|
Post by Ace on Aug 19, 2005 10:22:51 GMT -5
And we know no other Bond will ever surpass the accolades of the Peter Sellers/David Nixen Bond outing of Casino Royale. ;D I won't even mention Barry Nelson's vehicle. Well Niven was Fleming's original choice (or one of them) so how could one compete? I bought the Casino Royale DVD just to see Barry Nelson's Bond -- I prefer the intentional spoof to the unintentional one --- Jimmy Bond-- American--- UGH! A good role for Connery -- far from his best -- though he did IMO blow Ford off the screen as an actor and as a presence. Better roles: The Offense, The Anderson Tapes, Robin & Marian, The Man Who Would Be King, The Great Train Robbery, The Name of the Rose, Hunt For The Red October, Finding Forrester -- all better (but then so were his first 4 Bonds) than what he eventually won an Oscar for though he's also very good in The Untouchables. Ace
|
|
|
Post by sparklingblue on Aug 19, 2005 11:18:26 GMT -5
The Name of the Rose, Finding Forrester I also liked these two. When I read The Name of the Rose, I can't think of anyone else who could convincingly play William.
|
|
|
Post by Myrtle Groggins on Aug 27, 2005 2:23:49 GMT -5
I can honestly say I never saw most of them. I did see Hunt for Red October, and he wasn't bad. Not being a Connery fan, I'm just not drawn to his films.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Aug 30, 2005 23:31:04 GMT -5
Hollywwood Reporter: Post-Brosnan, Bond is a tough suit to fillPierce Brosnan By Anne Thompson and Borys Kit Where is James Bond? With production set to begin in January on the 21st Bond picture, "Casino Royale," the dashing movie hero who dates back to the '60s might as well be missing in action. The latest Bond film, "Die Another Day," starring Pierce Brosnan, was released by MGM in 2002. But last year, Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson, the sibling producers who control the Bond franchise, told the Irish Brosnan, 52, the fifth actor to portray Bond in the long-running series, that after four films they would not require his services for the new one. According to sources familiar with the situation, the producers and Brosnan were too far apart on terms to close a deal. One Sony executive described Brosnan's salary demands, which within the industry have been said to be as much as $30 million, "usurious." (No Bond has ever landed gross points.) Still, commented Steven Jay Rubin, author of "The Complete James Bond Encyclopedia": "They shouldn't have let him go. Now they have to find a guy they can patch up to a seven-year contract." "It was a big mistake to let Pierce go," agreed casting agent Debra Zane. "He's got it all. Who cares if he's in his early 50s? He's completely Bond." As a result, the producers now face the difficult challenge of casting a new Bond. The difficulty of that task became apparent shortly after a consortium headed by Sony Corp. of America announced its intent in September to acquire MGM and its assets. In November, the many players who are involved in casting the new Bond -- including Amy Pascal, chairman of the Sony Pictures Entertainment motion picture group -- held their first meeting at a British men's club in London, but they were unable to reach an agreement. "Casino Royale" is scheduled to start production in January for an October release. Once again, Judi Dench will play M. and John Cleese will be Q. The casting of a new Miss Moneypenny is moving forward. But so far there's no Bond in sight. Broccoli and Wilson, her half-brother -- were schooled in the Bond tradition by the late, legendary Bond producer Cubby Broccoli -- often don't agree with each other on the casting possibilities, according to talent agents. One source close to the movie reported that Broccoli liked "Layer Cake" star Daniel Craig, 37, but Wilson didn't. Broccoli also thought Australian star Hugh Jackman, 36, who in addition to playing Wolverine in "X-Men" has appeared in Broadway musicals, wasn't masculine enough. Colin Farrell, 29, was judged too much of a bad boy. Eric Bana, 37, star of "Troy" and the upcoming "Munich," wasn't good-looking enough. Ewan McGregor, 34, was too short. "Their natural instinct is to do what's been done