It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
@Tuulia Have you seen Die Another Day? That's why people think Brosnan was the fall guy. It was terrible thanks to EON so they went in a completely different direction and since Brosnan was the star, they ditched him. And me and lots of others think he deserved a better send off.
I always thought it was a case of Bond feeling sorry for Electra and wanting to protect her after seeing her on the computer.
@OHMSS personally I thought the killing of Electra was one of Brosnan's best moments in the role.
Yeah, I thought it was a combination of lust ("I take pleasure...and great beauty") and a desire to protect her.
???
Yes.
I can't remember if I had even heard of thetomatoes before I joined this site, and I have no plans on starting to pay any attention or give any importance to it now. :)
Of course I've seen DAD. I don't believe it was all EON's fault it was terrible, but ultimately yes, they hired the director and they accepted and allowed the madness, so... Anyway, the way I've understood they didn't blame him for the movie being the way it was - that is to say they didn't ditch him because he was the star in it, either. Yes, they wanted to go into a different direction, and since they wanted to do that very radically it made more sense to do it with a different actor. Also, I can't blame them for wanting to do CR since they finally could. Now... DAD followed by CR, with the same Bond? Pierce hardly deserved DAD in the first place, but it wasn't going to disappear even if he had made another movie. Only morons would think DAD itself was all (or even mostly) his doing.
I think there was some ambiguity with it, did he love her, could he even trust her, etc.
I think Elektra's aim was to try and get Bond to fall in love with her (like she did with Renard), to try and throw MI6 off her tail.
But then when it gets to her death scene ("you won't kill me, you'd miss me" BANG), we find out Bond never did love her. She was just another shagpiece, except she was one that he wanted to protect.
He did show some regret over killing her before he jumped out of the window to stop Renard, but I think that was more him regretting that it had come to that, not him being upset because he loved her.
@Ludovico He said he wasn't happy with his tenure in general after he left and he was pissing himself when they showed him the parasurfing scene as part of the EON documentary. I think he was dissatisfied.
As for Brosnan, I think he definitely served the agenda of what the producers were largely trying to achieve. Dalton is by far a superior actor and a more dynamic Bond but with audiences largely sleeping on the genius of TLD and LTK and a 6 year absence, the producers needed a "safe" bet and Brosnan delivered. He fit the general stereotype and discourse of what Bond was supposed to be and it worked. However, that element can only go so far and when the material was lacking and competitive movies were coming across more credible, it only stands to reason that the Brosnan era would become highly scrutinised. Say what you want about the Brosnan era but I think it's a fair assessment to state that Brosnan's movies were at least fun.
But I think if Bond loved her then he would've had more trouble killing her than he did.
He loved Vesper and still tried to save her even though he had no idea why she betrayed him. For all he knew she was a baddy all along, he didn't know anything about the stuff with her boyfriend. So I think if he loved Elektra then he wouldn't have been able to kill her so easily.
Although I could argue with myself and just say it was a reflex reaction when she started telling Renard to launch the submarines.
When Bond is chasing after Gettler, his men and Vesper (who is being held by Gettler at gunpoint), Gettler shouts, "I'll kill her!" and Bond answers, "allow me." So Bond is constantly fighting his feelings for Vesper in these moments, between wanting her to die (his cold side) or wanting to jump into the fray and save her (the side that loves her).
Back to TWINE:
Just because Bond shoots Electra doesn't mean he doesn't love her. He gives her warnings that she doesn't take note off or abide by, and even crosses a line and continues to disobey him on purpose just to see how much she can get away with, thinking he would never harm her. Bond took a call, sparing Electra and having her and Renard cause even more havoc or kill her and save the day. He chose the world/the mission over his own personal feelings. Even after she is dead he still remains at her body as if he is saying a precious final goodbye (kind of like he does with Paris in TND actually), taking one last moment with her before he must go and stop Renard. It has been a while since I watched TWINE, but I think the scene goes a lot deeper than just Bond popping her and running off, which I like seeing in an era dominated by missed opportunities.
I seem to remember Bond hesitating and not wanting to kill her. He gave her a chance iirc but she called his bluff and well, the bitch was dead. The thing to remember is, Bond always puts the mission first as we were so heavily reminded by Alec in GE.
