BOND... JAMES BOND!

[MacGuffin]

Bond Bosses' Secrecy Over Daniel Craig Announcement

Producers of the forthcoming James Bond sequel have refused to comment on reports British star Daniel Craig has won the coveted superspy role. Craig, 37, was in competition with Closer star Clive Owen for the part of the spy, after Pierce Brosnan was ditched for demanding a staggering $42 million for his next Bond film. But Owen has since decided the role would limit his acting career and a leak from movie giant Eon Productions suggests producer Barbara Broccoli has offered the Layer Cake star a contract for the next three films. An insider explains, "Everybody who works at Eon Productions, which makes the Bond movies, has been told Daniel is the new 007."

This would suck big time

Daniel Craig denies next James Bond rumours

Despite the best efforts of The Sun newspaper, actor Daniel Craig says he's not going to be the next James Bond 007, following a flurry of stories today claiming he had won the part.

A spokeswoman for the star of hit gangster movie "Layer Cake" denied the reports but wouldn't comment further - reports ThisIsLondon.

Eon Productions, which makes the Bond movies, also refused to comment.

This means that fellow British actor Clive Owen may still be in the running to take over from Pierce Brosnan. Other names mentioned to play the 007 role have included Eric Bana, Jude Law, Heath Ledger, Ewan McGregor, Dougray Scott and Australian Hugh Jackman.

The next James Bond movie, Casino Royale, is being directed by Martin Campbell, who first took the helm on Goldeneye in 1995. The Sun said today that Craig had been offered a three-film deal by producer Barbara Broccoli.

Betting money is on Brosnan returning. I'm serious.

Pierce Brosnan`s representatives rule out possibility of a return to 007

The Pierce Brosnan saga just won't quit, especially with the latest media flurry surrounding unfounded internet rumours that the four-times James Bond might be ushered back in the tuxedo for a fifth time.

In a Variety piece today (Apr. 07, 2005), representatives for the actor ruled out the possibility of Brosnan returning to the James Bond role and that no negotiations were taking place.

Sony were rumoured to be considering paying Brosnan his high price tag to return and guarantee a strong box-office, opposed to Eon Productions choice of a lesser known actor.

[Kal]

I dont know why I even bother having you here Mac

That news was lame anyways... 007 sucks more every time and brining an unknown like that to play Bond would bury it even more

[mogwai]

contains spoilers!

dr. no (1962)
directed by terence young.
script by richard maibaum, johanna Harwood and berkely mather.
based on the ian fleming novel.


intro: three blind mice


bond, james bond


the armorer and james bond


felix leiter spies on our hero


james bond meets quarell


picking up the spider at dr. no's lair


the spider takes over


james bond delivers a dry comment


honey rider makes her entrance


hiding with the help of straws


the dragon and quarell meets his demise


washing up


dr. no observes our hero at sleep


dr. no reveals his identity


the goya painting


radiation suit


dr. no at work


explosion


out of fuel


alone in the boat


the end

[modage]

those should all be banners.

[Gold Trumpet]

Betting money is on Brosnan returning. I'm serious.

Pierce Brosnan`s representatives rule out possibility of a return to 007

The Pierce Brosnan saga just won't quit, especially with the latest media flurry surrounding unfounded internet rumours that the four-times James Bond might be ushered back in the tuxedo for a fifth time.

In a Variety piece today (Apr. 07, 2005), representatives for the actor ruled out the possibility of Brosnan returning to the James Bond role and that no negotiations were taking place.

Sony were rumoured to be considering paying Brosnan his high price tag to return and guarantee a strong box-office, opposed to Eon Productions choice of a lesser known actor.

Oh, what did I just find....

Dench Says Brosnan Still 007
Posted:   Wednesday April 27th, 2005 2:33pm
Source:   The New York Post
Author:   Garth Franklin

The New York Post recent talked to Dame Judi Dench who reached a whole new fanbase in recent years playing James Bond's boss 'M' in the four Pierce Brosnan James Bond movies. During the chat, she revealed she will likely reprise the role in the upcoming 007 flick "Casino Royale."

Although Pierce Brosnan believed he wouldn't be back, Dench says he will return a fifth time. "Despite the fact that everyone on the face of the Earth has been tested as his possible replacement, he'll be doing it again, and it'll be announced come summer."

Martin Campbell is directing 'Royale' which is scheduled for a November 17th 2006 release.