before," the source said. Bond director Martin Campbell, who helmed "GoldenEye," has his own ideas about reinventing the franchise. He was involved in the recent hiring of Paul Haggis ("Million Dollar Baby," "Crash") to rewrite old Bond hands Neal Purvis and Robert Wade ("The World Is Not Enough," "Die Another Day"). "Campbell wants to find a complete unknown," one source said. "He wants to take credit for re-energizing the franchise again." Compounding the challenge, several bigger stars have passed on the opportunity to play Bond. When Clive Owen, 41, was approached by Campbell, who directed him in "Beyond Borders," he told Campbell that he wasn't interested in the role, his spokesman said. "He already had so many interesting, varied offers on the table that he wanted to keep his options open," he said. Owen instead signed up for a string of films, including Spike Lee's "Inside Man," Alfonso Cuaron's "The Children of Men" and Michael Davis' "Shoot 'Em Up." In the meantime, Owen will send up Bond by playing Agent 006 in the upcoming remake of "The Pink Panther." As the search has dragged on, Bond spokeswoman Ann Bennett has been fending off one Internet rumor after another. Just about every leading man capable of a British accent has been bandied about for Bond. There have been rumors of a black Bond: British "Prime Suspect" star and 007's agent cohort on the last three films, Colin Salmon, 43. There has been talk of a Croatian Bond: "ER" star Goran Visnjic, 32, who studied for 10 days in London with a dialogue coach and did a screen test. And there's even been speculation about a baby Bond: Brit Henry Cavill ("Goodbye, Mr. Chips"), 22, also did a screen test, along with 28-year-old Australian Alex O'Lachlan ("The Oyster Farmer"). Glasgow-born Ewan Stewart ("Titanic"), 47, was reported to have tested for the role but did not, according to a Sony spokesman. "There is no pending announcement," he added. As a result, agents and managers from Hollywood to Sydney to London and beyond have all been dreaming about one of their clients landing the coveted Bond assignments. There have been lobbying efforts -- some subtle, some not -- to get the producers' attention. One campaign by Julian McMahon, 37, who has starred in "Nip/Tuck" and "Fantastic Four," already appears to have backfired. After the Australian actor struck a Bond pose, dressed in a tuxedo and wielding a gun, along with the headline "License to Thrill" on the April cover of Angeleno Modern Luxury, he might have alienated the producers, sources said. Campbell did want to test McMahon. But according to several sources, the actor's new representatives at CAA and Three Arts Entertainment advised him to turn down a test, a charge a CAA spokesman denied.The producers are determined to give Bond a face-lift. Before MGM's sale to Sony was finalized, MGM execs arranged for "Layer Cake" director Matthew Vaughn to meet with the Broccoli family about directing the next Bond, possibly with Craig as his star. "They loved him more than me," Vaughn said ruefully. "I would have nailed Bond." Other directors who have spoken about their interest in reviving the franchise include Quentin Tarantino and John Woo, but the Broccolis decided to work once more with Campbell. However, they are concerned that the franchise has been skewing older as the boomer audience that grew up with Bond ages. In deciding to adapt Ian Fleming's first Bond tale, the 1953 novel "Casino Royale," they can reintroduce Bond as a young 28-year-old. "They were looking young," the agent of one Bond wannabe said. "They said they wanted the next generation's James Bond. Someone the younger audience could relate to." Meanwhile, the media have been busy advancing their own candidates, including Jonathan Rhys Meyers ("Bend It Like Beckham"), 28, who insisted that he was never approached for the role. "Who wouldn't want the chance of being the world's greatest super-spy agent?" he said. "It's not reality for me at the moment." Jude Law, 32, earned the most votes in a Total Film Magazine Internet poll on Bond. Gerard Butler ("The Phantom of the Opera"), 35, also has been mentioned as a real contender. Other names that have surfaced -- either in the media or