Brosnan too old for Bond!
http://entertainment.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4459,8636717%255E10431%255E%255Enbv,00.html (admin fix because spidz is too noob)
Vote 1 Christian Bale! interesting to note, the article states that Pierce Brosnan is the most successful bond ever. IMO Sean Connery owns him. wouldn't mind seeing Hugh as Bond, but I just reckon Bale would be awesome, and if Hugh was 007 I'd keep expecting his claws to come out ;) [Edit: tried to fix link but I'm too noob] |
10:43am 10/02/04 Permalink
Bond needs to be in his 40s, and they ought to wait a few years if they're bringing in a new one ffs :/
|
10:56am 10/02/04 Permalink
christian bale is in american psycho?
|
11:00am 10/02/04 Permalink
he's the lead isn't he? That kind of puts me off him being bond as well...unless I've got the wrong actor.
|
11:02am 10/02/04 Permalink
11:04am 10/02/04 Permalink
My fav bond was roger moore. But brosnan has done a damn awesome job. I agree with dais he should be a little bit older.
|
11:05am 10/02/04 Permalink
I think Christian Bale will be good as Batman in the new Batman movie as long as they make the movie along a similar style of the first Batman movie or Batman Returns.
|
11:06am 10/02/04 Permalink
Roger "pounce" Moore, no way, Sean Connery was the best. I think they sould get the mongrel back into Bond so he can kick the modern day terrorists arse better.
George Clooney would be alright, but I recon they should have someone with a good British Accent, Brosnan was a good choice but he needs more mongrel. :) |
11:09am 10/02/04 Permalink
Brosnan was a classy Bond, I rate him just as highly as Connery.
Bale = thumbs down Hugh Jackman = win |
11:09am 10/02/04 Permalink
Sean Connery is the best bond, everyone knows that
|
11:11am 10/02/04 Permalink
I'd hate to see either Hugh Jackman or Christian Bale as bond, they're too good to be stuck in bond films.
Not that I don't like Bond but the last few movies that those guys have done have been pretty cool and I'd hate to see them stop doing them. Jude Law and Orlando Bloom would be the most rediculously untuff bond ever. I vote Rowan Atkinson. |
11:15am 10/02/04 Permalink
Yeah Sean Connery was the best. I hated timothy daulton (sp?).
I reckon Hugh Jackman would be good, colin farrel might be good also. Just thought of something funny, Can you imagine Vin Diesel as 007?? last edited by Fik at 11:17:09 10/Feb/04 |
11:16am 10/02/04 Permalink
he's the lead isn't he? That kind of puts me off him being bond as well...unless I've got the wrong actor.yeah I think you have the wrong actor. Bond isn't meant to be mongrel, hes meant to be all class. Brosnan is the perfect choice but if he has to move on I think Bale or Jackman are the next best. nobody will ever match connery though. Bale definately fits the bill imo. |
11:19am 10/02/04 Permalink
vinnie jones would make a really good villain for a bond film, and jason statham is a bum, awesome actor but a bum - hence not bond material.
|
11:20am 10/02/04 Permalink
yeah I think you have the wrong actor. Nope He has the right actor, Bale was the lead in American Pshyco. last edited by Deadly-Fly at 11:26:37 10/Feb/04 |
11:22am 10/02/04 Permalink
I think farrell could pull it off - needs to be clean shaven to be bond though! i've never seen what he looks like without a goateee
Edit: not sure if he had one in recruit? last edited by Spidz* at 11:24:16 10/Feb/04 |
11:23am 10/02/04 Permalink
Jason in Transporter was suffisticated enough, just a few elecution lessons and he would make a cool Bond in the same vain as Connery.
|
11:27am 10/02/04 Permalink
yeah I was thinking of just plain Psycho, the one with the shower scene and Anne Heche. Haven't even seen the one with Bale.
anyway looking at his bio I think he's perfect for Bond. |
11:28am 10/02/04 Permalink
Jason in Transporter was suffisticated enough, just a few elecution lessons and he would make a cool Bond in the same vain as Connery.he wasn't sophisticated in that movie, he was a martial arts car driving bum. an awesome one at that. PS: Bond has a full head of hair :P |
11:29am 10/02/04 Permalink
Bond isn't meant to be mongrel, hes meant to be all class. Shows what you know. Anyway who cares who will be the next Bond, ever since Broccoli died, James Bond has been s***. Oh but Goldeneye was awesome as well, and the Timothy Dalton ones prettymuch sucked. |
11:31am 10/02/04 Permalink
Whats hair got to do with it.
