› ›

Will we ever see a Bond go for moore?

BritishChap007BritishChap007
edited December 2011 in Actors Posts: 555
My finals week is a bit on the easy side this semester, fortunate for me. So I've been indulging myself in a Bondathon. I started Sunday and am now on Octopussy (one of my favorites, I might add).

The thread is about this: in this day and age, will we ever see a Bond actor do six, seven, or even top Moore with 8? I feel as if we will be forever in a period of each actor doing 4 max. We will be lucky to get 4 out of Craig, and I can't imagine he will do five.

With no telling what the future of the series holds, will we ever see the return of a true tenure?

Or will Moore forever reign king with 7?

090603_p18_moore.jpg
«1

Comments

  • Agent005Agent005
    Posts: 562
    If Cavill had won the role for CR, I think we would be looking at a marathon Bond. He'd have been able to do six or seven without a problem.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,184
    Since when is this news?

    Come on, people. Pay attention to this sort of things please.
  • BritishChap007BritishChap007
    Posts: 555
    DarthDimi wrote:
    Since when is this news?

    Come on, people. Pay attention to this sort of things please.

    A bit harsh, wouldn't you say? I'm just adjusting myself to the new MI6 and this is only the second thread I've started. Given the new appearance of the forum homepage, I nearly forgot there were sections.

    Perhaps a bit more restraint for an old forum vet?

  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    I say we might get five out of Craig, but let's be honest: due to all the troubles EON and MGM have, actor scheduling, plot development, hopefully firing Purvis and Wade after Skyfall, etc... the list goes on. My point is: Bonds don't last much anymore. It is nice to see a new actor take the reigns once in a while, though, and I'm glad I was born after the Moore era was over, because I don't think I could have remained a Bond fan after seeing the same Bond for twelve years. I was almost tired of Brosnan after four.
  • X3MSonicXX3MSonicX https://www.behance.net/gallery/86760163/Fa-Posteres-de-007-No-Time-To-Die
    Posts: 2,635
    Brosnan would go 5, if weren't for EA.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    What did EA have to do with it? If DAD hadn't been his fourth film, yes, I could have seen him going for five (DAD of course being five instead of four), but DAD ended things for that version of Bond. You kind of get the feeling throughout the film that Bond is saying "this is my last mission" in his head the whole time.
  • BritishChap007BritishChap007
    Posts: 555
    Agent007391 wrote:
    I say we might get five out of Craig, but let's be honest: due to all the troubles EON and MGM have, actor scheduling, plot development, hopefully firing Purvis and Wade after Skyfall, etc... the list goes on. My point is: Bonds don't last much anymore. It is nice to see a new actor take the reigns once in a while, though, and I'm glad I was born after the Moore era was over, because I don't think I could have remained a Bond fan after seeing the same Bond for twelve years. I was almost tired of Brosnan after four.

    Maybe your being tired was Brozzer's fault and not inherently something wrong wi a long tenure? ;)

    Settling into this marathon, I would really get attached. I enjoyed seeing Connery after Connery after Connery, and now the same with Moore. It is a shame that current era's will now be blips in comparison, at least when it comes to Craig. Id love to see him develope over the course of a Connery 6. And he'd likely show up in shape with his Angameneach time, giving Moore and Connery's legacies a run for their money. A las. However, as long as Bond itself lives on, it could be worse.

  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    edited December 2011 Posts: 7,854
    I can deal with every long-term Bond when I'm just sitting down and watching the DVDs/playing the video games. I don't have to wait two/three/four years in between to see the next film/play the next game. It's different when you're waiting for the next one to come out in theaters.

    Believe me, I love the Moore era while I'm watching my DVDs, but if I'd have to wait the three years between TMWTGG and TSWLM, I'd have lost all interest in seeing the next film. It's the same with the Brosnan era, I love those while I'm watching the DVDs, but when I had to wait three years between TWINE and DAD (my first Bond film in theaters, though I was alive for all the Brosnans), I was almost ready to dump the series. It's almost starting to happen with the Craig era, though Blood Stone and GoldenEye have helped alleviate that.
  • OHMSS69OHMSS69
    Posts: 2,341
    I will chime in:
    No, I don't think any actor is going to pull a "moore". The movies take longer to film, the budgets are astronimical and there is such a long period between films now that no actor can remain in the saddle as long as Moore did.
    Films used to be one calandar year apart (except for OHMSS and TSWLM where we waited 2.5 years from the previous film) then there was a constant 2 year wait period...at the height of the Moore, Dalton and Brosnan years.
    Now it has been more than 3 years since QoS
    DC was like 38 when he started now he is well in his forties.
    No, nobody is going to play Bond for as many years or as many films as Sir Roger. We tip our hats to him.
  • X3MSonicXX3MSonicX https://www.behance.net/gallery/86760163/Fa-Posteres-de-007-No-Time-To-Die
    Posts: 2,635
    Agent007391 wrote:
    What did EA have to do with it? If DAD hadn't been his fourth film, yes, I could have seen him going for five (DAD of course being five instead of four), but DAD ended things for that version of Bond. You kind of get the feeling throughout the film that Bond is saying "this is my last mission" in his head the whole time.