He loved Vesper and still tried to save her even though he had no idea why she betrayed him. For all he knew she was a baddy all along, he didn't know anything about the stuff with her boyfriend. So I think if he loved Elektra then he wouldn't have been able to kill her so easily.
Well, when Bond follows Vesper and Gettler spots him, he threatens to kill Vesper and Bond says, 'allow me', implying that Vesper had betrayed him and he was more than happy to kill her himself. Also, Bond is a much better written character in CR than he is in TWINE. Also, I think it's fair to assume that Bond trying to save Vesper was him wanting to get answers as to why she turned. In TWINE, Bond already knew of Elektra's villainy and so the circumstances of their respective deaths were radically different.
Although I could argue with myself and just say it was a reflex reaction when she started telling Renard to launch the submarines.
It's possible but I think by this point Bond had given her enough rope and she ultimately hanged herself. With all that happened between these two, the romance, deception, emotional manipulation and torture, if it meant nothing to Elektra in order for her to achieve her own goal then Bond could do the same.
I'm not saying it didn't. I'm saying I thought it was more ambiguous than Bond loving her.
Elektra wanted him to love her so she could get MI6 of her back, but really I think Bond just felt sorry for her and wanted to protect her. I think he regretted killing her, which is why he stopped before jumping out of the window, but if he really loved her why not just shoot her in the leg, and why have no problem banging Christmas as soon as the missions over?
That comment wasn't aimed at you, my dear chap. I was just pointing out that the scene was a fresh aside from the common super-Bond acts of the era where Bond did a really gripping act that seemed to give him some dimension, only for him to go off and act like nothing deeply affecting happened to him afterwards, making him again one-dimensional. That is why I am annoyed that he sleeps with Christmas afterwards, just as you are. We just had a situation where Bond had to kill a woman he may have deeply loved even after giving her a chance to stop her betrayal. He shoots, showing immediate emotion and goes to her body to say a final wrenching goodbye before running of to again save the day. Predictably in the Brosnan era fashion, at the end of the film Bond doesn't have any of that visible pain or regret that he showed after he killed Electra, and goes back to being a one-dimensional character by sleeping with Christmas, like none of the stuff with Electra ever even happened. I would love the Brosnan era so much more if those moments of Bond showing his emotion, vulnerability and regret were actually built upon (I know Brosnan wanted that!) and the films continued to show a consistently deep characterization of Bond instead of being so pathetically inconsistent about what they wanted him to be. It is almost as if the film (TWINE) goes along the action route, then something interesting happens to Bond where he shows true emotion, all before the film realizes it is trying to be an action film first and scraps all that deep content for more punches, gunfire and explosions. A real shame, I say. The era had the fun of Moore, the coldness and suave mix of Connery and a small sprinkling of the pained/hurt/affected Bond from the Connery, Lazenby and Dalton eras in spots, yet it was trying so hard to be all these things it never made one clear voice for itself and comes off as sloppy and inconsistent.
however terrible it was, remember - Pierce went along with it, and obviously felt it was a good enough idea to film.. especially if you consider all the last minute changes Tamahori did to the script - Pierce obviously felt comfortable enough with them - and the director, as i believe he championed Tamahori for the job... so it's not like they held a gun to his head and said do this or else - like he had to perform a terrible script against his will.... i am not saying the lousy DAD squarely falls on his shoulders.. it's a combination of everyone - the least to blame with that film actually is Brosnan - for what its worth he was the only watchable part of that horrid mess..
but he often complained after the fact that they never gave him the strong character driven scripts to work with... which isn't completely the truth.. TWINE had some strong character moments in the film, despite being a misguided and weak script, there was plenty enough there for Pierce to play around with.. but i dont feel like he really shined through in that film.. in certain spots, yes.. but not in the film as a whole.. Brosnan was much better suited in GE or TND.. i could buy into his Bond a little bit more in those films.... in TWINE, he comes off as too soap opera-ish at times... compare that with Craig in QOS.. another Bond actor given a weak script, but he shined through with his performance.. even Roger Moore with TMWTGG or Dalton with LTK.. both inferior scripts compared to their other Bond films, but their performances make the films watchable, and help carry the film.... i never got that from Brosnan in TWINE, or even DAD...
but his time was over... his contract fulfilled, EON owed him nothing - if they wanted to go in a different direction, they had every right to - which is why i never agree with him being fired, or sacked.. the time was right to move on.... did Brosnan deserve a 5th film to set things back on course with his tenure.. sure, as DAD was pretty lousy.. but there was no guarantee that Brosnan's follow up to DAD would've been much better..