I want a Bond that looks like he could kick the bad guys arse for real, like Connery, not some pretty boy who looks like he'd slap harder than he punches. |
11:32am 10/02/04 Permalink
Yeh I think bond looks best when he's 40+ and thick chested, ie Connery.
|
11:35am 10/02/04 Permalink
have you seen equilibrium?
and 290 is clearly a bond noob. if he wasn't meant to be all class why would they have had the actors they have had play him sucessfully. lazenby was s*** and the rest have been british so another tick for bale who is also british. the bond character is a silver spooon british accent, tailored suits wearing ,bollinger drinking agent. Statham is from the local tralier park and wears lowes suits from $299! anyway, I think brosnan should stay for one more anyway. |
11:39am 10/02/04 Permalink
Yeh I think bond looks best when he's 40+ and thick chested, ie Connery. yes the positive for Jackman is his hairy chest and he's not too ripped. As every bond so far has been a mans man with a hairy chest and no rippling peter andre abs. None of them have been ripped just well built. |
11:41am 10/02/04 Permalink
Yeh I think my view of Bale is tainted because i've only seen him in American Psycho and The Shaft where he played psychotic characters. But you're right about the british part would make it work well, although I never picked up on the accent in either of those movies.
|
11:44am 10/02/04 Permalink
Hugh Jackman would kick some major ass if he was Bond. Actually, I'm so sick of watching those movies now and Pierce Brosnan just doesn't do it for me.
So in summary, either Hugh Jackman or Hugh Grant would be the better choice. Hugh Grant should play the next Superman. |
11:44am 10/02/04 Permalink
hugh grant????
as with a previous statement - querr guy for the secret agent guy... |
11:46am 10/02/04 Permalink
Well Spidz* how could you say all that when you stated the Connery was the best Bond, complete with Scottish accent. Also Connery was 32 when he played Bond in Dr No the first Bond Movie.
That Bond you discribed is the Roger Moore bond which while entertaining in its kampness is the butt of all the Austin Powers movies. |
11:47am 10/02/04 Permalink
Yeh I think my view of Bale is tainted because i've only seen him in American Psycho and The Shaft where he played psychotic characters. But you're right about the british part would make it work well, although I never picked up on the accent in either of those movies.if you haven't seen equilibrium you must drop everything and see it now. AWESOME movie and bale is great in it. Your opinion of him will change immediately. |
11:47am 10/02/04 Permalink
Well Spidz* how could you say all that when you stated the Connery was the best Bond, complete with Scottish accent.I said British accent and last time I looked scotland was in britain.. and he hardly has a strong scottish accent, hell sean connery has his own accent. I have never met a woman who doesn't think his voice is sexy. |
11:49am 10/02/04 Permalink
I dont think I'd want Christian Bale as bond. Dont get me wrong, I love Bond movies, and Christian Bale is one of my favourite actors, but I think he'd be wasted as Bond. Hes much better at playing the cold, psychotic asskicking character, and just wouldn't get enough chance to do that as Bond.
Hugh Jackman would rock as Bond though, he'd definately be my pick for the next one. |
11:51am 10/02/04 Permalink
I guess even though hes a good guy in equilibrium hes still pretty psycotic. If hugh can pull off the british accent he'd bea great bond. Bale can be a villain with vinnie jones instead :P
|
11:52am 10/02/04 Permalink
Yeah, Bale would make an awesome villian :) Some cold, emotionless assassin dude, thats what I'm talking about!
|
11:54am 10/02/04 Permalink
Well George Lazenby played Bond and he was Australian so I think Hugh Jackman has a pretty good chance. It would be a crime to let Brosnan play Bond for another movie.
|
11:55am 10/02/04 Permalink
Christian Bale will be too busy with Batman to play Bond. Plus it's not often you see an actor take on two major roles like that so Bale as Bond is highly unlikely.
|
11:56am 10/02/04 Permalink
and look how successful lazenby was....
but yeah the more I think about it he more I'd like to see bale as a villain! especially an assassin like khel mentioned. |
11:58am 10/02/04 Permalink
I reckon hugo weaving could do it - prolly too old though. edward norton maybe?
|
12:00pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Of course Lazenby sucked alot of ass. But Hugh Jackman is awesome and everyone knows that. Lazenby hasn't been in any good movies ever.