inside the Hollywood beltway -- are Hugh Grant ("Bridget Jones's Diary"), 44; Ralph Fiennes ("The Constant Gardener"), 42; Rufus Sewell ("The Legend of Zorro"), 37; Matthew MacFadyen ("Pride and Prejudice"), 31; Karl Urban ("The Bourne Supremacy"), 33; Orlando Bloom ("Kingdom of Heaven"), 28; Jason O'Mara ("Band of Brothers"), 33; Jack Davenport ("Pirates of the Caribbean"), 32; Robbie Williams ("De-Lovely"), 31; Jeremy Northam ("Gosford Park"), 43; Dominic West ("The Wire"), 35; Dougray Scott ("Dark Water"), 39; Rupert Friend ("Pride & Prejudice"), 26; David Morrissey, ("Derailed"), 41; Gary Stretch ("Alexander"), 36; James Purefoy ("Rome"), 41; and Ioan Gruffudd ("Fantastic Four"), 31. But there is a risk in casting a young Bond, one former Bond marketer said: Although the global franchise needs to be made more contemporary -- many kids see Bond movies as belonging to their parents -- "the danger of going too young to broaden the appeal is that you alienate the core, which is males over 25. He has to wear the suit well, as Brosnan did. You can't lose sight of the core." Broccoli and Wilson will find themselves competing with movies like "The Bourne Identity" series, starring Matt Damon, one ICM agent said. The "Bourne" filmmakers "took a '70s low-tech action franchise and made it work like gangbusters. Now they (the Bond producers) have to make Bond relevant all over again." "It's a tough casting job to replace someone whose qualities are stuck in people's heads," said Marcia Ross, senior vp casting at Walt Disney Studios. "He can't be so profoundly different that he's jarring. You have to find someone with similar elements. He has to be charming, intelligent, sexy, commanding and authoritative. You can argue that you bring more value to the part by going to an actor who the audience knows and likes. But the minute you get into somebody who has a career, he'll want to be paid. I'd pick Gerard Butler, who has an impish quality hiding behind his sexiness." All of which has Hollywood asking: Will the next Bond please stand up? James Vejvoda contributed to this report. =============================================================== So the rumor now is $30m including points? That's "usurious"? Sony is nuts. The last Bond film made $456m at the B.O. and double that with DVDs/TV. The salary is completely within blockbuster established leading man territory and far less than say Cruise or Reeves made for the MI or Matrix films. And Connery did receive points for DAF -- a % that gave him a salary that now would dwarf $30m. So Martin Campbell reportedly wants to be known as the man who re-energized the franchise again, with an unknown. I hate to tell him this (no I really don't) but he didn't re-energize it the first time. His leading man did and he did fine in the next three films without Campbell. Pftt. What a mess.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Sept 4, 2005 15:21:55 GMT -5
From Variety:
Bond in battle royale 007 team mulls major shakeup in franchise
By CLAUDE BRODESSER
With the announcement last week that Paul Haggis will write the next James Bond film, the question arises: What film?
Eon Prods. -- along with producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson -- and MGM/UA have been touting an imminent start for "Casino Royale" since 2004.
But with the new scribe starting over, it's dubious how realistic even November 2006 is.
And the bigger questions: Whether Bond will stay the same or head in a new direction -- and what influence a new studio (Sony) will have on the venerable franchise. The original "Casino" was a spoof on Bond, unlike the new version.
The vitality of actioners like Universal's two "Bourne" films as well as the mockery of pics like "Austin Powers," are forcing the Bond group to mull a rethinking of the format. One possible scenario would borrow from "Batman Begins," by going back to Bond's origins.
"Casino Royale" is meant to be far more than an update of Bond; it's the revelation of the ur Bond -- one going on his first mission, without any baggage.
Haggis' rewrite is expected in a few months time, and Martin Campbell is firmed as director. But that tight production schedule brings up the question of casting.