I've said before, that I often had an issue with accepting Brosnan as James Bond. He just didn't fit the profile more often than not, as seemed so far detached from what Fleming intended. Even Lazenby seemed more plausible in the part I feel like saying. His greatest hour was The World Is Not Enough, but apart from that and some memorable moments in his other three appearances, was simply not up to much I'm afraid
Brosnan was contracted to do the movie. So, while there was no gun-holding involved, he HAD to shoot the film even if he hated the direction that the script went. Like the rest of us, actors sometimes have to do things at their jobs that they find unpleasant, stupid, or unfair.
As far as his championing Tamahori, and being "comfortable" with the changes on-set: sometimes things happen by degrees. You can change one or two things on set and think the movie is evolving brilliantly, but then by the tenth or eleventh change, you realize you've ended up with a totally different film, and one you're not really happy with. Especially when you're shooting out of sequence, sometimes it's tough to keep a perspective on how the film is going to cut together later, because you're so focused on just getting through today's scene.
I'm sure Brosnan is partially culpable for the disaster of DAD, as are Tamahori, P&W, MGW & BB, etc. etc. But none of us can do anything more than guess at the exact percentage breakdown of blame. Just because Brosnan was (theoretically) supportive of some of the bad decisions doesn't mean he can't regret them after the fact.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2301799/My-new-role-brought-agony-watching-cancer-kill-wife-Former-Bond-star-Pierce-Brosnan-admits-thinks-Cassie-time--22-years-death.html
My new role brought back agony of watching cancer kill my first wife: Former Bond star Pierce Brosnan admits he 'still thinks about Cassie all the time' - 22 years after her death
Pierce Brosnan plays wealthy widower who falls in love with cancer sufferer
Brosnan's first wife died from cancer in 1991 at the age of 41
He is now remarried to journalist Keely Shaye Smith
By Jason Solomons
PUBLISHED: 20:34 EST, 30 March 2013 | UPDATED: 02:45 EST, 31 March 2013
Comments (89) Share
Pierce Brosnan lost his first wife Cassandra after she died of ovarian cancer in 1991
Despite the beauty of the setting, on a forested cliff atop the sparkling blue Mediterranean sea at sunset, the final scenes of his latest film bring back the most painful memories of Pierce Brosnan’s life.
In Love Is All You Need, a charming romantic comedy set on Italy’s stunning Amalfi Coast, the former James Bond star plays a wealthy widower who falls in love with a hairdresser suffering from cancer and awaiting a letter of final diagnosis from her doctor.
Such a predicament is deeply familiar to Brosnan, whose first wife Cassandra lost a four-year battle with ovarian cancer in 1991 and died, aged just 41.
Her death left him devastated and bringing up their son Sean, then eight, alone.
‘I went through it all, very publicly,’ Brosnan, 59, says. ‘Such things draw a mark across your heart and it’s always a part of your life. To watch someone you love have their life eaten away – bit by bit, by this insidious and horrid disease – becomes an indelible part of your psyche.
‘It certainly did for me and, of course, when I received this script, the challenge of playing this part was not lost on me.’
This is the first time since actress Cassie’s death 22 years ago that Brosnan has confronted the issue of cancer on screen. ‘I’ve sat in rooms with doctors and awaited the outcome of examinations, for results to come back. I’ve opened letters with bad news in them. I know what it’s like, I really do.’
On screen romance: Pierce Brosnan with Trine Dyrholm take to the Mediterranean in Love Is All You Need
Brosnan says he never discussed his past sorrow with his co-star in Love Is All You Need, the Danish actress Trine Dyrholm. ‘An actor has to draw on all his life experiences, good and bad. You have to be vulnerable and sensitive to the circumstances in a script which you know will affect everyone.
‘So I know the pain and the agony of waiting and being powerless.’
Brosnan fell in love anew in 1994 with journalist Keely Shaye Smith – and the pair have been happily married since 2001. ‘I know what it’s like to be a widower and what it’s like to find love again,’ he adds.
