producers probably wouldn't allow it, based on fan's opinions of the 20th film.

What I was expected was something more GoldenEye-esque. Yes there would still be gadgets, but not as too many or over-the-top (i.e., no invisible cars!). The plot would be a little bit edgier, forcing Pierce to rely on acting and not CGI. Sure, there would be stunts galore and beautiful, exotic locations with Bond girls as goregous as always.

The film wouldn't be too extreme like Casino Royale (no Q or Moneypenny), but it would be more of that idea. Gimicky villains and bad dialogue would be replaced.

So, all in all, if Brosnan had stayed around (whether he was fired or quit), I was expected a Bond film that highlighted Brosnan's acting abilities and not the films gadgets and locations. Yes, those elements would still be there, but they would not overpower the actors' portrayals.

[Furious Styles]

I wouldn't go around telling people you like DAD. The Fleming fans will castrate you, then sacrifice you to a Daniel Craig voodoo doll. But I really enjoyed the first 15/20 minutes of DAD. Interesting plot, great action, Bond gets captured, tortured and rescued. He pulls a Dalton and looks for revenge....THEN the film falls apart and it all goes downhill.

But over the 40 years, the franchise has been known to go through cycles from down to earth to over the top and back again. Whether it was Brosnan or Craig, I think EON realized they had gone overboard and had to reel in the line so to speak in the next film.

Personally, if I'm EON, I sign Brosnan to one more Bond film, and hype the ***** out of it as his final appearance as James Bond. You can then search for someone to take over (Craig, Owen etc. etc.) meanwhile the hype machine will do its thing and guarantee you big bucks at the Box Office...

[Agentsands77]

A final good-bye would have been nice for Brosnan. Even though I didn't like him as Bond all that much, it did feel like he left somewhat prematurely.

[Furious Styles]

I think the situation in general was handled rather poorly.

Both EON and Brosnan painted themselves into corners they couldn't easily get out of. And I think the fans were caught in the middle. Brosnan fans felt betrayed, non-Brosnan fans were happy, and so an even bigger divide occurred between Bond fans.

[Everyman]

Brosnan elaving on a strong note would have been great, but sadly he was already getting old and he burnt himself on DAD. That movie really destroyed him as James Bond, it was like an acting suicide. And had he done a fifth one, it would have certainly NOT be in the mould of DAD. DAD was hated by the fans and ridiculed by the critics (even the ones who enjoyed the movie). Jinx was the most annoying Bond girl bare none, and the fact that EOn wanted an own franchise for her was a cynical and unjustified exercice in self promotion.

[DACrowe]

Well I wish there was a fifth one in 2004 (as they skipped that year) while they were checking for a new Bond for a Casino Royale in 2007 (how STUPID is it to not have a 007 movie come out in 2007. And if they had another year, maybe they would've found someone better than Craig).

I think given that four films show Brosnan's strengths are a more compassionate if cynical Bond with a good numbero f quips than Moore-esque over the top action (as DAD showed) I'd want it to be down to earth. Maybe not like CR is *supposedly* being, but maybe something more like Goldeneye where we actually have Bond reflect on his age and being considered out of touch with the modern world (which DAD lightly tapped onto but did not explore for more than 5 seconds). I think that would have been a fitting farwell for him and then boom we get an ew young Bond in '07.

Too bad though.

[DACrowe]

P..S. I don't think DAD was career suicide. As The Matador is his best work as of today and all the previous Bonds ended on a bad note, save Lazenby, what with Connery on DAF, Moore on AVTAK and Dalton on LTK....it is kind of a tradition now.

[Kevin Roegele]

I see two opposing points;

1. Brosnan went out at the height of his popularity. An awful lot of people paid to see Brosnan in Die Another Day, as with all his movies. In terms of popular and successful movies, Brosnan scored 4/4, 100%. He went out when he was still (just about) young enough to be believable, unlike Connery and Moore.

2. Brosnan, who from the start of his reign, tried to bring more humanity to Bond and add depth with every film......finished his tenure with Die Another Day, the most immature, cartoon-ish and 2D episode of the entire series. Imagine if Michael Keaton had stayed with the Batman series and ended with Batman & Robin. It's that kind of come down, like a 1000ft drop.

[Two-Face]

I would loved seening Pierce Brosnan as James Bond one more time but with a serious Bond film also I believe that he wanted to do fifth movie and would been great to exit with a bang.

[SpyderDan]

It would've been sweet if they had gone with Brosnan's request for one more down to earth Bond film but it's too late now. His run was a success and there's no need to dwell on it now. And absolutely, by no means should they pull a Lazenby-Connery again and bring Brosnan back again. That'd be disastrous.

[Agentsands77]

Originally Posted by DACrowe

(how STUPID is it to not have a 007 movie come out in 2007.

It's not stupid at all. It misses a cool gimmick, but it wouldn't put any more butts in the seats.

And if they had another year, maybe they would've found someone better than Craig).

Considering Craig became the first choice really early on in the Bond search, I doubt it.

[DACrowe]

First choice? Is this before or after they offered the part to Eric Bana and then the rumor to Clive Owen then?

