SPECTRE--last Craig-era film?

18911131425

Comments

  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    end of sentence ;)
  • Posts: 709

    Absolutely 100% guaranteed not to happen. Already playing Superman AND already playing a Diet Coke Bond in a competing spy movie (presumably with sequel options if it does well). EON aren't going to pick a guy for whom Bond is a THIRD priority.
  • Posts: 11,119
    Is this discussion still going on :-)? Off course I think people should continue posting in this particular topic. It's all about discussions inside forums no?

    But come on guys, is it really appealing to predict when Daniel Craig will step down? I am pretty certain that after "SPECTRE" people are giving this topic another thought: Because I'm sure everyone will say: Daniel Craig needs to stay! ;-)
  • Posts: 15,231
    dinovelvet wrote: »

    Absolutely 100% guaranteed not to happen. Already playing Superman AND already playing a Diet Coke Bond in a competing spy movie (presumably with sequel options if it does well). EON aren't going to pick a guy for whom Bond is a THIRD priority.

    His Diet Coke Bond may be the reason this rumor is breathing.

    My money was on Cavill before Superman and Man from UNCLE. Now I doubt he'll come near Bond.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Agreed.
  • Posts: 709
    Ludovico wrote: »
    His Diet Coke Bond may be the reason this rumor is breathing.

    For sure. And when he's promoting UNCLE, get ready for a whole new round of interviews where he's asked if he'd want to play Bond.
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    Cavill can't act
  • Seven_Point_Six_FiveSeven_Point_Six_Five Southern California
    Posts: 1,257
    Cavill can't act

    Craig raised the bar when he took on the role of Bond. He brought depth to the character and actual acting ability. From what I have seen, Cavill just doesn't have it. I know I'm not the only one who thinks it takes more than just a handsome Brit to play Bond.
  • edited June 2015 Posts: 15,231
    Cavill can't act

    Now, now. Cavill can act, he just hasn't done so in a long while. Because it is far easier to look good.
  • edited June 2015 Posts: 2,081
    Cavill can act? And looks good? Oh, ok... I think I've only seen him in MOS, so waiting for further evidence... ;)

    (Hmm, the next work of his I might see could be where he's supposedly acting and looking good with Ben Affleck... - can he? is he? - Oh dear... I'm not even remotely convinced about that guy, either.)
  • Posts: 1,499
    Cavill can't act

    Craig raised the bar when he took on the role of Bond. He brought depth to the character and actual acting ability. From what I have seen, Cavill just doesn't have it. I know I'm not the only one who thinks it takes more than just a handsome Brit to play Bond.

    I agree with you. I think Eon will want another quality actor to replace Craig, when the time comes. My money is on Fassbender.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Fassbender would be good, agreed. But time and age is against him.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    I championed Fassbender after Inglourious, my Wife has been a fan since seeing him in 300. He's a superb actor one of the best on the planet at the moment and would make a terrific Bond but Fassy is just too big now.

    He's launching his own franchise and already plays an iconic comic book character. Compare this to Craig's situation, some acclaimed TV work, a few independent films one that brought him to the attention of BB and of course a supporting role in a Spielberg film. Fassbender is long past this, he has an academy award nom and a possible next one with either Macbeth or The Steve Jobs biopic.

    Like I've said before he's got a much better agent than Daniel Craig.

    We are looking actors on the cusp of greatness which is why either this guy is on no ones radar or the likes of Dan Stevens or Tom Hughes are a better option.

    The only way I see a big name becoming Bond is if EON partnered with a studio that insisted on it and the rewards for this were just too good so they went along with it.

    Not knocking Colonel's choice it is a stellar one but the history of casting this role doesn't point in the direction of either Fassy or Tom Hardy becoming Bond.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2015 Posts: 23,883
    I think things have changed considerably since DC's casting. Particularly given the success of Bond critically (which implies a good actor must be cast) and commercially (which means all bets are off in terms of name recognition, especially with a new studio/s involved).

