Pierce Brosnan out as Bond? (UPDATE: Daniel Craig confirmed)

Hope so. But I don't trust facts coming from thisislondon website either. We need to wait for some legitimate source.

I believe this morning's Parade Entertainment Report on the radio also confirmed Pierce was back for CR. Our morning guy mentioned it anyway. If I'm wrong about Parade, he could have gotten it from a Prep service that was citing the same website. So far, nothing on EW.com.

Latest news is that Goran Visnjic has auditioned for the role, I can't see it working, particualrly since he's not British or at least from that island.

Pierce Brosnan has made recent statements he's not coming back, too bad. With all the names being tossed about, it seems all a smoke screen for something.

I've never heard Visnjic even attempt to lose the Croatian accent. I wonder if he can?

Anyone familiar with Bond history knows that the Broccoli's audition a bunch of actors and that you can't count out the current actor until the last minute. Roger Moore was reluctant to appear in "For Your Eyes Only" but he went on to appear in "Octopussy" and "A View To A Kill", plus he was in the running for "The Living Daylights" for a long time, too. In any case, the Broccoli's had better be pretty careful casting their new Bond. The trend thus far is undeniable. Iconic Bond, obscure bond, iconic Bond, obscure Bond, iconic Bond. I really think Clive Owen is the only actor capable of breaking that trend. All the other rumored actors will likely suffer the same fate as Lazenby and Dalton.

Exactly, that's why I thought this is a bit of a smoke screen.

Anybody heard anything new on this? The Broccolis/Sony/MGM/whomever really seem to have dropped the ball on this. Nobody seems to want the part (except the guy they fired - idiots). OK, I guess there are a bunch of no-namers who do, but none of them interest me a whole hell of a lot.

I know they have the new one slated to come out 11/06, but I have a feeling that it's not going to be until 11/07 with all of this indecisiveness...

Hopefully they will get back to a movie every other year like before, that was my main problem with Brosnan, wanting three years in between movies...

Well the first 3 Brosnan Bonds were only 2 years apart, 1995,1997 and 1999. But there was a 3 year wait for Die Another Day and now it's coming up to 4 years until the new one opens. The biggest gap between Bonds was the 6 years between Licence to Kill (1989) and GoldenEye (1995).

Brosnan is Bond no more, at least he ended his run on a high. Die Another Day was the highest grossing film in the series to date, but adjusting for inflation Thunderball (1965) is probably still secure at number one.

Who will be the new Bond? No clues yet. Will the Bond producers strike gold again and pick the right actor for a new generation of fans or will they fumble the ball and do a Lazenby? I think we're overdue for a Lazenby.

I just pray it isn't Jude "in every film ever made" Law, he hasn't the build or the voice, or the presence. And please dear God not Colin "feckin" Farrell!

Clive Owen might be the best man for the job, but he's stated a few times he doesn't want to play 007.

I will say though, after having seen King Arthur and Closer, I have a better feeling for Clive Owen if he steps into the suit and martini of 007. I still think Colin Farrell would be an awesome choice. I would like Gorjin Visnjic quite a bit, never thought about him in this role .... but I'm not sure he's right for Bond. Visnjic is too Slavic I guess is the word, too non-British.

Whoever gets the role, I still hate to see Brosman go. He was an excellent bond...had the look, the voice, the swagger. Just as good as Connery IMO.

Yes, but he wanted that clause going forward. Maybe it's part of why they canned him. It was hell waiting for DAD (yes, I have no life ).

I have a feeling it might be Visnic, since Martin Campbell seems high on him and he supposedly has a lot of input as far as who will be cast.

I like the thought of Julian "Dr. Troy" McMahon as Bond...

Clive Owen would make a fine choice.

I'm sad to see Brosnan out, if only because I never thought that he got the chance to deliver on the promise that he showed to be a great Bond in Goldeneye. That was a pretty good Bond film, but the quality of the writing let him down after that. Tomorrow Never Dies was decent but not on the same plane as Goldeneye and, for me, the less said about the other two, the better.

There are plenty of lesser-known British actors out there who could do a good job playing James Bond. Tom Ward, for example.



What concerns me more is the continual reliance on unsuitable screenwriters and directors.

