Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Report post Posted February 11, 2004 In what will likely come as a huge shock to Bond fans, Pierce Brosnan's option for a fifth performance as 007 has not been picked up by Eon Productions, a source at the company confirms. The Daily Mail report was written off by many fans, who thought it was practically guaranteed that Brosnan would be back for his fifth outing. Pierce Brosnan's contract allowed Eon Productions to bring him back for a fifth Bond if they wanted to - but they decided against it. The contract would have netted Brosnan a huge payday. Intrigue had been swirling around Brosnan's contract since the fall, with one report claiming he had chosen not to renew. The Daily Mail report claimed that Brosnan (bio) was being replaced because the 50-year-old was not drawing a young enough audience. MKKBB has not confirmed that this is the reason Brosnan will not be back. The report also hinted at a bigger change taking place with the future of Bond. The paper quoted a source as saying, "We will go back to the first days of Bond - maybe even his first mission. We want to attract more young fans and we think that having a younger Bond will help." ianfleming.org I'll be responding later, when I can collect my thoughts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ghettoman Report post Posted February 12, 2004 Why can I smell Ashton Kutcher in this thread..... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Ghost of bps21 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 Man...he was the perfect Bond IMO. That's a shame. Ashton Kutcher it is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Report post Posted February 12, 2004 Why can I smell Ashton Kutcher in this thread..... You should be shot for that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
El Psycho Diablo 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 Why can I smell Ashton Kutcher in this thread..... Kill me now. Hollywood is stupid enough to do it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Report post Posted February 12, 2004 Why can I smell Ashton Kutcher in this thread..... Kill me now. Hollywood is stupid enough to do it. Batman and Superman both dodged that bullet, AND Ashton can't do a British accent. (And he knows this) Not saying there won't be stupid casting... but no Kelso. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kahran Ramsus 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 Terrible idea. Bond is not some young kid. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Si82 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 Why do film companys want to constantly fuck with franchises? I really don't get. What the hell is wrong with Brosnan as Bond? Did "Die Another Day" not make enough cash or something? I thought it was the highest grossing Bond movie ever. I really don't get. As for Ashton Kutcher, please God no. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Ghost of bps21 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 I hope EA says Fuck you to the Bond people and keeps using Brosnan's likeness and voice in future games. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justsoyouknow 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 Bring back Sean Connery. I'd see him as Bond, no matter how old he is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Youth N Asia 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 While I'm not a huge fan of the Bond movies...he was the most perfect guy for the movies in the late 90s to now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Report post Posted February 12, 2004 Bring back Sean Connery. I'd see him as Bond, no matter how old he is. Why? It's not like there hasn't been great Bond films post-Connery. The series needs to continue by INNOVATING, not by ripping off what worked before. Granted, the basic formula has stayed the same from the beginning, but the innovations and changes have kept the franchise fresh all these years. It's why we're getting a Bond 21, when Harry Palmer movies stopped at four, and Matt Helm stopped at three. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Krazy Karter Report post Posted February 12, 2004 Coming soon: MTV Presents: Bond Ain't No Playa Hater! Starring 50 Cent as James "2 Slick" Bond! Featuring Britney Spears as his hoe! James Bond bitch ain't nothing ta fuck wit!...Summer 2005 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Choken One Report post Posted February 12, 2004 I don't understand the big deal here...As long it's James FN Bond...idiots still come in droves to watch it...be it Pierce Bronson or James Earl Jones or Carrot Top... All Bonds have been replaced and recycled over the years, How is this any different? It needed a Bond anyways, I like change... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kahran Ramsus 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 I don't understand the big deal here...As long it's James FN Bond...idiots still come in droves to watch it...be it Pierce Bronson or James Earl Jones or Carrot Top... All Bonds have been replaced and recycled over the years, How is this any different? It needed a Bond anyways, I like change... Because they aren't just changing the actor, they are changing the character this time. Bond has been the same for 40 years. Even the Dalton version was pretty much the same guy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lil' Bitch 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 I have no interest in seeing the 21th Bond film at all now... I guess it was a good way to "stop" it at 20. The end is here!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest OctoberBlood Report post Posted February 12, 2004 Coming soon: MTV Presents: Bond Ain't No Playa Hater! Starring 50 Cent as James "2 Slick" Bond! Featuring Britney Spears as his hoe! James Bond bitch ain't nothing ta fuck wit!...Summer 2005 Sad... but probally true. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Report post Posted February 12, 2004 I don't understand the big deal here...As long it's James FN Bond...idiots still come in droves to watch it...be it Pierce Bronson or James Earl Jones or Carrot Top... All Bonds have been replaced and recycled over the years, How is this any different? It needed a Bond anyways, I like change... Because they aren't just changing the actor, they are changing the character this time. Bond has been the same for 40 years. Even the Dalton version was pretty much the same guy. Kahran is basically correct. Each actor emphasized different points in the personality, but you could always tell it was the same guy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hektik 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 I like the idea of a new actor to play Bond. It is a way to keep the franchise fresh. I have also never had a problem with them doing something different with a Bond film. It is the reason I like license To Kill. Some people hate it because it is not the standard Bond movie but that is the same reason liked it. I would guess the top contenders for the new Bond are still Ewan McGregor and Clive Owen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Report post Posted February 12, 2004 I like the idea of a new actor to play Bond. It is a way to keep the franchise fresh. I have also never had a problem with them doing something different with a Bond film. It is the reason I like license To Kill. Some people hate it because it is not the standard Bond movie but that is the same reason liked it. I would guess the top contenders for the new Bond are still Ewan McGregor and Clive Owen. Hugh Jackman is defintely a contender. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Choken One Report post Posted February 12, 2004 Where does it say it's changing the character? It's still James Bond...Just a few years younger... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
2GOLD 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 I like the idea of a new actor to play Bond. It is a way to keep the franchise fresh. I have also never had a problem with them doing something different with a Bond film. It is the reason I like license To Kill. Some people hate it because it is not the standard Bond movie but that is the same reason liked it. I would guess the top contenders for the new Bond are still Ewan McGregor and Clive Owen. Hugh Jackman is defintely a contender. Is Hugh REALLY that younger than Bronson? What about that kid from the Mandy Moore movie? People were saying he's the next big thing. What was his name...Stark Sands! And if that happens, hang whoever did the casting by their balls. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Report post Posted February 12, 2004 I like the idea of a new actor to play Bond. It is a way to keep the franchise fresh. I have also never had a problem with them doing something different with a Bond film. It is the reason I like license To Kill. Some people hate it because it is not the standard Bond movie but that is the same reason liked it. I would guess the top contenders for the new Bond are still Ewan McGregor and Clive Owen. Hugh Jackman is defintely a contender. Is Hugh REALLY that younger than Bronson? What about that kid from the Mandy Moore movie? People were saying he's the next big thing. What was his name...Stark Sands! And if that happens, hang whoever did the casting by their balls. Brosnan is 51. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tony149 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 The report also hinted at a bigger change taking place with the future of Bond. The paper quoted a source as saying, "We will go back to the first days of Bond - maybe even his first mission. We want to attract more young fans and we think that having a younger Bond will help." It wouldn't be the first time they thought about going down that route, producer and co-writer of all 5 1980s Bond films Michael G. Wilson said one of the ideas for the first post-Roger Moore Bond film was to show Bond in his first days, etc. But that was axed by Cubby. I'm kinda shock Pierce is out. I, like many, thought he would be back for one more film. Depending what you read Hugh Jackman is the man MGM wants. The key to a successful Bond is likeablitiy, Connery had it, Moore had it, Brosnan had it, and I think Hugh has 'it.' It's a shame Pierce didn't have stronger scripts to work with. He could have been the best, but there's nothing wrong with being behind Connery. If Pierce is gone, say goodbye to Samantha Bond (Miss Moneypenny) and Judi Dame, who both said -- well, I know Samantha Bond said it, not sure about Dame Judi -- she'll leave when Pierce does. This could be the best thing to happen to the franchise in a while if they don't screw it up. EON will have to bust their balls to make sure the new Bond debuts with a strong script like Brosnan did with GoldenEye which means new writers! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dubq 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 I could see Jude Law getting the role.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sfaJack 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 I love almost all of the Bond movies and thought Brosnan did well as Bond. But to me, this seems like the perfect time to end the Bond franchise, for good. They did 21 (yes, I count Never Say Never Again) movies in 40 years and, to me, have exhausted just about every possibility for stories. Plus, given the way the movies have veered very much towards simple slam-bang action movies as opposed to the story-driven, espionage early Bond films, they just aren't that much fun anymore. Die Another Day was awful. Now with Brosnan not coming back, it just seems time to let it go. At the very least, they need to get Connery to play the villian in the next one. That'd rock the house. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Ghost of bps21 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 Well...I don't think Hugh has "It" at all. Not the Bond "It" or really any kind of "It". I look at the previews for Van Helsing...and I just think "There's Hugh Jackman with long hair." or "This part would be better played by Guy Pearce". Of course...he couldn't play Bond...but then again...neither IMO can Jackman. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tony149 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 I love almost all of the Bond movies and thought Brosnan did well as Bond. But to me, this seems like the perfect time to end the Bond franchise, for good. They did 21 (yes, I count Never Say Never Again) movies in 40 years and, to me, have exhausted just about every possibility for stories. Plus, given the way the movies have veered very much towards simple slam-bang action movies as opposed to the story-driven, espionage early Bond films, they just aren't that much fun anymore. Die Another Day was awful. Now with Brosnan not coming back, it just seems time to let it go. At the very least, they need to get Connery to play the villian in the next one. That'd rock the house. Doesn't Connery still have a grudge with EON? I wouldn't mind him as a villian though. But can you hate Sean Connery? I do agree with you on how Bond films have become very packed with action, which seems to get blamed on Americans or better yet the so-called 'Americanaztion' of Bond. Sure we love action movies but we like Bond, too. If the film's good people will come to see it. That's why I'd support a non-British or Commonwealth Bond actor and director. If the guy's good for the role and can pull off the accent, go for it I say. But I don't they should end the franchise. They need new blood in the creative department. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tony149 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 Well...I don't think Hugh has "It" at all. Not the Bond "It" or really any kind of "It". I look at the previews for Van Helsing...and I just think "There's Hugh Jackman with long hair." or "This part would be better played by Guy Pearce". Of course...he couldn't play Bond...but then again...neither IMO can Jackman. Obviously we disagree on Jackman, but the general public would decide his fate as Bond. I thought Timothy Dalton's Bond was great but the public shitted on him. Dalton's shyness screwed him in the end. Really, there's no one guy who screams sure-fire success. Judging from various message boards, people aren't thrilled part of the reason for Brosnan's departure is because MGM feels he's too old. Yeah he's 51 -- he still looks great for his age, nothing like Roger Moore. Since EON is basically blowing things up, now would be the time to look worldwide for the next Bond instead of sticking with the tired "Bond must be played by an actor from the UK or Commonwealth." They did it long ago (1971 with American Jim Gavin for Diamonds Are Forever) before they gave Connery a huge pay day. And this time Connery isn't coming back. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kahran Ramsus 0 Report post Posted February 12, 2004 (edited) You could have said the same thing in 1970s, before For Your Eyes Only, Licence to Kill & Goldeneye brought actual stories back into the series. Besides the early Connery ones, it is hard to tell when we are going to get a good Bond or not. Between two of the best Bonds, TSWLM & FYEO, we got Moonraker. The series could turn around with the next flick. Getting Clive Owen would be a step in the right direction. Edited February 12, 2004 by Kahran Ramsus Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