Speculation on the Internet and British press has centered on sexy, charismatic leading men like Gerard Butler, Hugh Jackman, Daniel Craig and Julian McMahon.
But others suggest it will be a black Bond, played by Colin Salmon! Or it will be a downy-cheeked Bond, played by 22-year-old Henry Cavill! Or a fresh-from-TV Slavic Bond, played by "ER" star Gorin Visnjic!
A nasty bridge-burning spat with the previous 007, Pierce Brosnan, became public last month, with the thesp telling Entertainment Weekly he was dumped from the role and that he was glad to be free of its "cheesy" jokes.
Brosnan apparently had been seeking $25 million plus 5% of the gross, as well as certain bonuses -- demands that led to the Broccolis' rethinking of the role and the franchise.
The Broccolis' restrictions on compensation are turning off some stars (no gross points, thank you) and the three-pic commitment has young thesps a little edgy. (Playing Commander Bond hardly guarantees a launch into stardom, viz George Lazenby.)
And then there's the question of a new studio.
Aside from "Spider-Man," Sony hasn't had much luck with sequels lately ("Bad Boys 2," "Stuart Little 2," "Charlie's Angels 2," "XXX: State of the Union"). It would love a new franchise.
The Broccolis are famously protective and cautious about Bond, but Sony execs are sure to have their own ideas about the series. Haggis is a bold choice, given his "Million Dollar Baby" adaptation and original "Crash" (which he also directed). But how bold do the Broccolis want to get?
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Sept 8, 2005 11:37:30 GMT -5
God, what a tease. ======================================================== 09/08/2005 07:48:20 AM EDT THE EXPRESS PIERCE BROSNAN has slammed the makers of the Bond films for turning down Ewan McGregor for the role on account of his height. Irish actor Pierce, who has donned the 007 tuxedo for four Bond flicks but has not been asked to make another outing, tells us he was astounded after hearing that the Star Wars actor was deemed too short to play Ian Fleming's famously shaken-not-stirred superspy. The bizarre revelation was made days ago in a leaked report from the film's production company which declared 5ft 10in Ewan was an inch-and-a-half shy of the required James Bond height. "Yes, I've just read that, it's ridiculous, " says Pierce, who stands an impressive 6ft 1in. "I thought, that's a stupid reason. Ewan's a fine actor and he's tall anyway. I couldn't believe it." Panic has been rising over casting the next Bond film, Casino Royale. It is scheduled to start filming in the next 12 weeks but no replacement for Pierce has been found. Many names have been bandied about for the part, including Clive Owen (who reportedly turned down the role), Enduring Love star Daniel Craig, 37, Australian X-Men actor Hugh Jackman and Troy star Eric Bana. Pierce, who is 52 and was the fifth actor to play 007, was last year told by producer Barbara Broccoli that his services were no longer required. However, the actor maintains that he may yet appear one more time. "Who knows?" says Pierce. "Let's put it this way, they know where to find me." As to who else he would like to see fill his shoes - Pierce appeared in Die Another Day, The World Is Not Enough, Tomorrow Never Dies and GoldenEye - he adds: "I've said Colin Farrell before but I was told off for that." In the meantime, Pierce has grown a snowy beard for his new role in Seraphim Falls, a psychological thriller set just after the American civil war. "Does the missus like it?" says the actor, stroking his new facial hair. "She says it's like going out with a sloth." Must make a change from supersmooth Bond though. Copyright © 2005 The Express. Source: Financial Times Information Limited - Europe Intelligence Wire. thomson dialog
|
|
|
Post by IcyCalm on Sept 8, 2005 12:48:42 GMT -5
I wonder if it is his or Keely's choice of words: "going out." Going out means the same as they're dating. This is so awsome. Married, two kids, extended family, fast-lane career, socially engaged, etc., etc., and he still refers to "dating" his wife. Utterly spectacular.