[MacGuffin]

New mission for Haggis: 007's 'Royale'

For James Bond, 007 means having a having a license to kill. For Academy Award nominee Paul Haggis, 007 means having a license to write.

The writer, who was nominated for an Oscar for "Million Dollar Baby" and wrote and directed this summer's sleeper hit "Crash," has been tapped to do a rewrite of "Casino Royale," Sony and MGM's 21st installment of the lucrative Bond franchise.
 
Producer siblings Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson have brought back Martin Campbell ("GoldenEye," "The Legend of Zorro") to direct his second Bond. Neal Purvis and Robert Wade, who cut their teeth on Bond films "The World Is Not Enough" and "Die Another Day," wrote the previous draft. The search for a new Bond to replace Pierce Brosnan is under way.

The movie's script is based on the 1953 Ian Fleming novel, which is the first, darkest and most violent of the Bond books. It introduced not only Bond, but the evil organization SMERSH, as well as model Bond villain Le Chiffre (French for "the number"). One of the book's set pieces is a baccarat duel between Bond and Le Chiffre. The book was first adapted as the 1967 spy spoof starring Peter Sellers, David Niven, Orson Welles and George Raft, although the comedy is not considered part of the Bond canon.

[squints]

Imagine if they made 21 star wars?

[polkablues]

From tvguide.com:

Question: Is it true that Goran Visnjic is among the finalists to take over as James Bond? And what does this mean for him on ER? — Sandy

Ausiello: Yes, it's true. But should he get the role, it wouldn't mean the end of Kovac. "We have a contingency plan," says exec producer David Zabel. "We would film a bunch of stuff (with Kovac) at one time for later episodes. Or, depending on where the Bond film was shooting, he might be able to work on both at the same time. That's what (George) Clooney did. He was shooting Batman & Robin for part of the day and ER the other part."

To me, this is great news.  Goran Visjnic kicks ass, and would help revive the James Bond franchise from the time-waster it has become.  Good scripts would be nice as well, but Goran Visjnic would be a good start.


"I'm Bond.  James Bond."

[MacGuffin]

Casino Royale Delayed?
Casting trouble may prompt postponement.

Largely rehashing a recent Hollywood Reporter piece, both The Sunday Times and Variety have run features on the arduous development of the next James Bond installment, Casino Royale.

According to the Times, Amy Pascal, chairman of Sony Pictures, "will this week convene a second 007 summit to pick a new Bond. The first, last year in a London club, ended in disarray. Sony has told Eon, the British-based company that holds production rights to the Bond series, that it may have to postpone the film."

Production is slated to begin in January for a fall 2006 release. Oscar nominee Paul Haggis has been hired to revise the script. Previous screenwriter Robert Wade recently said Haggis was hired only to do a three-week polish on a second draft penned by Wade and partner Neal Purvis.

The general consensus is that Casino Royale won't get underway on time because the filmmakers can't find their young James Bond. The word is that Sony and Eon want a Bond roughly 28-years-old. Since Casino Royale was the first Bond novel penned by Ian Fleming, it will follow 007 early in his career as he grows into the cold, hard killer we all know and love. On a practical level, it seems the Bond filmmakers want a British Matt Damon, the young star who has made the Jason Bourne series a successful franchise.

This makes one wonder, though, if the filmmakers are mistaking the real reason why the Bourne films are a success. It's not because they have a thirtysomething lead (40-something Brad Pitt was initially attached to star but would later team with director Doug Liman for Mr. and Mrs. Smith). It's because they are lean, mean throwbacks to old school spy flicks; in other words, Bourne succeeds precisely because it isn't big, bloated Bond.

At least one young action star wants a crack at Bond (and the guy's British to boot): Jason Statham, 33, who currently has the #1 movie in North America with The Transporter 2. "He's the James Bond that drinks a Heineken, not a martini," Statham recently said of his Transporter role. "I love James Bond, but I hate that he's a misogynist chauvinistic pig. He goes from one woman to the next, cheats on her, doesn't care. I hate that. The Transporter is like the working man's James Bond. He is the real man."

Not to say that Statham isn't interested in slipping into 007's tuxedo, although he admits he has not been approached. "They're running out of names, I'm sure, if mine is being bandied around," Statham joked, adding, "I'm a massive fan of James Bond, and I've seen every one of the movies. ... If I was to do that most prestigious role, then I think I'd add a new, modern feel to it, definitely."