8-) |
12:00pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Hugo Weaving would make an awesome Batman.
|
12:01pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Plus it's not often you see an actor take on two major roles like that so Bale as Bond is highly unlikely What, you mean kinda how Hugh Jackman is Wolverine in the X-Men movie franchise, and the lead in Van Helsing (which they've said they wanna turn into a franchise if its successful), and now up for Bond? |
12:03pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Those aren't major established roles with a history Khel. The fact is no current popular actors are really suitable for Bond, it will probably be an unknown.
|
12:06pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Yeh I think my view of Bale is tainted because i've only seen him in American Psycho and The Shaft where he played psychotic characters. But you're right about the british part would make it work well, although I never picked up on the accent in either of those movies.Seen Reign of Fire? He was in that, english accent and all. Plus it's not often you see an actor take on two major roles like that so Bale as Bond is highly unlikely.Hugh Jackman is Wolverine though and I wouldn't be surprised if Van Helsing had a sequel or two. Hugh is to big for Bond, most Bonds weren't all that big until they actually became Bond. Damn you khel! last edited by Deadly-Fly at 12:10:03 10/Feb/04 |
12:07pm 10/02/04 Permalink
and 290 is clearly a bond noob. that activates my hilarity unit... I haven't seen a 007 film in a while and cant pick a specific incident, but he's a mongrel, he f**** any woman he can. Is everyone basing their idea of Bond from previous actors? I think so, there were books before the films you realise. CBF giving a big thesis here but I'll say that spidx is the 007 master and obviously knows all... |
12:11pm 10/02/04 Permalink
thats very true deadly fly.
I'd say hugo Weaving comes the closest to doing major roles like that at the same time. Considering he was part of the two biggest movie trilogies ever, made almost concurrently. the other thing that puts me off about bale is that hes not really a 'ladies man' like jackman or farrel, and bond is the ladies man. |
12:13pm 10/02/04 Permalink
The fact is no current popular actors are really suitable for Bond you really dont have a cluse |
12:13pm 10/02/04 Permalink
290 hes a ladies man, not a mongrel - the women know his reputation and want to be part of his trophy cabinet - and a fine trophy cabinet it is!
|
12:15pm 10/02/04 Permalink
well spidz, considering he only ever loved one woman, the rest he f***ed off.
And BTW, anyone who says that Lazenby was a s*** Bond obviously hasnt seen his film or listens to all the other idiots out there. He had HUGE shoes to fill after Sean Connery left, especially with everyone basically believing that the franchise was over. I'll bet 90% of yous haven't seen OHMSS and say he's s*** without any evidence or basis for your opinion, so hire it out and maybe you'll realise that it is one of the best 007 films. |
12:24pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Let me clarify for the tards who didn't read my last post:
Playing new roles like Wolverine/Van Helsing at the same time doesn't really compare to playing Bond/Batman in tandem, leading characters that have been in movies for ages and done by many other people. |
12:34pm 10/02/04 Permalink
I thought OHMSS was a decent movie, I just thought Lazenby was s*** in the role of Bond.
|
12:36pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Playing new roles like Wolverine/Van Helsing at the same time doesn't really compare to playing Bond/Batman in tandem, leading characters that have been in movies for ages and done by many other people. Why does it not compare? They're still just movie roles. Its not like playing Batman is going to be more work than playing Wolverine or Van Helsing. |
12:39pm 10/02/04 Permalink
I got equalibrium out, i'll let you know what I think. Yay for dollar movie days.
|
12:41pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Not enough Collin Farrel thumbs up in this thread.
Out of those named, he'd play the best bond, followed by bale. Jackman and Stratham both seem a little too commando for the role, but i'd have to see what jackman is like in hellsing i guess. And Orlando Bloom heh, seeeeeef. Im just glad there's no Americans on that list ... I think. Cant have an American playing bond, ever. |
12:45pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Laza was OK, just not the right man for the times as he was to similar to Connery and thus suffered for it, then Rodger was on the total opposite end of the scale, stamped Bond as his own by being a new type of Bond.