I urge all our sons, grandsons, nephews and ittle brothers to make it their business to study Pierce Brosnan's life, because if there ever was one modern man worthy of emulating, he is IT.
IcyCalm
|
|
|
Post by sparklingblue on Sept 8, 2005 15:38:55 GMT -5
This man is unbelievable. Unbelievable.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Sept 12, 2005 17:06:55 GMT -5
From Mi6 with quotes from Pierce in his GQ interview When that interview to the mag isn't known. Mi6 seems to assume it's when he received his award last week but that issue had to go to press well before (at least a month) for it be out on the stands this week. www.mi6.co.uk/sections/articles/bond_21_brosnan_back.php3?t=bond21&s=bond21Pierce Brosnan Set For James Bond Return 12th September 2005 Expecting someone else? As the saying goes in Bond-lore, "never say never"! The turf war over the casting of James Bond for the forthcoming movie "Casino Royale" is about to end. If the trade press reports are anything to go by, Sony, who took over MGM earlier in the year, have been turning down candidates for the "vacant" 007 role proposed by the producers right, left and centre. The casting of 007 is down to four people: Amy Pascal (Sony), Michael G. Wilson and Barbara Broccoli (Eon Productions producers), and Martin Campbell (director of "Casino Royale"). Each party have had their favourites, and due to the much reported failure to find a suitable replacement by the producers, despite their wide reaching casting calls, Sony has come to the inevitable conclusion: if it's not broke, don't fix it. Pierce Brosnan has been hinting to the media over the past few days that the situation has changed and he was willing to step back into the tuxedo for a fifth and final time - if the call from the producers came. Following his `Editors Special Award` earlier this month, Brosnan gave an interview with GQ that revealed the true state of affairs. On the subject of his pay demands for a fifth movie, which was over hyped and overblown by the tabloid press to a staggering figure of £20m ($35m USD), Brosnan set the record straight: "Twenty million? Oh no, rubbish. Oh for God's sake. Bollocks. No way. No, it was a handsome figure of maybe £10 million or something like that. Given what the films make it was a spit in the bucket. I wasn't being greedy. The age issue? Bollocks to that, too." MI6 exclusively reported back in February that the figure Brosnan was allegedly asking for was actually £10m ($17m USD) - a figure now confirmed by Brosnan himself and not that staggering considering he was reportedly paid around $16.5m USD (~£10m) for "Die Another Day". The "too old" rumours which first started in the tabloid press and internet sites back in February 2004 have also been quashed many times. So what do Sony think about their newly acquired franchise being stalled due to the vacant lead role? Brosnan candidly explained, "Sony are pulling their hair out over it, apparently. I was in their offices just a few weeks ago pitching Thomas Crown 2. They said, "come back" and I said "it's not up to me, guys." "I think I was caught up between the egos of the producers and the studios, really. They (the producers) didn't know whether to go younger, they didn't know what to do, period. I don't know what the truth is. It could be as honest as that, but it seems strange, especially as each film made more and more money." But Eon Producers have been silent on the whole affair ever since the first headlines speculated that Brosnan's tenure as 007 was over. "Maybe it's all a big, clever ploy just to bang the drum. We've seen it over the years with Sean and Roger" said Brosnan in the GQ interview. Latest News MI6 has learned that Pierce Brosnan is now the top contender for the role of James Bond in "Casino Royale" after all, due to studio pressure and the lack of an obvious candidate to replace him. No date has been set for an official announcement on the role, but news it imminent. The major shooting location for "Casino Royale" will move to an Atlantic island off the east coast of the USA, and not South Africa as originally planned. Pre-production is on schedule and filming is still set to commence in early January 2006.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Sept 22, 2005 14:31:30 GMT -5