Happily remarried: Pierce Brosnan found love again with his second wife Keely Shaye Smith
‘So I know there’s hope and that you have to learn to get on with it. Ups and downs are what life is all about. But the memory of Cassie and her fight against cancer is never forgotten.
More...Revealed: Daniel Craig received $1MILLION for (00)7minute appearance at New York auto show
'The battle we didn't choose': Photographer documents his wife's fight with cancer in moving series of images
‘Keely has always been kind and compassionate and encouraged me to mourn Cassie. I think of Cassie all the time – my son Sean is also her son, of course, and he’s 29 now.
‘Cancer is a very sad thing but you can always take something from every experience. This film is proof of that. I’ve always been a positive thinker. I suppose Keely is my North Star, always looking out for me.
‘And I guess that makes me more thankful and more up for it, up for taking on whatever life throws at me and whatever parts my career now puts my way.’
I first saw Love Is All You Need last year when I reviewed it for The Mail on Sunday from the Venice Film Festival. I found it funny and sweet yet always classy; it could be a big hit.
Made with Danish money and a Danish-influence cast, it has the rather more comic title in Danish of The Bald-Headed Hairdresser.
That is because it concerns hard-working, suburban hairdresser Ida who is recovering from severe chemotherapy for breast cancer and reeling from the discovery of that her husband (Kim Bodnia from The Killing) is having an affair with a bimbo secretary.
Wearing a blonde wig, Ida travels to Sorrento to attend the hastily announced wedding of her daughter to the son of a wealthy fruit importer, Philip (Brosnan). While there, Ida’s pragmatism and serenity appeal to the buttoned-down, bereaved workaholic Philip.
Susanne Bier, director of Love Is All You Need, says that when she approached the actor to be her unlikely star, she had no idea about the ghosts of cancer that lurked in Brosnan’s past.
‘It was his James Bond past that I was interested in,’ she recalls. ‘I wanted some of that suave elegance, the way he sort of always keeps a bit of himself back as an actor, a bit of distance. He has humour and grace.
Quintessential Bond: Pierce Brosnan in 1997's Tomorrow Never Dies
‘But I soon learned about Cassie after I’d sent him the script, and I was really worried he’d think I was exploiting the cancer element of his history. I was so nervous when he called me, that he’d be insulted or just find it too emotional and close to live through on screen.
‘But, no, he said because the film treats cancer in a light-hearted way, and with humour, he would do it.’ Ms Bier, who won an Oscar for her film In A Better World, says Brosnan was a pleasure to have on the set and that he would talk openly to her and his fellow performers about his experience.
‘Cancer is common to a lot of people in that it has touched them somehow, caused them some kind of pain, directly or indirectly. Pierce just cared that we addressed it with hope and light.
‘Many actors are not happy people and they escape their pain through their art. But not Pierce. He is a happy human being and he enjoys life.’
Ms Bier says she was looking for a happy ending to the journey for her lead character of a woman living with cancer. ‘Maybe I cast Pierce because I could sense some pain beneath his graceful exterior? I don’t know. Maybe I just thought a woman who has been through pain deserves a happy end – and what happier end could a woman wish for than to fall in love with the man who played James Bond?’
For many viewers, the sight of Brosnan back in a sunlit Mediterranean setting will recall the film Mamma Mia! – in which he played one of three men who could be the father of a child for their former lover, played by Meryl Streep. The film, based on the songs of Abba, became notorious for Brosnan’s attempt at singing.
‘The thing is, I had a lot of lessons to sing like that,’ he laughs. ‘In fact, some people think my singing is superb. But they’re mainly on strong medication and not allowed out much.’
He recalls the experience with affection. ‘You go out there and try these things. I didn’t care as we were having such a good time. When I was offered the job, I’d never even seen the stage play so I went out that night to see it with my daughter. She said, “Daddy, which one are you going to play?” and I said, “You know, I forgot to ask and I honestly don’t know – I could be the gay one.”
‘I lay in bed that night, sweating, just saying to myself, “Meryl Streep’s doing it, Meryl Streep’s doing it.” ’
Brosnan turns 60 later this year. Does he approach the milestone with fear? ‘No, with relish,’ he says, quickly. ‘I realise how precious life is, probably because I’ve seen how it can be taken away. So I embrace it and feel lucky enough to enjoy it.