Me personally I enjoyed all Bond movies, there isn't a bad one amonst them, they are enjoyable and exciting, Dalton and Bosnan are good as Bond and the movies they made are enjoyable. We need another Connery or Mooore, someone to make the role refreshed with their own style, Dalton tried to Connery and Bosnan is more a Moore than a Connery. So now it is time to make a fresh new persona while still mantaining the Bond attributes. This is wht I believe that Stathman would be a good new persona, with a twist of Turkish while caring the virtues of Connery. |
12:46pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Spidz I think you haved a preconcieved idea of what bond is meant to belike but. etc etc
|
12:48pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Thats because bond is meant to be like a certain character, he doesn't change. The actor has to fit a certain mold and I think thats fair enough. I don't think farrels right for it though, imo.
|
12:51pm 10/02/04 Permalink
You work it out Khel http://www.ausforums.com/images/icon12.gif
|
12:53pm 10/02/04 Permalink
You have to admit it was a bit stupid when she walked out of the water wearing a bikini in slowmo.you mean just like in Dr No the original bond movie? and yes I do have a preconcieved idea of what bond is supposed to be like, and that idea is based on what he was like in the past 20 odd movies. While the actors changed, the character of bond himself was reasonably consistent. as with moneypenny. shame Q is dead and they use John Clease now - hate john cleese as Q. |
12:55pm 10/02/04 Permalink
this is f***ed up - Brosnan was my favourite bond by far - and yes that includes sean connery, although he was blood good as well. I was really looking forward to another james bond with brosnan in it. I knew it would be his last one and I cant belive they arent going to use him again - specially with the argument of he has been so succesful and we dont know if we can do that again...
nuts... that being said - I think hugh jackman would make an excellent bond if he can get the accent right - an american playing bond just seems wrong to me, and its a bit of a tretch to imagine 'aussie' hugh as him as well, but he certainl looks like a bond |
12:57pm 10/02/04 Permalink
I still dont see what the difference between playing Bond/Batman at the same time, and Wolverine/Van Helsing/Bond at the same time is? If anything, that just makes it even less likely that Hugh Jackman will get in.
|
12:57pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Post f***up.
Repost The last Bond films were absolute rubish, hollywood bulls***. I don't want to see Bond take on Koreans or whatever, i dont want a story line involving some guy that can't feel pain....or some guy that changes his face. It's pretty lame. I couldnt stop laughing when Bond started a film surfing...what the hell is that? Bond films used to be mad...because they were swarve and didnt take themselves seriously...without being stupid. The bond story lines are getting gayer and gayer...i don't care that the "times are changing" and Russians are no longer the enemy...but they're cool, and have a sweet as accent, Koreans don't have an english accent...they're too busy trying to get the words right. And Russians were tough...they didnt do any gay matial arts bs, how is bond meant to stand a chance against a warrior? He's used to punching and hitting people with things. It's lost it's charm. IMO the last bond was the corniest POS ever...you may argue that it's meant to be corny...but not lame. What was with Berry? You have to admit it was a bit stupid when she walked out of the water wearing a bikini in slowmo. What the f***? I don't want to see Bond figting a ninja just because martial arts and wire effects are trendy. I want to see barenuckle tough boxing and guns. Manly stuff, not fully grown men flying through the air like a bunch of fairies. Not impressed. Best Pierce Bond flick so far was Goldeneye...it kept with the original feel. I'd rather an unknown actor to be bond, rather than someone new. It will add something new, and get rid of the hollywood bs...we want to see a cool story, not a hollywood actor. But if not, jackman could do the job. I just think that big budget films are playing it too safe, and keeping with known actors to generate revenue. But that's my opinion. |
12:58pm 10/02/04 Permalink
on that side note anyone know when we can expect x-men 3? I'm gunning for it after the dissapointments of ROTK and the matrices.
|
12:59pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Jason Statham wont work as Bond and here's why. Bond must have hair and can you imagine him with hair?? It'd be like Vin Diesel having hair, it wouldn't work.
|
01:00pm 10/02/04 Permalink
ROTK wasn't that big a disappointment, wait for the DVD they fatten up the ending with an additional 1hr.
|
01:01pm 10/02/04 Permalink
on that side note anyone know when we can expect x-men 3? Just checked imdb and it says 2006 :( |
01:06pm 10/02/04 Permalink
agreed gumby - it certainly wasn't a s*** movie (like that plague to humanity called revolutions) but it didn't meet my admittedly massive expectations. I thought TT was the best of the three.
the extended hour at the end will really seal the deal for me, especially if they have the battle for the shire included. That was what really made the movie an anti climax for me - they just went back to the shire and it was all happy as larry like they had never left. |
01:06pm 10/02/04 Permalink
I reckon khel would make a sik villain in a bond movie.