Our latest installment in How The Bond TurnsSony: It Will "Probably" Be PierceCBn confirms Brosnan back in the running...for real this time Written by John Cox (22 Sep, 2005, 10:07) Today CBn is able to confirm that Pierce Brosnan is back in the running to play James Bond in Casino Royale, the 21st James Bond film due to start production in January. In fact, a senior Sony executive has told a member of the Casino Royale production team that the new Bond will "probably" be Pierce Brosnan Many fans will be delighted to hear this news, but some sources close to the producers find it "impossible to conceive" that Eon will cave to the actor who recently savaged them in the media, nor that they will abandon their carefully crafted "reinvention" of the Bond franchise. As it stands, the Casino Royale screenplay is tailored to introduce a new, younger James Bond on one of his first missions as a double-oh agent. Screenwriter Paul Haggis said as recently as last week that the script he is polishing features a 28-year-old James Bond. Also unclear is how director Martin Campbell would react to a Pierce comeback. Pierce and Campbell proved to be a winning combination on GoldenEye in 1995. But Campbell was partially wooed back into the world of 007 with the promise that he would be able to help reinvent that franchise and launch the new Bond. With Pierce back onboard, Casino Royale becomes a much more traditional Bond movie that may hold less appeal for the director. A CBn source says Daniel Craig remains Eon's "preferred" choice for the role, and could still turn out to be the man in gunbarrel. However, the edgy Layer Cake actor may be considered too much of a commercial risk for Sony Pictures. Eon's attempts to find a convincing twenty-something actor appear to have failed, and with only 12 weeks to go before that start of principle photography, Eon and Campbell may have to abandon their ambitions to reinvent the franchise via Ian Fleming's first novel and quickly rework it into Pierce Brosnan's final James Bond film. Pierce, who throughout the process has spoken candidly to the media, recently told citybeat's Steve Ramos, "Until someone like Daniel Craig steps in or until someone like whomever the next man is or until they ask me back the story is still open. For me it's unfinished business and we might get to stand there again." Spy vs Spy: Brosnan & Daniel Craig
|
|
|
Post by sparklingblue on Sept 22, 2005 14:43:22 GMT -5
He "savaged" them, huh? Gee, I'm really sorry for the poor veggies. *goes off to find object to kick or punch*
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Sept 22, 2005 15:03:35 GMT -5
He "savaged" them, huh? Gee, I'm really sorry for the poor veggies. *goes off to find object to kick or punch* Yeah he said things like they were overcontrolling of directors and didn't know where they were going with the franchise - that they were in a state of paralysis-- completely savage remarks if one's target is a twinkie I guess. Also pretty darn accurate. ;D Ace
|
|
|
Post by Barbara on Sept 22, 2005 16:19:56 GMT -5
I can't speak for the rest of my former colleagues at commanderbond.net, who were one of the first to herald Pierce's exit two years ago, but speaking for myself....
I feel like we were played, and put up to doing Eon's dirty work for them. If PB is Sony's choice now, he always was.
Excuse me, while I go start my apology letter to SMA.
-- Barbara
|
|
|
Post by Lauryn on Sept 30, 2005 14:56:27 GMT -5
Inside Move: 'Dallas' saddling up; Bond field narrows Craig, Cavill up for 007 role; Travolta contends for Ewing
By MICHAEL FLEMING for VARIETY
<Boring stuff about "Dallas" movie snipped>
Would-be Bonds
The star wattage dims in an endless James Bond bake-off that should finally conclude after screen tests are completed this week. Latest front-burner names are oft-rumored Daniel Craig, Henry Cavill (a contender in the "Superman" sweepstakes), Sam Worthington and Goran Visnjic.
Lack of star power comes from rights-controlling Broccoli family's unwillingness to break precedent and pay gross points to an 007, which eliminated rumored stars like Clive Owen. They'll surely get their Bond for a fraction of the $25 million or so paid on the last film to Pierce Brosnan before he was dumped. Martin Campbell starts production in January on "Casino Royale" for Sony.