There are Bond fans who think former Olympic athlete-turned-model-turned actor Statham, whom I suggested for the role back in fall 2002, would not make a good 007 for the following reasons: too working class, too bald, too mean. And all I can say to that is: Sean Connery. Initially, Ian Fleming didn't like the toupee-wearing Connery's casting, reportedly thinking of him as an Aberdeen pubcrawler (I think that's what he called him); Fleming wanted David Niven for the role. Ironically, Niven would play Bond in the unsuccessful 1967 spoof ... Casino Royale.

Then again perhaps all this talk of a Casino Royale delay is a lot of smoke and mirrors obscuring the most obvious possibility: the filmmakers are simply waiting for Clive Owen, reportedly Amy Pascal's choice and that of many Bond fans, to satisfy his existing commitments for the first-half of 2006 (Shoot 'Em Up followed by The Golden Age). That way we could have a 007 film in '07. While Owen, who turns 41 next month, has already reportedly turned down the role perhaps he also knows to never say never.

[Gold Trumpet]

Jeez, its not like this casting has much requirement. Every face I've seen in speculation for the role has the look and prolly can play it cool if they tried. I think the producers are over worried that picking an unknown would mean a smaller pay day than the last one.

[mogwai]

Bring Back My License to Thrill

By Daniel Fienberg

LOS ANGELES (Zap2it.com) An open letter to the creative powers behind "Casino Royale"

Dear Martin Campbell, Paul Haggis, Barbara Broccoli, Michael G. Wilson and anybody else involved with the upcoming James Bond film:

It's only two months before you're supposed to shoot a new James Bond movie and your writer and director are detailing entirely different visions to the press. And there's still the fact that many months of searching have failed to yield a leading man. Does it bother you that with every unsubstantiated rumor and fabricated press release, one of the most successful franchises in cinema history is turning into a joke? Just curious.

A proviso, or word of qualification: This writer has always been more of a fan of Fleming's novels than of the films, particularly anything not involving Sean Connery. Roger Moore was an amiable clown who got stuck with too many subpar adaptations. George Lazenby was billboard cut-out Bond who somehow found himself in a good movie. Conversely, Timothy Dalton was a great Bond -- at least for this purist -- stuck in two horrid movies and tarred by their failures. Brosnan looked, sounded and felt exactly the way people came to expect Bond to look and sound and feel, which is exactly why he was so boring. His interpretation of the role was limited to everything that made Bond iconic -- the perfectly fitted tuxes, carefully ordered martinis and endlessly bedded women -- and fell short of everything that made Bond compelling. The great irony surrounding Brosnan is that he was more quintessentially Bond-ian in "The Thomas Crown Affair" and "The Tailor of Panama" than he ever got to be in his four stints as 007.

Brosnan's departure -- forced or voluntary -- gives the series a chance for a necessary reboot, please don't blow it. Actually, Clive Owen should have been offered the part immediately after "Croupier," but that opportunity was missed. And stop saying that A-list actors don't want to make a three-film commitment. If you'd stop making awful movies from undercooked scripts, actors would be more eager. Just because Brosnan has reduced the role to quippy one-liners, making out with beautiful women, outrunning fireballs and looking good in a suit doesn't make that some alpha male thespian wouldn't want to play Ian Fleming's Bond, the compulsive gambler, consummate gourmand and justifiably paranoid spy, a man equipped with both psychological and physical scars. While that character hasn't appeared in any of the past dozen movies, he's right there on the pages of "Casino Royale" -- you know, that book you're supposed to be adapting?

It has been a long time since Bond did anything other than order his martinis "shaken, not stirred." How dull for him. In "Casino Royale," he requests a different drink, desiring, "A dry martini, in a deep champagne goblet -- Three measures of Gordons, one of vodka, half a measure of Kina Lillet. Shake it very well until it's ice cold, then add a thin slice of lemon peel."

Viewers deserve that kind of Bond.

I recently picked up "Casino Royale" and reread it in one sitting. It's a great yarn and it'd make a nifty movie, but not in with the more-is-more ethos that has ruled the Bond series for years. It has a car chase, but only one. It has a bomb exploding, but only one. There's a sexy woman, but only one. The novel has a fantastic action set piece, but it happens to be a 28-page game of baccarat. There are no gadgets at all (a possibility Haggis has smartly acknowledged and Campbell has slavishly denied), which means no Q, while M appears in passing only. Le Chiffre is a splendid villain -- a debauched pornographer, pimp, gambler and Holocaust survivor -- but he's dealt with only two-thirds of the way through.