    We've only been in this position once before in terms of recasting at the top of the game, and that was when Connery was replaced. They went with Lazenby, and at the time it was not well received (as per Michael Wilson's direct comments at a speech he gave some years back). They are unlikely to take a risk with Craig's replacement imho due to the position they find themselves in with the franchise (as big and as good as it will ever be). I expect a 'safe' choice, whatever and whoever that may be.
  • Posts: 12,526
    I believe you summed that up spot on bondjames!
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    I'm sorry I don't see a big name getting the job, for the most part you don't get a star to play Bond, you cast someone and they become a star playing Bond.

    This seems to have worked pretty well for EON in the past so why change that now?

    What's a safe choice anyway, do you mean someone not too far from the Craig model or casting a name? A good actor can be cast but I don't see that being an actor like Fassbender or Hardy, as for Lewis I'm sure that was just something his people put out to gain momentum and it back fired.

    Also if Craig is supposedly hanging round till 2020, does this mean one more or 2, although Bond 25 seems like a good one to bow out on, being Bond in the 25th entry will be a great achievement for Daniel.

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    The thing is, people get way too overzealous with their fan casting and often compromise the fundimental template of thought that's been in place for over 50 years and with the way the production is handled today, coupled with external factors within the movie business it's genuinely shocking to see fans propose certain candidates as serious contenders when they should know better than the average Joe who knows nothing.
    Names like Hardy, Cavill, Fassbender...Lewis; seriously? Hell will freeze over first before any of these guys are cast.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Shardlake wrote: »
    I'm sorry I don't see a big name getting the job, for the most part you don't get a star to play Bond, you cast someone and they become a star playing Bond.

    This seems to have worked pretty well for EON in the past so why change that now?

    What's a safe choice anyway, do you mean someone not too far from the Craig model or casting a name? A good actor can be cast but I don't see that being an actor like Fassbender or Hardy, as for Lewis I'm sure that was just something his people put out to gain momentum and it back fired.

    Also if Craig is supposedly hanging round till 2020, does this mean one more or 2, although Bond 25 seems like a good one to bow out on, being Bond in the 25th entry will be a great achievement for Daniel.

    I'm saying this:

    1. the stakes are higher than they've ever been. Bond is one of the top 5 global franchises again (maybe top 2 or 3). It's not been that way since Moore's heyday in the late 70's.
    ---

    2. there is a studio changeover coming. I'm pretty sure that whichever studio is coming into the picture already has an idea of who the next Bond should/could be, and these discussions have already been had with EON. There's no coincidence to the Craig leaving Bond rumours. They are tied together.
    I'm pretty sure these discussions are taking place now, because if I was the new studio, I would not want to make an investment/commitment like this without knowing/influencing who takes over the role in the next 4 - 5 yrs or so (or sooner). At least preliminary discussions have taken place.
    I think high level discussions are already ongoing about directors as well, maybe for multiple films (EON has probably learned from their mistakes about having journeymen directors on the projects).

    I wouldn't underestimate this. MGM had a big say in getting Brosnan in (and even wanted him when Dalton was in the role) and Sony approved Craig wholeheartedly (at least Amy Pascal was a big proponent of his in 2006, despite recent leaked emails about her suggesting Elba post-Craig)
    ---

    3. strategically, EON is going to go one of two ways with Bond going forward imho:
    a. back to a slightly lighter Bond
    b. stay on the Craig dark-ish path (although they will run out of ideas soon enough without digging up other familial connections/past trauma

    c. There is also a 3rd option, but I think it will only apply if Nolan gets it, and that is to go even darker than they have. I think this is unlikely.