Date in print: Wed., Sep. 28, 2005, Los Angeles
Setting aside the odd notion that Brosnan got 25 million for Die Another Day, leave it to the Borgia family, err, I mean the Broccolis to cleave like barnacles to a business model that predates the Lew Wasserman days of the 50's. Oy! (At least the Borgias were willing to shell out their ducats for the services of da Vinci and Michelangelo, et. al.)
Connery had Cubby's back against the wall in DAF for his percentage I guess but since then it's been no dice. I've beat the discussion about paying points to Bond actors into the ground before, but as we see by that list of finalists you get what you pay for. I have my doubts that they even approached Owen; he can't open a film but even he's of a stature that gets their usual offer laughed out of court. I looked up the Aussie, Sam Worthington, and he looks a cross between Matt Damon and Mark Wahlberg, which puts him back of the line when the the gods handed out big screen charisma. Daniel Craig is a very interesting actor with good voice and presence in the right role. You can slot him as an action lead as a post-modern Brit Steve McQueen, but he's too flinty, ugly, and hardscrabble for Bond. (We only have to go as far as the original Thomas Crown Affair to recall how uncomfortable McQueen looked in a suit.) Things should come rather easily to Bond, with that unstudied elegance that is in his very nature -- but Craig, no matter how you scrub him up, has the look of a chap who's come up through the ranks and done it the hard way.
I hear Daniel Craig is a good friend of Barbara B. socially, so maybe they're sympatico enough that he's willing to take his shot at it, miscast or no.
What was Napoleon's famous quote about the English being a nation of shopkeepers? That's what this generation looks like in comparison to the James Bonds of old (even George Lazenby).
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Sept 30, 2005 15:59:48 GMT -5
PB's salary for DAD was reportedly $16.5 (chump change in the land of blockbusters -- for comparison MGM paid Reese Witherspoon $15m for Legally Blonde 2) But it was probably over $20m when revenues from DVDs were included. I'm sure he gets more than the actor minimum for DVD sales, or he really has been screwed by the Veggie family.
Roger actually did receive points in at least his last film and maybe before so it's been done before outside of Connery holding UA/EON over a barrel with DAF.
As for Owen wanting to receive points, maybe he did but word is he was never offered the role at all. He's also reportedly getting mid 7 figures for his new big action film at New Line -- that's $5-7m (his highest ever paycheck by far). Not exactly an A list salary for a major action film and he probably isn't even receiving points there either, he's not big enough for points.
So this Variety article seems more based on rumor than any actual fact or hard numbers.
Even so EON are notoriously cheap, always have been when it comes to "the talent" and they've probably deluded themselves into believing the latest films were a success regardless of the lead actor.
Considering they
a) want to pay less than the going rate b) lock up the actor for 3 films plus a fourth at their option c) not give points d) work the actor's ass off for publicity more than for any other comparable film
-- they're no doubt finding it hard to lock up even a mid level actor for the role.
With PB they lucked out. He wanted to be Bond, he loved the role, he was even game for the publicity machine. He also needed the role then as much as they needed him. He wasn't A list for any other leading film role in Hollywood at that time but he was A list for that particular role in the public's mind. The public associated him with the role already and wanted him in it for years. His name for the franchise was money in the bank. And his hiring alone was worth millions in free publicity and good will.
If they think they're going to get any of that (setting aside what they lose as in the unique things he brings to the role as an actor) with any of these bargain basement rumored names, they're nuts.
