› ›

Will we ever see a Bond go for moore?

2»

Comments

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited December 2011 Posts: 23,537
    Yes, I'm familiar with that theory. :) The odd Bonds stay on for at least 4 films, the even ones bail out after at most 2 films. Luckily this logic no longer applies to the series.

    I could easily step into the old debate of should Lazenby have done a few more, possibly till the end of the 70 (thereby effectively removing Moore from the Bond equation) with Dalton stepping in soon thereafter to complete the 80s and possibly a few years into the 90s? I'd say both ways have their advantages. I'm nevertheless glad that Lazenby started and ended his Bond tenure on a high note and I'm oh-so pleased that Moore did what he did for the franchise. As for Dalton, there's my weak spot. If I could have I would have worn a t-shirt around 1990 that said "Dalton for number 3!". A weak spot indeed. ;-)
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited December 2011 Posts: 15,690
    I could see 2 consecutive actors after Moore with a long tenure - Dalton from 1987-2000 (7 films) and Brosnan from 2002-2012 (6 films, could be longer as he still looks very good these days).

    @Dimi
    For more films with Lazenby, I could see a trilogy release 1969,1970,1971, with Connery's DAF (same film as now) in 1972 and then Moore's run 1973-1985.
  • BritishChap007BritishChap007
    edited December 2011 Posts: 555
    MajorDSmythe wrote:
    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

    That was incredible. Loved every second of it. Funny that Craig looked near tears in almost every one of his shots. :)
    DaltonCraig007 wrote:
    I could see 2 consecutive actors after Moore with a long tenure - Dalton from 1987-2000 (7 films) and Brosnan from 2002-2012 (6 films, could be longer as he still looks very good these days).

    @Dimi
    For more films with Lazenby, I could see a trilogy release 1969,1970,1971, with Connery's DAF (same film as now) in 1972 and then Moore's run 1973-1985.

    Well, I believe at ship has sailed. The question is: will it happen again?

    Moreover, do we WANT it to happen again? Or should the records of Conner and Moore remain untouched?
  • 00Beast00Beast
    Posts: 4,762
    Nice video @forgotmyusername! I really liked that.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    DarthDimi wrote:
    Yes, I'm familiar with that theory. :) The odd Bonds stay on for at least 4 films, the even ones bail out after at most 2 films. Luckily this logic no longer applies to the series.

    I could easily step into the old debate of should Lazenby have done a few more, possibly till the end of the 70 (thereby effectively removing Moore from the Bond equation) with Dalton stepping in soon thereafter to complete the 80s and possibly a few years into the 90s? I'd say both ways have their advantages. I'm nevertheless glad that Lazenby started and ended his Bond tenure on a high note and I'm oh-so pleased that Moore did what he did for the franchise. As for Dalton, there's my weak spot. If I could have I would have worn a t-shirt around 1990 that said "Dalton for number 3!". A weak spot indeed. ;-)

    my dream bond timeline

    connery- 5 films, 1962 to 1967

    lasenby- 3 films, 1969 to 1972

    moore- 4 films, 1973 to 1979

    dalton- 10 films, 1981 to 1999

    brosnan- 5 films, 2001 to 2007

    craig- 5 films, 2009 to 2017
  • Master_DaharkMaster_Dahark
    edited December 2011 Posts: 4,813
    You can't deny that Bond movies have a tradition of having an actor 'this close' to the role, and then finally getting it way later.
    (Rumor has it) Roger was approached instead of Connery, Dalton was approached as early as 1969 and Pierce would have been Bond in TLD if not for Remington Steele being jerks about his contract. This pattern kind of makes me want to put my money on Cavill being the next Bond-- which I'm totally OK with. He was in the top running when they ultimately went with Craig because Cavill was too young

    Related to the topic at hand, if they get him early enough, yes, I could see him playing Bond quite a few times! Maybe as many times as good ol' Rog!
  • BritishChap007BritishChap007
    Posts: 555
    Master_Dahark wrote:
    You can't deny that Bond movies have a tradition of having an actor 'this close' to the role, and then finally getting it way later.
    (Rumor has it) Roger was approached instead of Connery, Dalton was approached as early as 1969 and Pierce would have been Bond in TLD if not for Remington Steele being jerks about his contract. This pattern kind of makes me want to put my money on Cavill being the next Bond-- which I'm totally OK with. He was in the top running when they ultimately went with Craig because Cavill was too young

    Related to the topic at hand, if they get him early enough, yes, I could see him playing Bond quite a few times! Maybe as many times as good ol' Rog!

    Now that he's Superman, I don't really see Cavill becoming the next Bond.