You can have the best actor in the world playing James Bond, and it won't matter a jot if the behind-the-camera team isn't up to scratch.

I remember, as a child during the 80's, thinking that Pierce Brosnan of Remmington Steele would make a great Bond...

I'll be sad to see him go.

"One phone call, that's all it took!" Brosnan told Entertainment Weekly. The actor said the knowledge that he would no longer be a Bond man came as a "titanic jolt to the system," followed by "a great sense of calm."

Brosnan Loses License to Kill

As evidenced by Die Another Day rather completely. None of my problems with the direction Bond has taken lately have ANYTHING to do with Brosnan.

Take care,
Chuck

I agree. I too will miss him in the role. I think it is a BIG mistake for the franchise.

I still say it's up in the air - negotiation tactics and the like.

And Brosnan's been saying this kind of thing for a while. "One phone call is all it took" - yeah, one phone call saying you're demanding too much money. Don't get me wrong, he deserves a significant pay raise since Die Another Day made $431 million worldwide

I think Eon is not sure what to do. Do they go with Brosnan's salary demands and stick with an actor that audiences have accepted as Bond for what will soon be a decade (something only two other actors have achieved and while I don't think anybody would say Brosnan was good enough to make you forget Connery, I'm sure there's many who feel he made a better Bond than Moore). Or, do they go with a new actor for a cheaper price and have to deal with all the risks of introducing a new actor and having to hope he'll click with audiences the way Brosnan did. Of course there's a positive side to that in having a new actor, it will give the film a bunch of free publicity and a sense of novelty (I remember people predicting Tommorrow Never Dies wouldn't make as much as Goldeneye because Goldeneye had so much hype and anticipation because they were introducing a new actor and it had been a while since a Bond film came out).

I don't think you can look at replacing Brosnan as a mistake, if only because it's inevitable. It Has to happen, it's like saying dieing is a bad choice. As far as them doing it with this particular film, I think it makes sense at this point. This film will be a departure from the previous films, getting back to the roots of the series. That coupled with the longer than average wait for the film makes this an Ideal time to introduce a new Bond.

I loved Brosnan in the role, but was hoping they'd take him out for the next one. He is getting up there, and to me he looked a little ready for pasture in DIE ANOTHER DAY. I wouldn't want him looking too much like pops Moore from A VIEW TO A KILL.

He is only 52...not old at all. Even when i was a kid and young adult i felt Bond should be a 40 to 50 year old guy. Sorry youngsters but a 20 something cant pull it off. Moore did stay for a few years to many however.

A co-worker told me Bond is supposed to be in his 30's. Keep in mind Moore began at the age Connery was when he initially left the franchise (42). Connery just LOOKED old.

Lazenby WAS in his 20's, and I still think he did a good job. I'm sure he'd have relaxed into the role quite nicely, so if they "pull another Lazenby", I for one , will be quite happy, much happier than I was with Brosnan.

The EW article revealed a lot about Brosnan's shortcomings in the role and made me wonder why he ever bothered to play Bond at all.

He mentions that he didn't like doing the one-liners, which have already been an essential part of Bond, and he never felt comfortable doing them. Which might explain whi it SHOWS so much. I was constantly amazed how he could get the wrong inflection 99% of the time. With his comments, it just makes it seem like he didn't want to be there every day he had to do them. Compare him to Roger Moore who made could deliver the cheesiest one-liner as naturally as he drew breath. Wait, maybe Brosnan did the same since he seems horribly quiet and asthmatic in the Bond films. He obviously wanted the character to be something new and different, not James Bond. I'll be glad to see him go.

If Visjnic can pull off a British accent he probably COULD play Bond. He's certainly more than big enough. He could have the same kind of sinister look as Dalton, who I also thought was a good Bond. Wasn't his fault License To Kill wasn't so hot.