Khel: 1 Bale: 0 :P |
01:06pm 10/02/04 Permalink
FFS Khel, I don't even know what you're saying now. Let me spell it out for you.
My original point was Christian Bale won't play Bond as he's playing Batman, and the studios will not want someone who is taking on another role like that to play Bond. Because these movies are long running franchises they need to be able to market their actor purely as that character. That's why playing roles like Wolvering/Van Helsing at the same time doesn't compare, they're not in the same league as Bond/Batman. ie; Who the f*** is Van Helsing anyway? |
01:06pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Stewart Says X3 For 2005! |
01:08pm 10/02/04 Permalink
I see you point dais and I can't ever recall the same actor taking on two major roles like that at the same time if at all.
hell theres really only 3 roles out there like that. Batman, Superman & Bond. and Superman barely makes the grade, not like theres all that many superman movies and only one guy has played him. so really batman and bond are the only characters that are involved in several movies that have a different actor playing the role over a few decades. |
01:09pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Playing new roles like Wolverine/Van Helsing at the same time doesn't really compare to playing Bond/Batman in tandem, leading characters that have been in movies for ages and done by many other people. Laurence Olivier, Anthony Hopkins, Nehemiah Persoff, Nigel Davenport, Peter Cushing, Frank Finlay, and Richard Benjamin are all actors that have previously played Van Helsing a character that has been around well before the creators of batman were even born. Not too mention that X-Men 3 has been announced. I think you'll find that they are completely compareable. |
01:09pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Who the f*** is Van Helsing anyway? Probably a more famous literary character than Batman, seeing as he was one of the main characters in Bram Stoker's Dracula. |
01:10pm 10/02/04 Permalink
well there you go - I thought only Anthony Hopkins had played Van Helsing.
|
01:11pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Laurence Olivier, Anthony Hopkins, Nehemiah Persoff, Nigel Davenport, Peter Cushing, Frank Finlay, and Richard Benjamin are all actors that have previously played Van Helsing And dont forget Mel Brooks! :) |
01:11pm 10/02/04 Permalink
yeah but van helsing isn't a comic book character, all the other roles are.
meh ignore that - bond isn't either! |
01:12pm 10/02/04 Permalink
I know who Van Helsing is, but I don't recall him ever being the lead character in his own series of blockbuster Hollywood movies. Not like, say, Batman or James Bond for example.
Why the f*** must I continue to explain this? It's really quite simple. last edited by dais at 13:15:45 10/Feb/04 |
01:15pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Who the f*** is Van Helsing, never heard of him till this new movie. Also Pierce is not too old, retards. Sean C. forever.
|
01:17pm 10/02/04 Permalink
like I said Batman and Bond are the only real characters that have had several actors play them while maintaining the same character in the movie. of course remakes etc don't count.
|
01:18pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Reckon they should be different and get a brother to be the next bond ;) I mean you can't beat a brutha when it comes to street suave and ass kickin' right ? ;):) I hereby nominate Eddy Murphy or Chris Rock?!@##
|
01:20pm 10/02/04 Permalink
It'd be like Vin Diesel having hair, it wouldn't work. He still looks tough. |
01:22pm 10/02/04 Permalink
samuel L!
Ewan McGregor (sp?) could possibly play Bond also. |
01:25pm 10/02/04 Permalink
I reckon hugo weaving could do it - prolly too old though. edward norton maybe? no and no. hugo doesnt have the flair or the smooth suarve sofisticated style to him. neither does norton, but his main problem is he's a thin weedy runt :p never will he play bond! |
01:26pm 10/02/04 Permalink
rofl series.
vin would also make a good bond villain. not a clever one though, more in the mould of jaws, a henchman. |
01:27pm 10/02/04 Permalink
No nes mentioned Brad Pitt for bond, I reckon he would do a good job of it.
|
01:28pm 10/02/04 Permalink
I haven't seen this one crop up yet in this post but people have been speculating about this man for a while about being Pierce Brosnan's replacement.