    Bottom line: Bond is big business now like he's never been for decades. DC's brave and offbeat casting was a one off due to the need to 'reboot'. There is no necessity for a reboot now (in fact, the contrary). So I see a 'safe' pick. The issue is, who is the safe pick who is in his 30's (the right age for a new sustainable Bond actor). I can't really think of anyone. I hope it's not Cumberbatch. It could be Dornan, given his 50 Shades fame, but I don't know.... Tough choices.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    As it is, Daniel Craig's involvement is more important than any other casting decision and pick of director and that includes Nolan. Irrespective of who ends up with the distribution rights Craig isn't going anywhere unless he himself wants out and I guarantee he'll be back for Bond 25.
  • Posts: 725
    Shardlake wrote: »
    I'm sorry I don't see a big name getting the job, for the most part you don't get a star to play Bond, you cast someone and they become a star playing Bond.

    This seems to have worked pretty well for EON in the past so why change that now?

    What's a safe choice anyway, do you mean someone not too far from the Craig model or casting a name? A good actor can be cast but I don't see that being an actor like Fassbender or Hardy, as for Lewis I'm sure that was just something his people put out to gain momentum and it back fired.

    Also if Craig is supposedly hanging round till 2020, does this mean one more or 2, although Bond 25 seems like a good one to bow out on, being Bond in the 25th entry will be a great achievement for Daniel.

    Agree. The films have become so big and the filming schedule so difficult with so many landmines if the last 10 years are any guide, I can't see a major star with their pick of roles taking on the critical and financial expectations of the next Bond. Guys like Fassbender and Hardy already have their own franchises and pick of great roles and directors. Cahill, even if he were a better actor, hasn't a chance. Why would EON want their next BOND to have their Bond's iconic screen identity diluted by an actor who is also Superman and Solo let alone deal with the scheduling mess.

    Other lesser big names like Lewis and Elba are too old by 10 to 15 years. If Craig were to leave after SP, one actor I'd like to see get some consideration is Charlie Hunnam. He's English, mid 30s, a good actor and can easily handle the stunt work. He has a career trajectory similar to Craig's at the time he was chosen. Craig was just breaking out into some more mainstream film roles, as Hunnam is now doing.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    doubleoego wrote: »
    As it is, Daniel Craig's involvement is more important than any other casting decision and pick of director and that includes Nolan. Irrespective of who ends up with the distribution rights Craig isn't going anywhere unless he himself wants out and I guarantee he'll be back for Bond 25.

    DC's involvement is important currently because he has been more than an actor for Bond. He has interwoven himself into the fabric of the series, including scripts, pick of director, actors etc. That has all been under Sony's watch.

    I think B25 is the one that could swing either way. If it's back with Mendes and Craig as a semi-continuation to SP, then I'll be happy.

    However, as I said before, I'm pretty sure the discussions about DC's replacement have taken place. It would be imprudent not to do it. The contenders likely will be screen tested shortly after SP's release imho.
  • Posts: 709
    bondjames wrote: »


    2. there is a studio changeover coming. I'm pretty sure that whichever studio is coming into the picture already has an idea of who the next Bond should/could be, and these discussions have already been had with EON. There's no coincidence to the Craig leaving Bond rumours. They are tied together.
    I'm pretty sure these discussions are taking place now, because if I was the new studio, I would not want to make an investment/commitment like this without knowing/influencing who takes over the role in the next 4 - 5 yrs or so (or sooner). At least preliminary discussions have taken place.
    I think high level discussions are already ongoing about directors as well, maybe for multiple films (EON has probably learned from their mistakes about having journeymen directors on the projects).

    But, assuming the box office of SPECTRE is comparable with Skyfall, i.e. in the billion ballpark, why would any studio want to risk messing with that, by replacing the new lead actor? The series is at the strongest point its been since the 60s, and Craig is the most popular Bond since Connery. I think its far more likely that a studio would demand at least two more films with Craig. No matter how good a choice one thinks a potential Bond actor might be, they just for whatever reason may not click with audiences.
    Besides, EON is in a strong bargaining position after Skyfall's box office. Every studio in town would want in on this. If one studio tries to strongarm them and dictate terms, EON can simply move on to the next one.