‘We’ve just finished building a new house in Malibu. It’s been hellish but Keely has seen it all through. I guess it is my home. I went out there [to LA] for two weeks, and I seem to have stayed 30 years.’ It was Cassie who persuaded Brosnan to chance his luck in Hollywood, following the success of a 1981 mini-series called The Manions Of America.
Suave: Pierce Brosnan as James Bond with signature car, the Aston Martin Vanquish
‘We’d just bought a nice house in Wimbledon – which I still own,’ he says. ‘Cassie had done For Your Eyes Only and I’d done this mini-series, so that bought us the house, but we were pretty skint otherwise.
She was very ambitious for me and when the series was a hit on ABC, she practically pushed me out there. I flew to LA, got an agent and the first interview he got me was for a detective show called Remington Steele. And that was it: America.’
After Love Is All You Need, Brosnan will be seen in Love Punch, a romantic comedy set in Paris and starring Emma Thompson, and an adaptation of Nick Hornby’s London-set novel A Long Way Down, with Toni Collette. Then he’s off to Thailand to film The Coup, an action movie with Owen Wilson.
‘I’m very busy,’ he agrees, ‘but I work hard at finding all this work. At the moment, I seem to be travelling, ever the gipsy. Shooting in Paris, I just had the strongest desire to maybe move there. I told Keely and she groaned that we’d just finished this house in Malibu.
International blockbuster: Pierce Brosnan with Colin Firth and Stellan Skarsgard in Mamma Mia! from 2008
Part of me regrets never coming back to Europe. You just never know what life will throw at you, but you must always take it head on, surprise it before it surprises you.’
It’s clear that a new phase in Brosnan’s life and career is beginning, post-Bond. Of the film, he says: ‘Cancer is a sad thing to deal with but you can take something out of it. This film and my life proves that. Memories of Cassie are with me every day and I never deny that. That’s how I deal with it – others may be different.
‘It depends on your outlook. I’ve always been a positive thinker and I take what comes.’
Love Is All You Need is released on April 19.
Losing Bond to Daniel Craig 'hurt like hell' Runaway success: Fans loved 2012's Skyfall with Daniel Craig as James Bond
Brosnan's Bond has now been overshadowed by the success of Daniel Craig – particularly with the recent hit movie Skyfall.
Brosnan’s career as 007 was cut short after four films – GoldenEye, Tomorrow Never Dies, The World Is Not Enough and Die Another Day – when the franchise’s producers decided they needed a change of direction.
‘It hurt like hell, taking that phone call,’ he recalls. ‘I just said, “OK,” put the phone down and that was it. I wasn’t Bond any more. But the experience of Bond was an amazing one, a turning point in my career.
‘It’s the gift that keeps on giving for me – the stature it gives you. It’s amazing and it’s up to you what you do with it, how you use it to your advantage.’
Brosnan’s stint as Bond was commercially very successful. But he says he can’t bear to watch any of the four films.
‘My sons call me in to the room to see them but I have to leave. I laugh at some of the things we did in the later movies – like driving an invisible car or snowboarding down a glacier on a parachute.’
He even giggles an infectious, almost childish cackle, at the recollection of such stunts.
‘It was getting ridiculous. I just can’t look at them. So I’m glad they revamped it. I didn’t see the first two of Daniel’s films either, but Skyfall is different. We saw that as a whole family.’
Brosnan says he knew his time as the secret agent was up when he saw the breathless action of the Bourne films.
‘I looked at those and thought, “Oh God, they’re going to want me to do all that running again.”
‘But gyms are so bloody boring. I couldn’t face it again.
‘I look at photos of Daniel now and I think, “Crikey he’s fit.” He’s got the presence and the voice and he’s a tremendous actor, so he’ll be just dandy.’
Brosnan had been forced to wait for the coveted role of Bond.
His work on Remington Steele had caught the eye of legendary Bond producer Cubby Broccoli – and when it became clear Roger Moore’s time as 007 was up, Brosnan was his first choice.
Popular: Daniel Craig's performance as James Bond on a mission with the Queen was a highlight of the Olympics Opening Ceremony last year
‘But we had a problem with my Remington Steele contract, a big problem,’ Brosnan recalls. ‘I was signed up for seven series and I was just hoping they wouldn’t renew it.’