In fact, after racing through 124 pages of intrigue, torture and fun, "Casino Royale" dedicates its last 57 pages to the main character's existential crisis. This Bond has only used his license to kill on two occasions and he fears that his desire to kill -- for revenge or for country -- renders him indistinguishable from the bad guys ("The villains and heroes get all mixed up," he tells a colleague). This inner turmoil leads him to contemplate retirement.

"[D]on't let me down and become human yourself," his confessor, an operative named Mathis, tells him. "We would lose such a wonderful machine."

In reality, Bond is neither evil, as he fears, or a machine, as Mathis alleges. The word that Fleming uses most frequently to describe him (heck, uses frequently to describe most everything) is "cold." At times, actors and filmmakers have confused that "cold" with "aloof" or "distant." Again, only Connery has been able to get it right.

Brosnan restored the franchise's financial fortunes, but the six-year delay between "License to Kill" and "GoldenEye" left the series unmoored. The underappreciated genius of John Le Carre is not in the espionage classics he wrote during the Cold War, but in the author's ability to swiftly recognize the new enemies after the fall of the Soviet Union and the Berlin Wall. It's a challenge Fleming never had to face and that the slew of screenwriters-by-committee haven't mastered. The pervasive menace of SPECTRE or SMERSH -- Smyert Shpionam, "death to spies" -- and the organizations' real world counterparts was as essential to the early books and films as the Auric Goldfingers, Ernst Blofelds or Pussy Galores.

If we lived in a peaceful world without any kind of nefarious terrorist organization threatening our Western ideals, the film's current lack of relevance might be acceptable, but the recent slew of maniacal billionaires or mercenaries bent on world domination is a bore. Bond without political context is so anonymous he might as well be played by Goran Visnjic (a leading rumored candidate).

Do you want my recommendation? No. Didn't think so. Here it is anyway: cast Daniel Craig as Bond. He's a bit older than other candidates like Henry Cavill and Sam Worthington, but he looks like the character should look. The romantic interest in "Casino Royale" says Bond looks like Hoagy Carmichael, which is a compliment, but not the same as looking plastic and pretty. His features have texture.

Then, put Mr. Campbell on hold. He's a director for stunt and spectacle. If you're going to do "Casino Royale" right, hire somebody whose indie bona fides are in place. Mike Hodges ("Croupier") is the best choice, but Jon Amiel ("The Singing Detective") might work. Actually, John Dahl ("Rounders") could handle the action and he'd deliver a heck of a card game. Anyway, an efficient director, sticking to the plot of the book, could start production in January and shoot fast and turn the movie in for less than $30 million and have it out by November. That would reestablish the character and the franchise, produce a quick profit and open the door for Campbell to return for a brainless blowout the following year, for 007 in 2007.

Oh well. I just felt like sharing.

Best,

Fienberg. Daniel Fienberg.

[Fernando]

That was a great letter.

Thanks for posting it mog.

[polkablues]

Oscar nominee Paul Haggis has been hired to revise the script.

Thank god... I was afraid there wasn't going to be any ham-fisted social commentary in it.

[MacGuffin]

New 007 Reportedly Chosen
British tabloid names Bond, James Bond.

British tabloid The Daily Mail, the first outlet to report that Pierce Brosnan would not return as 007 for the next installment, now claims that the search for the new James Bond is over and that oft-rumored contender Daniel Craig (Layer Cake) will star in Casino Royale.



"In the end a shortlist of two emerged - Craig and newcomer Henry Cavill. The pair were auditioned again and tried on tuxedos to see how they would look in the quintessential Bond clothing," the Mail reports. "Craig, 37, whose choice will be confirmed by producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G Wilson later this week, will be the sixth Bond, but the first blond."

Reuters followed up on the Mail's report. "Craig's agent in London declined to comment, and both the next film's Hollywood backers, Sony Pictures Entertainment and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc, and Bond production company EON have remained silent on who will take over as the super-spy."

"The decision hasn't been made yet. They are casting and that takes however long it takes," an EON spokeswoman advised Reuters.

IGN FilmForce has learned that Sony honcho Amy Pascal flew to London this past weekend to meet with Eon and Casino Royale director Martin Campbell and make the final decision on casting the next Bond.

If there is an official announcement this week, I'd wager it would be on Thursday. The trades publish their Friday papers on Thursday so that way Eon and Sony can get a whole weekend of free press by getting Craig's face on the trades' front pages.

[modage]

ah, ugly bond.  this will be a change.