› ›

Leave Bond alone after Craig finishes

123578

Comments

  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    Posts: 6,432
    Bond is reimagined based on the time he exists in, i would argue Bond will always be relevant though the era in which he exists paints a different portrait.
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    I think that the movies can be spaced shorter than every 4 years, which means that an actor playing 007 ages easily 12 years within 4 movies.
    Based upon SF I do not see where they put the huge budget? which is something the Pre-Craig years could hardly be accused of.

    As for continuing after Craig, I would hope they do as the last two movies have been a big disappointment for me. I like to see a new exciting actor doing fun and exciting movies with 007 starring.
  • Matt_HelmMatt_Helm
    Posts: 908
    SaintMark wrote: »
    I think that the movies can be spaced shorter than every 4 years, which means that an actor playing 007 ages easily 12 years within 4 movies.
    Based upon SF I do not see where they put the huge budget? which is something the Pre-Craig years could hardly be accused of.

    As for continuing after Craig, I would hope they do as the last two movies have been a big disappointment for me. I like to see a new exciting actor doing fun and exciting movies with 007 starring.

    fun and exciting Bond movie? Sounds almost too good to come true again, but hope springs eternal.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    Bond will not be coming to an end anytime time soon thank goodness! It is a mega cash cow!
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,304
    Soundofthesinners wrote: »
    The delay after Dalton had a very good effect, namely making Goldeneye even better, but the uncertainty was, by all reports, disastrous and could have been even more so.

    I would very much like them to go to the next Bond after Craig without missing a beat, even if it might be unlikely.

    And that film should be a close adaptation of Moonraker.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Leave Craig alone after Bond finishes, sure. But not the other way around.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Leave Craig alone after Bond finishes, sure. But not the other way around.

    oops!!! =))
  • scouse007scouse007
    Posts: 90
    I would leave it three years and build excitement over two years for a new actor to play Bond and make it a media battle with these three. Therefore, by year three have a new Bond Film and call it

    Everything Too Play For


    1. Tom Hardy

    2. Michael Fassbander

    3. Jack O Connell
  • MooseWithFleasMooseWithFleas Philadelphia
    Posts: 3,369
    Ideally, I would like

    Bond 24 - Craig - 2015
    Bond 25 - Craig - 2017
    Bond 26 - ??? - 2020

    While three years tends to produce solid Bond offerings, I don't think we've seen the last of 2 year turn arounds. We saw this from GE-TND-TWINE and CR-QoS most recently. While the 2 part Bond story seems to have been ditched, I still think it's feasible to do another Bond in 2 years.

    This would give Craig 5 Bonds in 11 years, which is a fair amount. I wouldn't mind a 6th for him though 2019-2021 would put Craig at 51-53 and he has not aged as well as Moore did, who looked great through Moonraker.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    I think Craig will be really pushing it if he does a fifth. A sixth would probably just be a step to far. His AVTAK.
  • MooseWithFleasMooseWithFleas Philadelphia
    Posts: 3,369
    It's hard to tell as aging is different for everyone. Connery aged horrifically from 65-82, but then had a 20 year stretch where he looked fantastic and appeared to stop aging. Moore aged tremendously through his 40's and into early 50's, but it came crashing down shortly after. Dalton throughout his career aged pretty naturally, though imagining him in OHMSS looking like this would have been pretty epic http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/0f/9e/1b/0f9e1ba6d79a4e15c1b03e651f118420.jpg

    Brozzer had the perfect look, but sneakily started looking old in DAD.

    Craig's face looked a bit more aged from the 6 years between CR and SF, but I think the super short haircut compounded it. If he goes back to QoS style hair, I think 4-5 more years will still look realistic, but who knows until it happens.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Craig is doing a 5th and ideally it would be best if we didn't have to wait 3 years for it. Bond 25 can easily get a 2017 release date. Also, recent pics of Craig when he isn't wearing dumb glasses or has a huge bright light in his face have him looking better than he did in SF. In fact, even when promoting SF and his stint on SNL he looked better and younger than he did in SF. That being said, I do feel his ageing gets exaggerated as to me, he doesn't look that much older from how he looked 8 years ago.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited October 2014 Posts: 15,718
    I still think Craig looks somewhat similar than he did in Munich in 2005. For sure he looks a little older, but I think he can easily do a 5th outing in 2017, or even 2018 when he'll be exactly 50. Based on how he'll look then I could see him make a 6th and tie Connery's run.
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    Posts: 4,619
    Craig should to 5 and the next actor 3 movies. Then we will have an actor with 1 movie, one with 2 movies, one with 3 movies, one with 4, one with 6, and one with 7. :)

    Lazenby - 1
    Dalton - 2
    Bond actor nr. 7 - 3
    Brosnan - 4
    Craig - 5
    Connery - 6 (NSNA does not count!)
    Moore - 7
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    Craig should to 5 and the next actor 3 movies. Then we will have an actor with 1 movie, one with 2 movies, one with 3 movies, one with 4, one with 6, and one with 7. :)