Russell Crowe. He's done several action movies (Proof of Life, Gladiator) and can do sauve and debonair (LA Confidential). His roughneck boorish attitude in RL would count against him and it's hard to see him even wanting to do a Brit accent to play Bond. But he could do it... Otherwise Hugh Jackman would be a fantastic Bond. And to those who knock Timothy Dalton - his Bond is the closest interpretation of Fleming's books of any of the actors. Bond isn't a master of the double entendre, gadget relying daredevil, he's a former naval officer with a hard, arrogant reputation who enjoys a good adventure as well as having an eye for the ladies. Brosnan had a great start with GoldenEye but the next movies have just been pale imitations. |
01:28pm 10/02/04 Permalink
neither does norton, but his main problem is he's a thin weedy runt :p never will he play bond!have you seen american history X? Russell Crowe for Bond (also a joke...) |
01:28pm 10/02/04 Permalink
quote - Brosnan had a great start with GoldenEye but the next movies have just been pale imitations.
Thank f*****g god someone else isn't a d*******. last edited by series at 13:30:55 10/Feb/04 |
01:30pm 10/02/04 Permalink
guy peirce and eric bana for bond?
from priscilla to bond in less than a decade! or from poida to hulk to bond in less than a decade - what a turnaround! |
01:30pm 10/02/04 Permalink
ok so he got buff for history x, but his other movies eg fight club and italian job he looks thin etc. bond has a well built frame with a hairy chest etc etc, norton couldnt grow a hair on his chest if his life depended on it :p
|
01:31pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Brosnan had a great start with GoldenEye but the next movies have just been pale imitationsI thought brosnan himself was good as bond in those movies - it was the movies that were s***. whereas in lazenby's case he was s*** while the movie was quite good. |
01:32pm 10/02/04 Permalink
actually...i can see guy peirce as bond.
|
01:32pm 10/02/04 Permalink
if you've been on neighbours you should automatically be ruled out of calculations. Unless of course they want kylie to get her kit off in the next one - thats fine with me!
|
01:36pm 10/02/04 Permalink
sauve and debonair (LA Confidential) Sif he was suave and debonair in LA Confidential, he was a thug. |
01:36pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Russell Crowe as bond, nope can't see it, while I like all his movies and he is very versitile he's just plain crap at doing accents.
|
01:36pm 10/02/04 Permalink
was wondering what squarkyD was on about for a bit then I realised I think he means prophet?
|
01:37pm 10/02/04 Permalink
^^ bahaha Deadly-Fly penny arcade does it again.
Whats a pre-crisis Superman? |
01:39pm 10/02/04 Permalink
the laffter is plentiful!
penny arcade owns me :P |
01:42pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Penny Arcade is NOT funny. Its stupid.
|
01:53pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Hugh Grant = Neg, hes too much of a "softie"
Hugh Jackman = Definatley Possible Russel Crowe = Definatley Possible Hugo Weaving = Possible but he doesnt have the bond look about him. Guy Pierce = Definatley Possible heres one I thought of, i'm not sure.... what about Heath Ledger, if they could make him look normal with dark hair... also, about LOTR:ROTK and revolutions, people who were disapointed when they saw them must have hyped them up inside their heads too much. I went to see them and found them quite enjoyable endings, especially LOTR. |
02:28pm 10/02/04 Permalink
What about Colin Pharell or however you spell it. Young, Smart ass, F**** alot of b******, plus he looks like a younger Brosnan. What more could they want ? A Bond role wouldnt be any different from his day to day routine.
last edited by Skitza at 14:46:21 10/Feb/04 |
02:45pm 10/02/04 Permalink
The new Batman movie will rule:
http://www.superherohype.com/batman/index.php?id=806 |
02:50pm 10/02/04 Permalink
have you seen american history X? He had to take roids to get that big and he was only that big for half the movie. I also think physically he's too short, but with photography that doesn't really matter. |
02:58pm 10/02/04 Permalink
colin farrel for sure, he'd suit the role perfectly.
|
04:02pm 10/02/04 Permalink
There is nothing wrong with Brosnan. Don't know why they would want to ditch him. He is up there with Connery.