The show was cancelled by the NBC network in America in 1986 – but the publicity around it, and rumours that Brosnan was now going to be Bond, meant ratings for the TV show’s summer reruns put it back at the top of the charts.
‘NBC had 60 days’ ownership option over me,’ Brosnan recalls. ‘I couldn’t sign on to anything else until that time was up.
‘On that 60th morning, I was out of the door on my way to a press conference to announce, officially, that I was James Bond. I had champagne on ice. But NBC then decided to renew Remington Steele.
‘And if I broke the contract, they could sue me for $20 million.’
Timothy Dalton became Bond instead. It was another nine years before Brosnan took the Bond role.
‘Even then, I wasn’t sure of anything,’ Pierce recalls. ‘I’d even signed on to do a different film and was packing my bags, to go to New Guinea, I think it was, to play Robinson Crusoe.
‘Then, when the phone rang this time, it was the Bond people – it was official. I put the phone down and I admit it, yes, all I could do was look up to the heavens and say, “I’m James Bloody Bond.” ’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2301799/My-new-role-brought-agony-watching-cancer-kill-wife-Former-Bond-star-Pierce-Brosnan-admits-thinks-Cassie-time--22-years-death.html#ixzz2P865f05O
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Great to see him with all this work, the best of luck to Pierce.
Now, as to whether Brosnan was a "fall guy"...
Having met him, I can say he championed the tone now used by Eon in the Craig films. And in fact, if you watch carefully, you will see glimpses of a "cold" and/or "on-the-edge" Bond (killing of Elektra, the first act of DAD, reacting to the murder of Paris Carver, etc.). The problem is that Eon wasn't ready to fully commit at that time to a character more in line with the tone of the Fleming novels. So, what happened was Pierce got a few great individual scenes over four movies which never amounted to much in the greater story context (ie Paris Carver's death, 16 months tortured in North Korea, etc.), and the context of the stories became more-and-more in line with the over-the-top Moore day fantasies. It wasn't that Brosnan wanted to make fantasy Bond films. Eon had him on contract and they were interested in making DAD.
In my opinion, Brosnan was the best Bond since Connery. He was a ruthless charmer and had the chops as an actor to be a great Bond, but Eon threw away their chance by not understanding what made audiences connect with Brosnan in GOLDENEYE. I think Brosnan would have been much better than Daniel Craig in CR, QOS, and SF... but his age would certainly have been an issue with the intensely physical films (reason George Clooney left Warner's THE MAN FROM UNCLE movie). In the end, Eon squandered Brosnan. They kept putting him in ridiculous situations/stories, trying to get him ad nauseum to speak terrible quips, and never wrote basic human drama. And if you read Brosnan's interviews post-GOLDENEYE carefully, although he's a professional and wouldn't knock Eon, you will see that he wasn't happy with the direction of his Bond series.
Lastly, to those thinking a great actor can pull a bad movie out of the abyss... Sorry, but in all of my years in Hollywood, I've only seen the opposite -- bad movies sucking great actors to the bottom. An actor cannot save bad words on the page. And although I would say the last two Brosnan movies were dreadful, I don't think Brosnan's performance is the problem. The problem is the words on the page -- the script/story.
I always enjoy GE and TND a lot and I'm glad we got Brosnan as Bond. Just wish he went out on a final one - a good Bond movie - and it not being CR. I don't find fault with Brosnan in TWINE or DAD; actually I thought his individual performance in DAD was slightly more satisfying for me than in TWINE.
He was an overall very good Bond for me, yes, and I hate the way his tenure ended.
Although that's the general opinion, I don't completely agree. I've worked on a few film series and it hasn't worked out like many think. Let's take Indian Jones... Most agree that the last installment was terrible. In fact, the last film made me unable to watch the previous three (movies that I enjoyed). Yet, if Ford made another Indiana Jones movie that was good, I'd simply forget CRYSTAL SKULL and be excited about Indy movies again. The movie-going public is very forgiving... if the follow-up is good. If CR was made with Brosnan, people would simply have forgotten DAD and moved-on.
Now, with that said, why was Brosnan dumped? My feeling is...
Eon got enamored with the success of Jason Bourne (BOURNE IDENTITY) and Brosnan was too old to easily do the Bourne-like physicality of CR. Craig has more years in him for the series and absolutely no relationship to DAD.