[Agentsands77]

Originally Posted by DACrowe

First choice? Is this before or after they offered the part to Eric Bana and then the rumor to Clive Owen then?

Craig became among their top choices as far back as 2004. It was offered to Craig in early 2005, and he initially turned it down. Later in Fall of 2005, they approached him a second time (this time with script in hand), and he consented.

Eric Bana, from what sources tell us, was never approached. Clive Owen was always rumored, but it's ambiguous as to whether he was genuinely approached or not.

[BobJM]

Originally Posted by Agentsands77

Craig became among their top choices as far back as 2004. It was offered to Craig in early 2005, and he initially turned it down. Later in Fall of 2005, they approached him a second time (this time with script in hand), and he consented.

Eric Bana, from what sources tell us, was never approached. Clive Owen was always rumored, but it's ambiguous as to whether he was genuinely approached or not.

Clive Owen stated in an interview that he is was approached and offered the role, yet he turned it down, feeling that the character was dated.

[AndrewBerger]

Originally Posted by BoBByJoMo

Clive Owen stated in an interview that he is was approached and offered the role, yet he turned it down, feeling that the character was dated.

It's not uncommon for actors to claim they were offered big roles for publicity.

[Agentsands77]

Originally Posted by BoBByJoMo

Clive Owen stated in an interview that he is was approached and offered the role, yet he turned it down, feeling that the character was dated.

Actually, it was ambiguously worded. It never really stated that he was outright offered the role.

[Kevin Roegele]

The problem with Bond is that EVERYONE is considered, absolutely everyone. That does not mean they are seriously looked at, or offered the role. EON may have contacted Hugh Jackman or Eric Bana or Orlando Bloom simply to gouge their interest, or offer them a screentest, or to offer them the role.

Adam West was offered the role for OHMSS.

Christopher Reeve was offered the role for The Living Daylights.

Sam Neill screentested for The Living Daylights.

[Kevin Roegele]

I personally like the fact that Bond is not associated with one actor, and that 007 is handed from actor to actor, from era to era. That's why it keeps going, because it changes and refreshes itself to suit each generation.

I really want to see the same with the Spider-Man series. New Spidey actor? New director? Great!

[Kevin Roegele]

Brosnan in prime 007 age (maybe even slightly too young looking).


Brosnan today.

[SpyderDan]

Originally Posted by Kevin Roegele

EON may have contacted Hugh Jackman or Eric Bana or Orlando Bloom simply to gouge their interest, or offer them a screentest, or to offer them the role.

Anyone else remember those terrifying rumors of Sony wanting Orlando Bloom to star in a series of Young 007 films?

[DACrowe]

Well Brosnan could shave and dye his hair afterall. Of course I think he should've gotten a fifth in 2005 more like Goldeneye if a little darker for him to go out on (about Bond aging out of the world kind of combining what made GE click with what DAD SHOULD HAVE BEEN). But alas.

And though I think Bond is not solely considered one actor, I think it is safe to assume that most people would say that Sean Connery IS James Bond and associate him with the role more than any other actor (there are exceptions but generally only generational and they are in the minority. Like some who grew up in the '70s say Moore, '90s Brosnan, etc, etc.).

Also I think Bond can move generationally so effortlessly because the films have very little continuity and Bond has no close ties to anyone other than his employers and collegues (who too can be recast) and never develops strong relationships beyond casual sex. It may be harder with Spider-Man considering by the end of SM4 to the latest he will be married and the first four at least are more about personal struggles than the threats (or first 3 anyway) and it will be MUCH harder to keep a franchise on that level fresh for decades.

In my opinion though.

[Clouseau]

Originally Posted by BoBByJoMo

Clive Owen stated in an interview that he is was approached and offered the role, yet he turned it down, feeling that the character was dated.

he also stated in another article - confirmed by Michael G. Wilson at Daniel Craig's announcement - that he had never been approached, and there was never any offer on the table...

and there was, before that, the article that claimed he'd turned down an offer because they wouldn't give him contract points...

too many contradictions...

but regardless of all this, i'm glad Brosnan is out the door...

...Die Another Day (a great Bond film, IMHO)...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHhahahahahaHAHAHAHAhahahahahaha!!! that's hilarious! keep 'em coming!

[Kevin Roegele]

Originally Posted by DACrowe

And though I think Bond is not solely considered one actor, I think it is safe to assume that most people would say that Sean Connery IS James Bond and associate him with the role more than any other actor (there are exceptions but generally only generational and they are in the minority. Like some who grew up in the '70s say Moore, '90s Brosnan, etc, etc.).

In the UK, Roger Moore is associated with Bond just as much as Connery. And to the millennial generation, Bond is Pierce Brosnan.

[Kevin Roegele]

Originally Posted by SpyderDan

Anyone else remember those terrifying rumors of Sony wanting Orlando Bloom to star in a series of Young 007 films?

Yep.....

[SpyderDan]

Originally Posted by Kevin Roegele

Yep.....

I guess we should consider ourselves lucky that that never happened.