Ace
|
|
|
Post by Lauryn on Sept 30, 2005 16:55:00 GMT -5
PB's salary for DAD was reportedly $16.5 (chump change in the land of blockbusters -- for comparison MGM paid Reese Witherspoon $15m for Legally Blonde 2) But it was probably over $20m when revenues from DVDs were included. I'm sure he gets more than the actor minimum for DVD sales, or he really has been screwed by the Veggie family. I wasn't sure how much of the DVD revenue he was getting on DAD over his salary, or what figure it would come to. And, yeah, if he were getting the minimum (which is sparse, indeed) he is getting screwed. Right, I think he may have for AVTAK, but you could count that as a nice retirement package sort of thing. Cubby was at least that generous. I'd agree, but even mid-level actors that aren't proven ask for them and Bond is a major, established franchise and the job a long hard slog over three films with lots of foreign travel and publicity involved. Owen might well have balked without points, or at least, the promise of them down the line, contingent on his performance. Even without that issue, though, as you say, the impression sticks that Eon want someone malleable and relatively cheap and are not seriously considering bigger names, so there is doubt that Owen's case would ever be put to the test. Those of us in the reality-based community would beg to differ, LOL!
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Oct 2, 2005 10:08:47 GMT -5
Well, with all these rumours of the next Bond going around, I would just like to ask if any of the members here have a personal hunch or maybe faintest faith that PB would be back as Bond?
|
|
|
Post by curious george on Oct 5, 2005 9:05:48 GMT -5
My understanding is that he's pretty much ruled it out.
cg
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Oct 5, 2005 12:20:24 GMT -5
The latest in the rumor mill: More 'Royale' Details from Campbell Press Conference
Pinewood shooting, plot details, and rumour controlWritten by John Cox (05 Oct, 2005, 09:22) Swedish news-site, vlt.se has reported more details about Casino Royale, the 21st James Bond film due to start production in January, revealed at Martin Campbell's Legend of Zorro press conference in Paris on Monday. Besides confirming the information that appeared on the Club 007 France website yesterday [see CBn story], Campbell added that not only is Pierce Brosnan not Bond in the new film, but he specifically stated that recent rumours about Brosnan being a "back-up" in case they fail to find someone else are wrong. "Because it's a young Bond, we need a young actor," said Campbell. He added that recent reports claiming Sienna Miller is signed as the leading lady are also wrong. Campbell also shot down rumours that a name star, like Clive Owen, wanted the part. "That has been wrongful speculation," said Campbell. "Everybody must realize that it's almost impossible to persuade an actor who already has a successful film career to sign the dotted line. The contract is for three films in a row." The director then revealed some juicy plot information. The new film will largely be based on the original Ian Fleming novel, with "the second half of the novel pretty much intact." The film will be "a mixture of the novel's down-to-earth realism and the traditional Bond film gadget-extravaganza." As to the James Bond regular cast members, Campbell confirmed Judi Dench is back as 'M' and John Cleese as 'Q', but Samantha Bond will not be returning as Miss Moneypenny. Campbell also confirmed CBn's report that the production has moved from South Africa to The Bahamas. Campbell then added that while the bulk of studio work will be done in Prague, at least a few days will be spent at Pinewood shooting on the Albert R. Broccoli 007 Stage. "There are some traditions you can't depart from," says Campbell. ==================== Shows Campbell at least (and really he's a for hire director so I have no idea even why he's getting this kind of imput --- oh yeah I forget he's solely responsible for the success of Goldeneye and all the films afterwards) wants a snot nosed Bond. Oh and very amusing how Clive (41 years old and looks older) isn't Bond because he's too hard to sign because he has a film career. (No mention also that getting any experienced actor to sign on to their draconian long term cheapo contracts is "hard") But not because say he's too OLD to be a 28 yr old Bond. But Pierce who actually wanted the role, his role, who is a bigger star, isn't in the frame cause he isn't 28. A snot nosed 28 yr old Bond that still has Judi Dench as M and John Cleese as Q when they're NEW characters introduced to an older experienced Bond who worked with and remembers their predeccsors! Idiotic but then almost everything rumored about this film and it's casting is. I give up. Ace
|
|
|
Post by curious george on Oct 5, 2005 12:52:22 GMT -5
Yeah, I wondered about that, too! And as y'all know, I'm not even a Bond follower. But how weird is it to keep the same supporting actors in the same roles when the whole storyline is going back decades? Strange. But what does a monkey know? cg
|
|