Goldeneye...it kept with the original feel. That's for sure. It was the last great bond film and Brosnan did an awesome job. If they would just get the plots right, I believe Brosnan could keep going. And if not Brosnan, Robbie Williams would rock as Bond! (thats if he could act) last edited by KappA at 16:32:19 10/Feb/04 |
04:31pm 10/02/04 Permalink
At one stage they were thinking of having Cuba Gooding Jr as Bond...I thought that was weird.
|
06:52pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Phwoar, that article dais posted about the new Batman makes it sounds pretty damn madcainer.
Also, Tanaka, that gif in your sig f***en rocks! I sat there watching it for ages :) |
07:34pm 10/02/04 Permalink
It does sound pretty awesome, especially since it seems to be a complete retelling of the batman story and not a sequel to the previous batmans. It sounds like it's going to be much darker and take itself more seriously then the last batman movie, that movie kind of sucked balls.
|
07:46pm 10/02/04 Permalink
If you have seen the movie "kate and leopold" you will see why hugh jackman would make a great bond.
the movie itself was a pretty ordinary chick flick that I was bored and watched on a flight to america, but in it he played the part of the refined english gentlemen with the debonaire sense of adventure that the bond character needs. He would get my vote. Crusher |
09:44pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Viggo Mortinsen!
Aragon to Bond in one smooth motion! *runs* |
10:17pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Christian Bale is far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far far too cool to be a Bond.
|
10:21pm 10/02/04 Permalink
It started off as a joke, but the more i think about it...the more i think it'd suit. Bring on Charles i say! |
11:23pm 10/02/04 Permalink
Ok, so far it seems like a pretty even tie with the following people being perfect for a Bond role...
- Hugh Jackman - Hugh Grant - Christian Bale Hmmm, hard choice. |
11:31pm 10/02/04 Permalink
I can't think of anyone at the moment who could do as good a job as brosnan, and especially not as good as Sean...
So I vote for finding a no-body who fits the profile better |
02:10pm 11/02/04 Permalink
trog would make a good bond - better than hugh grasnt thats for sure!
|
02:59pm 11/02/04 Permalink
So am I the only one who's aware of Rev's obsession with Hugh Grant?
|
03:02pm 11/02/04 Permalink
well there you go - I thought only Anthony Hopkins had played Van Helsing. Yeah you are wrong about a lot of things. ---- any clowns who say "no x would be s***", look at Michael Keaton in Batman. Everyone started crying when Tim Burton put him in: "but he's Mr. Mom"... Look how he turned out, the best. ----- plus he looks like a younger Brosnan I shouldn't dignify that post statement with a reply, but you really are STUPID. ------ But anyway, as if you'd see another James Bond film since TWINE. Or TND. They suck these days compared to the old ones because movies these days generally suck more, with exceptions, but the mainstream ones generally do anyway. |
03:38pm 11/02/04 Permalink
social retards are what this forums all about.
|
03:44pm 11/02/04 Permalink
James bond has to be played by a guy from the UK and nowhere else. Timothy dalton was a flop, and so was roger moore.
007 has only been successful becuase of the connery and brosnan. How can someone think og colin farrell to play 007...he doesn't suit the image. Same with hugh jackman, orlando bloom and christian bale. None of them have the nature of what bond is about. |
03:52pm 11/02/04 Permalink
well spidz, resorting to petty name calling is pretty lame. if you cant take the heat why not f*** off somewhere else, that or get a clue
|
03:53pm 11/02/04 Permalink
James bond has to be played by a guy from the UK and nowhere else. Yes, accents can't be imitated can they... - Timothy dalton was a flop, and so was roger moore. I'd like to see where you base that from. 007 has only been successful becuase of the connery and brosnan. OMG! - colin farrell to play 007...he doesn't suit the image He doesnt suit your image you mean. - None of them have the nature of what bond is about.And you know what Ian Flemming had in mind of what Bond was to be? You've read all the books to gain his insight? -- World famous Bondologist, German there... last edited by 290 at 16:00:28 11/Feb/04 |
03:58pm 11/02/04 Permalink
An imitated accent isn't as good as the real thing.