    Lazenby - 1
    Dalton - 2
    Bond actor nr. 7 - 3
    Brosnan - 4
    Craig - 5
    Connery - 6 (NSNA does not count!)
    Moore - 7

    Funny, I was thinking that too!
  • Some_Kind_Of_HeroSome_Kind_Of_Hero
    Posts: 6,844
    MooseWithFleas wrote: »
    Dalton throughout his career aged pretty naturally, though imagining him in OHMSS looking like this would have been pretty epic http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/0f/9e/1b/0f9e1ba6d79a4e15c1b03e651f118420.jpg

    You mean looking like one of the lost Beatles? ;) I do agree though, Dalton would have made a fantastic young Bond in OHMSS. Next to Lazenby, he's the only other Bond (who would have been an appropriate age in '69) who could have pulled off that "We have all the time in the world" speech.
  • MooseWithFleasMooseWithFleas Philadelphia
    Posts: 3,369
    @some_kind_of_hero Agreed! Dalton in OHMSS would have made for an incredibly interesting film.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,801
    You preach to the choir here! :)>-
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    I think Dalts grew into his face. Looks like a teenager in that photo. Laz looked the part and worked well with Rigg even if they hated each other. Dalts would have looked too young IMO. Although it would have been interesting to see.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,801
    Getafix wrote: »
    I think Dalts grew into his face. Looks like a teenager in that photo.
    Agreed, but then Laz looked like a young hippie right after filming OHMSS.
    It's all in the styling IMO. Dalts *could* have been made to look a bit more mature as well.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    MooseWithFleas wrote: »
    It's hard to tell as aging is different for everyone. Connery aged horrifically from 65-82, but then had a 20 year stretch where he looked fantastic and appeared to stop aging. /quote]

    Until he was 102? Wow, must have taken some vitamins.
  • MooseWithFleasMooseWithFleas Philadelphia
    Posts: 3,369
    Hahaha 1965-1982 and then 1982-2002.
  • 007RogerMoore007RogerMoore
    Posts: 1,082
    No, please, no! Dan is good and popular but no one is irreplaceable. Even though Bond 7 might not be up to Craig's level, I see no reason to suffer another long break. I will enjoy Bond 7 as long as he is good, regardless of how good he is compared to for instance Moore.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    It will be interesting to see where EON take bond after Craig. More of the same or a different tack?
  • cooperman2cooperman2 Uk
    Posts: 380
    I'm afraid some of the negative comments on here regarding Martin Campbell have made my blood boil. He may not have the acclaim and the Oscar's of someone like Mendez or Apted but he has directed the two best Bond movies of the last twenty years and in the process saved the franchise twice. Make no mistake if GoldenEye hadn't have worked the whole series would have been in serious trouble. And I think the same applies to CR. How many people were saying Craig was wrong choice and he would be awful. Campbell proved them wrong. I for one would welcome him back anytime.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    I personally never liked GE, but that's mainly down to Brosnan, the script, and Eric Serra. But CR is well done, if perhaps a bit flabby/overlong in parts.

    Cambell is okay, but I'm in no hurry to see him return. His films perhaps look better than John Glen's, but I don't think he brings the same tension and drama to the screen as Glen managed.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    edited December 2014 Posts: 4,585
    Yes, it is way too early to discuss this, especially since Spectre is filming and all, but...I just came across an actor who may be a dark horse a few years from now. Jai Courtney. Yes, he's an Aussie, but I just saw him in Jack Reacher (plays the baddie) and in Divergent. He resembles Tom Hardy...but much younger. There are comments floating around about him in other threads...not sure I get the hate. But keep an eye on him.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=gsgBg9ms6ZM

  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    I find Jai Courtney to be bland and wooden. He was awful in Die Hard 5.
  • PanchitoPistolesPanchitoPistoles 2.0
    edited December 2014 Posts: 4,619
    Jai Courney? There are more than 7 billion people on Earth and I believe he would be the absolutely worst choice to play Bond. Even Hulk Hogan would be a better choice. Even Pamela Anderson would be a better choice! Hell, even QUEEN ELIZABETH II would be a better choice than Jai Cortney to play Bond.

    My number one choice: Nicholas Hoult. Yes, he is still too young but 5-10 years from now he will be perfect. He can act, isn't hideous and would be a fresh choice.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    PanchitoPistoles wrote: »
    Jai Courney? There are more than 7 billion people on Earth and I believe he would be the absolutely worst choice to play Bond. Even Hulk Hogan would be a better choice. Even Pamela Anderson would be a better choice! Hell, even QUEEN ELIZABETH II would be a better choice than Jai Cortney to play Bond.

    My number one choice: Nicholas Hoult. Yes, he is still too young but 5-10 years from now he will be perfect. He can act, isn't hideous and would be a fresh choice.

    With all due respect I think both Courtney and Hoult would be horrible choices. Both are IMO as bland as can be and would bring no screen presence to the role.

    When casting the next Bond I think they'll go for a relatively unknown actor the feels out of left field, kind of like Craig. It's a good bet that all of our choices will be wrong.
Sign In or Register to comment.