I'll tell you; I watched Dr. No recently for the first time in a long while, and it amazes me another Bond film was ever made. The only redeeming quality I saw was Ursula Andress, and okay, the snappy Bond theme even if it is horribly over-used at times. Connery was really terrible then. He either spoke so fast you could barely keep up with him like he had to finish his scene before the Ex-Lax kicked in or spoke in such a whisper you couldn't hear him. And he sure seemed awfully intense for a guy who dealt with that kind of life on a daily basis. He'd have been dead of ulcers real fast. Watching that at the same time I was watching Roger Moore on "The Saint" I can see why they wanted Moore for Dr. No. He HAD to have been closer to the character in the books. Too bad he was contracted to the Saint or so many people wouldn't have developed the "First Bond, Best Bond" syndrome for Connery. Brosnan and Connery do have a lot in common, like knacks for speaking softly and sweating perfusely.

I really like Clive Owen, but he may be a little TOO rugged looking for Bond. Sometimes he looks good, but other times is far from handsome.

Anyone remember the rumors of Orlando Bloom being Bond about a year ago? Whatever happened to that? (although I don't think Bloom would be a good bond, he has too much of the "wuss" factor for that). I think Clive Owen would be a great candidate for Bond. Anyone remember the BMW films? He had some great one-liners. Plus he has the personality type, the loner "I do my own thing" kinda type (although he might be missing the "ladies man" aura, haven't seen him filling that type of role)

I agree that Bond should be in his 40s. But 52 isn't that, is it?

50 is the new 40 Joe. LOL
I am only 41 myself, but damn i would hate to see a much younger Bond. Orlando Bloom is way to young. They already did a Young Bond cartoon didn't they? Whats next Bond Jr, The Movie, or Bond in Training-The Early Years. I was thinking of another movie franchise hat went with a younger guy. Jack Ryan with Alec Baldwin or Harrison Ford was great, but when they went young and hip with Benifer it lost me.

If the next movies aren't more like the classic Bonds then it doesn't matter who plays the roll. The scripts and direction have been sucking of late.

They don't even do real, dangerous stunts any more (just a lot of CGI) and the bad guys are terrible and uninteresting!!!

Give us back SPECTRE!!!! Give us the real James Bond!!!

Dan

I remeber they could not do Spectre becasuse Mclory owned the name.

I actually thought the villain in DAD was the best villain they've had in a long time. He was a real shit and entertaining to watch.

The acquisition of his identity was a little silly, but I thought the charcter itself was good.

He was in some ways cooler than Bond though.

I'm starting to think Bond 21 will never happen. Or it's going to be a long wait like from License to Kill to Goldeneye. So many people have been "the next Bond" it's getting ridiculous. Soon it will be "Who will be Bond? Who will be Bond? Who cares?"

Cast someone in their 30's, just so it's someone who looks like a man. No middle-school girl poster-boys. (I do think Julian McMahon could do it, but rumor is he already turned it down once.) If you want the guy to play Bond for a while he'll be in his 40's soon enough. If people can live with "Superboy" in Singer's Superman and a Lois who looks like she should be picking out her prom dress, a 30-something Bond shouldn't be a big deal. As long as he's not a boy-man type. And someone physical. The older films had the luxury of being older when fighting in films was a lot stiffer. All you needed was someone big enough to throw a good haymaker. If they could just barely kick someone in the head that was great. But now you need someone who could convincingly fight a trained martial artist. I watched Die Another Day recently and I kept picturing Christian Bale delivering Brosnan's lines, realizing how fantastic he'd be. Some have said he could do it when he's too old for Batman. He'd actually be good now, but if he was in both franchises those are the only movies he'd get to make. He has a unique ability to be serious and humorous at the same time which would be great for Bond. Brosnan either tried to shake-off the one-liners or make them dramatic (yelling them instead of saying them casually). I think I know what he was trying to do, but it's a fine line not everyone can walk. Bale could do what Brosnan set out to do, but he'd still need a decent script.

What's funny about "Grandpa Moore" is I think Roger Moore looked better in A View to a Kill than he did in the 3 previous Bond films. He either had a face-lift or his face was just less droopy because he was trimmer. Maybe a combination of the two.

http://movies.yahoo.com/mv/news/va/2...548203700.html


Albert Broccoli must be turning over in his grave. His children are fucking idiots and have no clue what they are doing.

They need to get down on their hands and knees, offer Pierce what he wants and beg him to come back.

Otherwise, this has disaster written all over it.