The best way to describe 007s image is look at connery and brosnan. Don't put words in my mouth, I never said he didn't suit my image. So don't make things up. Why do I say dalton and moore were a flop, becuase there acting was appauling in the movies. How often do you hear someone say roger moore or timothy dalton were excellent playing 007, never. Becuase a large majority of people know that they didnt suit the role. |
04:43pm 11/02/04 Permalink
Almost forgot Rodger Moore became Bond off the back of the highly successfule Saint TV show, which put to rest the theory that a Bond Actor can't portray 2 major character roles at once.
http://www.ianfleming.org/mkkbb/guide/rogermoore/ Also http://www.ianfleming.org/007news/articles2/twinebigmoney.shtml I can't believe that Octopussy rates so f***en high, be better to compare number of tickets sold rather than total revenue. |
04:49pm 11/02/04 Permalink
well spidz, resorting to petty name calling is pretty lame. if you cant take the heat why not f*** off somewhere else, that or get a cluewhy? because I made the thread and wasn't expecting some tard to come in with deads*** responses and quote battles typo style. you keep accusing people of having a preconceived idea of what BOnd should be like - of course we f*****g do, its not likes its a new character. Our ideas are based on all the previous people who have portrayed bond. Stop referring to the books - nobody cares whether you have read the books and how that makes you an authority on the subject. Just make a suggestion and move on. and it wasn't petty name calling you are quite clearly socially retarded. Its not a name its just the way you are - unfortunately. |
05:01pm 11/02/04 Permalink
I really like Octopussy - maybe we should make a thread about your favourite bond movie.
Mines what are other peoples favourite bond movies? |
05:03pm 11/02/04 Permalink
1. Thunderball
2. Goldfinger 3. Moonraker 4. License to Kill 5. Diamonds are Forever / Man with Golden Gun thats my top 5 |
05:08pm 11/02/04 Permalink
I really like You Only Live Twice, but thats cos it was the first Bond movie I ever watched, so it has a special place in my heart. So my top 5 list would go:
You only Live Twice Goldfinger Diamonds are Forever Goldeneye Spy who loved me Die Another Day would almost make it onto that list too actually, even though some people bag it out, I really enjoyed it. While it did have some pretty lame sequences (that surfing bit was really retarded), overall I thought it was a pretty good Bond movie and definately up there in the entertainment stakes. |
06:47pm 11/02/04 Permalink
I think Brosnan is the best Bond. I like Roger Moore and his suave sophistication, and I like Connery's more rough and tumble approach. But I reckon Brosnan is a good blend of both. Neither Dalton nor Lazenby felt right as Bond to me. I certainly agree that he should be a little older, in mid to late 30s at least. A 20ish Bond just wouldn't be right.
Oh and someone mentioned Rowan Atkinson as Bond. He's actually been in a Bond flick already. Never Say Never Again IIRC. |
06:57pm 11/02/04 Permalink
An imitated accent isn't as good as the real thing.Yeah, you realise that they have trainers to get accents right to certain parts of a country on movie sets these days? --- haha spidz, you realisethat batman was played by adam west before michael keaton, 2 totally different people, and yet michael keaton was better. also why do you imply that i've read the books, you now have to make up lies about me because you can't win an argument with facts. oh and i have to add this in: Stop referring to the booksoh thats right, because they were based off the movies, weren't they? oh and: 1. Thunderballwish I could count as well as you last edited by 290 at 13:56:32 12/Feb/04 |
01:55pm 12/02/04 Permalink
threads finished buddy - get over it.
took you two days to think of that really helpful input into the thread. what the f*** has adam west got to do with it, f*****g hell get a grip. PS: adam west's greatest role was when he played himself in the simpsons - "pure west" hahah! |
02:50pm 12/02/04 Permalink
why? because I made the thread and wasn't expecting some tard to come in with deads*** responses and quote battles typo style. Hey, I only quote so everybody knows exactly what I am talking about. Besides nobody forces you to read them :) |
03:58pm 12/02/04 Permalink
sorry spidz, i work and attend social functions during the day, and thus, I can only come here once every day or so.
|
11:19pm 12/02/04 Permalink
There was actually another dude that played Batman before Adam West did. We have a few of the early eps at work and they look like pure ass.
8-) |
11:43pm 12/02/04 Permalink