  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2015 Posts: 23,883
    dinovelvet wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »


    2. there is a studio changeover coming. I'm pretty sure that whichever studio is coming into the picture already has an idea of who the next Bond should/could be, and these discussions have already been had with EON. There's no coincidence to the Craig leaving Bond rumours. They are tied together.
    I'm pretty sure these discussions are taking place now, because if I was the new studio, I would not want to make an investment/commitment like this without knowing/influencing who takes over the role in the next 4 - 5 yrs or so (or sooner). At least preliminary discussions have taken place.
    I think high level discussions are already ongoing about directors as well, maybe for multiple films (EON has probably learned from their mistakes about having journeymen directors on the projects).

    But, assuming the box office of SPECTRE is comparable with Skyfall, i.e. in the billion ballpark, why would any studio want to risk messing with that, by replacing the new lead actor? The series is at the strongest point its been since the 60s, and Craig is the most popular Bond since Connery. I think its far more likely that a studio would demand at least two more films with Craig. No matter how good a choice one thinks a potential Bond actor might be, they just for whatever reason may not click with audiences.
    Besides, EON is in a strong bargaining position after Skyfall's box office. Every studio in town would want in on this. If one studio tries to strongarm them and dictate terms, EON can simply move on to the next one.


    You're right on that.

    The problem as I see it, as has been discussed here and on other threads, is that it is DC that will make that decision....maybe he doesn't want to make that investment and maybe that's why these rumours of him leaving started.

    I agree, if I was a new studio, I'd want DC, but DC himself is the key to it. We are assuming the man is motivated by money which is really the only thing that will keep him in this role for longer than B25 (he's already made some sarcastic comments about Bond being less than creatively challenging and I'm sure he is looking to his film legacy as he ages). I don't think he is. He is the wildcard and if he doesn't make a multi-film commitment, then it will open up the options.......for studio risk management.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited June 2015 Posts: 11,139
    Shortly screen tested after SP's release? I dont see that happening at all as I stand by my belief that Craig will be back for Bond 25. Furthermore, if SP is Craig's last for the sake of argument screen tests won't take place for some time as EoN harps on about how big these productions are, how they want to enjoy a break and blah blah. There's going to be a healthy hiatus if SP is Craig's last and if Craig is leaving with
    Blofeld alive and kicking and ready for vengeance
    then they're clearly not that fussed about ushering a new Bond in, picking up where Craig left of and confusing tge he'll out of people.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    @doubleoego, I'm pretty sure preliminary discussions have taken place about his successor and options are on the table, regardless of everything else. In a multi-$bn production/investment, it's just common sense.

    I'd love to know who those candidates are that they've considered (we'll likely only know many yrs down the road as happened in the past) and what we'd think of them.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited June 2015 Posts: 11,139
    bondjames wrote: »
    @doubleoego, I'm pretty sure preliminary discussions have taken place about his successor and options are on the table, regardless of everything else. In a multi-$bn production/investment, it's just common sense.

    I'd love to know who those candidates are that they've considered (we'll likely only know many yrs down the road as happened in the past) and what we'd think of them.

    Well the leaks confirm that preliminary discussions have been discussed but to what degree is unknown. Afterall, Bond is a continuous movie series and actors are always being kept an eye on to take on the role circa a specific time frame; so candidates ready for 2022 roughly, has been given abstract considerations.
  • Posts: 725
    I doubt if any deal with be announced until SP opens and I would think the wild card will be SP's BO figures. If it does not do that well, all bets are off. I think Craig will walk, before he feels any draft. If SP is another hit, Craig and Mendes will be offered obscene amounts of $$ for just one more.
  • Posts: 9,860
    and that means then Bond 25 will be titled Shatterhand as Mendes loves one word titles that start with S I mean we might get something like The Silver Phantom 2 words but the first one beginning with S but yeah I doubt that somehow.
  • Posts: 1,680
    Preliminary discussions can only go so far when theres at least another 8-9 years before a new Bond arrives. Bond 25 will be released in 2018 most likely. Craig may do another one after that but I doubt it. Then your going to have a 4-6 year gap and unveil a new Bond. Your looking at 2022- 2023 IMO.
Sign In or Register to comment.