  • Master_DaharkMaster_Dahark
    edited December 2011 Posts: 4,813
    It would totally be something new-- an actor playing a superhero and then coming back to play Bond, but Cavill has said in interviews that he's still totally interested in playing Bond. I wouldn't be against it-- he is an actor-- and a damn good one too.

    lol you could argue that he should be playing Bond instead of Superman- being a Brit and all. But seriously, I'd have no problem seeing him do both. Bond would be a few years from now anyway if it happens at all; Cavill might look even more like a 'Bond' than he does now!
  • KennonKennon
    Posts: 297
    Well, Cavill's just an example of an actor seriously considered and still in his twenties. OK, I see why he may have seemed still a little too young at the time of CR. But Lazenby for example had an air of matureness at 28/29 that would make such a scenario feasible. If there is such a talent around at the time Eon are looking for a Bond. As noted above experience shows actors are often signed later on, years after they first were considered.
  • JWESTBROOKJWESTBROOK
    edited December 2011 Posts: 5,745
    Tom hardy would also be quite the runner up to Craig imo. His humor in Inception was very enjoyable.
  • Master_DaharkMaster_Dahark
    Posts: 4,813
    BUT HE CAN'T PLAY BOND, HE'S BANE

    lol JK, he'd be cool to see too :D
  • craigrulescraigrules
    Posts: 284
    better an ounce of gold than a ton of shit
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    I don't know. I was indifferent on Inception (still haven't seen it all), but I hated him in Star Trek Nemesis. Besides, he'd look weird with hair.
  • forgotmyusernameforgotmyusername
    Posts: 2,782
    he's a bit too bi-curious for me to be Bond.
  • BritishChap007BritishChap007
    Posts: 555
    Master_Dahark wrote:
    BUT HE CAN'T PLAY BOND, HE'S BANE

    lol JK, he'd be cool to see too :D

    Ha!

    But it would be bizarre to have an actor embody such an iconic and world-know role like Superman and then play 007. It's possible, but I think his chances are slimer now.
  • forgotmyusernameforgotmyusername
    edited December 2011 Posts: 2,782
    I don't know PB had a world-wide known tv character and so did RM, TD was a well know actor only GL, SC were relative unknowns.

    HC would have been good but I think Sups film will fail no matter what they throw at it - do we have an appetite for yet another Superman movie? No.

  • BritishChap007BritishChap007
    Posts: 555
    forgotmyusername wrote:
    I don't know PB had a world-wide known tv character and so did RM, TD was a well know actor only GL, SC were relative unknowns.

    HC would have been good but I think Sups film will fail no matter what they throw at it - do we have an appetite for yet another Superman movie? No.

    Remington Steele and The Saint are no Superman.

    Superman is arguably one of the only characters ever that is better known than Bond. It is also one of the only other roles that is known to trap an actor in the role, forever to be known as Superman.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    It's almost true that Superman, James Bond and Darth Vader are the world's three most well-known icons.
  • forgotmyusernameforgotmyusername
    Posts: 2,782
    Agent007391 wrote:
    It's almost true that Superman, James Bond and Darth Vader are the world's three most well-known icons.

    You may have an idea for a discussion there.

    Spiderman, Batman maybe?

  • KennonKennon
    Posts: 297
    forgotmyusername wrote:
    Agent007391 wrote:
    It's almost true that Superman, James Bond and Darth Vader are the world's three most well-known icons.

    You may have an idea for a discussion there.

    Spiderman, Batman maybe?

    All in the same league IMO. Interesting though that only one is not a comic character.
  • BritishChap007BritishChap007
    Posts: 555
    Kennon wrote:
    forgotmyusername wrote:
    Agent007391 wrote:
    It's almost true that Superman, James Bond and Darth Vader are the world's three most well-known icons.

    You may have an idea for a discussion there.

    Spiderman, Batman maybe?

    All in the same league IMO. Interesting though that only one is not a comic character.

    Vader?
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    BritishChap007 wrote:
    Kennon wrote:
    forgotmyusername wrote:
    Agent007391 wrote:
    It's almost true that Superman, James Bond and Darth Vader are the world's three most well-known icons.

    You may have an idea for a discussion there.

    Spiderman, Batman maybe?

    All in the same league IMO. Interesting though that only one is not a comic character.

    Vader?

    indiana jones and (as much as I hate to say it) harry potter are also pretty iconic characters. Add homer simpson up there too.
  • KennonKennon
    Posts: 297
    Forgot about Vader, yes. But is he as iconic as Superman, Batman, Bond? Well, probably.
  • BritishChap007BritishChap007
    Posts: 555
    As I see it:

    Bond, Superman

    Vader

    Indiana Jones, Harry Potter, Batman, Spider-Man

    So.... to get back on topic, I don't think Cavill will be the one to go for moore. To portray the two most iconic characters of all time...unlikely.

    The icon discussion should probably take place elsewhere....
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,690
    Sherlock Holmes must be a world-famous character as well. When I think 'british' I think Bond and Holmes.
  • forgotmyusernameforgotmyusername
    Posts: 2,782
    DaltonCraig007 wrote:
    Sherlock Holmes must be a world-famous character as well. When I think 'british' I think Bond and Holmes.

    Always spot on.

    Can we add Hamlet, Dr.Watson, Jekyll and Hyde, Peter Pan, Frankenstein's Monster, Tarzan (but of course), Romeo...

  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    Kennon wrote:
    forgotmyusername wrote:
    Agent007391 wrote:
    It's almost true that Superman, James Bond and Darth Vader are the world's three most well-known icons.

    You may have an idea for a discussion there.

    Spiderman, Batman maybe?

    All in the same league IMO. Interesting though that only one is not a comic character.

    All three appeared in comic strips.
Sign In or Register to comment.