    Didn't u hear that Everything Or Nothing would be a movie, if EA hadn't buy it before?

  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited December 2011 Posts: 13,355
    No one will ever do as many as Moore but with some film series running for a number of films now, it wouldn't surprise me if the actors who play Bond do five or six films each from now on.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    X3MSonicX wrote:
    Agent007391 wrote:
    What did EA have to do with it? If DAD hadn't been his fourth film, yes, I could have seen him going for five (DAD of course being five instead of four), but DAD ended things for that version of Bond. You kind of get the feeling throughout the film that Bond is saying "this is my last mission" in his head the whole time.

    Didn't u hear that Everything Or Nothing would be a movie, if EA hadn't buy it before?

    No, as a matter of fact, everything I read about it said that it was always a game, and that no Bond film had been written for 2003/2004. Plus, it'd doubtful EON would have allowed Feirstein to pen another film since Purvis and Wade have been the writers since 1999.
  • BritishChap007BritishChap007
    Posts: 555
    Samuel001 wrote:
    No one will ever do as many as Moore but with some film series running for a number of films now, it wouldn't surprise me if the actors who play Bond do five or six films each from now on.

    Dumb question, but, besides those Potter films, is there another successful series where the lead has staid on that long these days?

    Bale will only do 3 Bat films. Spidey was switched after 3. Damon wouldn't stay for 4.

    What will keep Craig? Or any other actor? It doesn't seem sporting these days.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    BritishChap007 wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    No one will ever do as many as Moore but with some film series running for a number of films now, it wouldn't surprise me if the actors who play Bond do five or six films each from now on.

    Dumb question, but, besides those Potter films, is there another successful series where the lead has staid on that long these days?

    Bale will only do 3 Bat films. Spidey was switched after 3. Damon wouldn't stay for 4.

    What will keep Craig? Or any other actor? It doesn't seem sporting these days.

    Pirates, Die Hard, Resident Evil. Toby wanted more Spider-Man films too but that didn't happen. Craig seems happy and anyone who is Bond has wanted at least to stay for a while (why change what's good, Bond is afterall a long-running series, that should have long running actors in the lead). Brosnan wanted six and Craig seems to want some more.
  • BritishChap007BritishChap007
    Posts: 555
    Samuel001 wrote:
    BritishChap007 wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    No one will ever do as many as Moore but with some film series running for a number of films now, it wouldn't surprise me if the actors who play Bond do five or six films each from now on.

    Dumb question, but, besides those Potter films, is there another successful series where the lead has staid on that long these days?

    Bale will only do 3 Bat films. Spidey was switched after 3. Damon wouldn't stay for 4.

    What will keep Craig? Or any other actor? It doesn't seem sporting these days.

    Pirates, Die Hard, Resident Evil. Toby wanted more Spider-Man films too but that didn't happen. Craig seems happy and anyone who is Bond has wanted at least to stay for a while (why change what's good, Bond is afterall a long-running series, that should have long running actors in the lead). Brosnan wanted six and Craig seems to want some more.

    Good points indeed.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited July 2014 Posts: 13,355
    It's worthwhile noting if Deep does six Pirates films - and that seems very likely - he'd have been playing that role for 14 years, longer than any Bond actor and for one less film than Moore, by then the public may still want more of him. Films take longer to make today but actors seem more than OK with waiting to come around again.

    EDIT: It seems it's now 14 years for five films, so six would take 17 at least. That makes my point even stronger.

    We need another actor to do five or six films as Bond to get a sense of continuity going again. 6, 1, 7, 2, 4 is a really odd count for any series. A few more 5's or 6's would help in my opinion.
  • BritishChap007BritishChap007
    edited December 2011 Posts: 555
    Samuel001 wrote:
    It's worthwhile noting if Deep does six Pirates films - and that seems very likely - he'd have been playing that role for 14 years, longer than any Bond actor and for one less film than Moore, by then the public may still want more of him. Films take longer to make today but actors seem more than OK with waiting to come around again.

    We need another actor to do five or six films as Bond to get a sense of continuity going again. 6, 1, 7, 2, 4 is a really odd count for any series. A few more 5's or 6's would help in my opinion.

    I couldn't agree more.

    And dear lord, six pirates films? Yikes.

  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    edited December 2011 Posts: 14,586
    I say give Craig seven or more films. If he has a walking stick by the last one, he can use it as a rifle gadget a la Valentin. Jokes aside, I think Craig will do a maximum of 6 films if we're lucky. By then, he'll be pushing 50. He has a typical 'character face'- meaning he has prominent facial lines. Therefore, I believe at 50 he'll look older than he really is- and by then Babs & MGW may be looking at a younger face.
  • 00Beast00Beast
    Posts: 4,762
    Craig may tie with Moore, but I wouldn't say he'd beat him with 8 or above. If anything, he'll get right or 7 or probably around 5 would be more reasonable.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    depending on how long the gap between skyfall and bond 24 will be, and how old craig looks by then, skyfall could be his last one.

    I think we'll get 4 or 5 out of craig if we're lucky. If EON did want another moore then they would get a younger actor next time, because I don't think they'll let an actor carry on into his late 50s again.
  • KennonKennon
    Posts: 297
    I think there's nothing that would prevent a second 7 film run if the actor is young enough at the start (Cavill anybody?), keeps fit and agile enough and if the franchise can stay out of trouble for a given time.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    I'm all for another 7 film era, so long as it's the right actor. As for Cavill, I can't shake the feeling that he would be another Brosnan. Which exchanges one load of problems for another.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    Isn't he the guy who's playing Superman in Man of Steel?
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    Agent007391 wrote:
    Isn't he the guy who's playing Superman in Man of Steel?

    Yes.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited December 2011 Posts: 24,184
    A good actor with the proper looks can stay on as long as he likes if it's up to me. During the DAD - CR gap I actually rooted for Brosnan to play the role a fifth time, in part because I have trouble letting someone go who's established in a certain role, in part also because I thought he still had a Bond or two in him.

    Another case is Dalton. I certainly wouldn't have minded to see Dalton return for two or even three more Bond films. He could have done a couple more in the early 1990s.

    The problem with 7 Bonds, however, is that you either need to cast someone surprisingly young for his first film, or you really can't afford any gap that lasts longer than two years. On average, Moore did his 7 with another film every two years. And Moore, contrary to what some say, aged rather well IMO. So, if we start counting from the release of the first film, it eventually takes 12 years in total. So imagine we hire someone age 37. He'd be 49 when he does his final Bond. I can see that happen for sure. But then we don't need financial fiascos like the recent Sony ordeal and we have to make sure that audiences nowadays don't grow tired of seeing the Bonds released so 'fast'. I know, silly isn't it? Seven Saw films, seven years. You'd think it'd be easy. Well, it isn't with Bond as long as they want to produce big, quality films with which they hope to make more than 150 million dollars each time. ;;)
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    Well, I'll agree with you there: Moore didn't exactly change a lot in those twelve years.
  • forgotmyusernameforgotmyusername
    edited December 2011 Posts: 2,782
    A bit off topic - but it is the nicest I've scene (pun intended) of Bond through the generations. Enjoy:




  • KennonKennon
    Posts: 297
    Well, a very young actor and a tight two year schedule may seem unlikely at the moment. But not impossible, we might be in for a surprise in the future.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited December 2011 Posts: 13,978
    forgotmyusername wrote:
    A bit off topic - but it is the nicest I've scene (pun intended) of Bond through the generations. Enjoy:



    Well done to the creator of that tribute. Though it was most welome (as a Dalton fan), there was surprisingly a high quota of Daltonage in that tribute. There may be more Daltonage in that tribute than any other Bond tribute i've seen. Well, excluding Dalton-centric trubutes. :-B
  • thelordflasheartthelordflasheart
    Posts: 1,370
    DarthDimi wrote:
    A good actor with the proper looks can stay on as long as he likes if it's up to me. During the DAD - CR gap I actually rooted for Brosnan to play the role a fifth time, in part because I have trouble letting someone go who's established in a certain role, in part also because I thought he still had a Bond or two in him.

    Good point, DarthDimi. I remember that there was some concern about what would happen with the franchise when Brosnan was (depending on your point of view) booted/left. There was a lot of talk about the Alternating Bonds theory - you get a long-running, successful Bond and then an unsuccessful one. After the long gap between LTK and GE I was worried that we'd get a one or two film actor, a long break between films, and then (if we were lucky) a few films in a row again. When Craig was announced I was worried we would see another Lazenby or Dalton.

    Wow, was I wrong...

Sign In or Register to comment.