|
Post by Ace on Apr 7, 2005 21:04:46 GMT -5
In fairness, I should note that Craig, though he was brought up in Liverpool, can do a posh accent, by all accounts, when it's called for -- which puts him a rung above Clive Owen on the Bond ladder. DC does a decent Irish / American accent in "Perdition", too. Still doesn't change the fact that he looks like a bruiser, (or a KGB agent -- not his opposite number) is a character actor, not an iconic leading man, and appears to be ageing at a rather brisk pace. Agreed, Craig has a far better speaking voice than Owen, but yeesh he's unattractive to be it milldly and the fact that he's only 37 is positively shocking. Maybe EON has leaked this so Owen will look better in comparison, I wouldn't put it past them. Ace
|
|
|
Post by Lauryn on Apr 7, 2005 21:28:43 GMT -5
Babs also wanted Dalton (but then she had him in more ways than one ) I like Sean Bean alot, and he's far better looking than Craig or Owen but yeah he wasn't suited for the role of Bond either, though he'd have made a better one than Owen or Craig. Ace Sean Bean at least has good presence and charisma even if he can't quite lose the regionalisms in his accent, though he makes a valiant effort. You can still hear those traces of Sheffield in Alec T. I like him in a lot of other roles, not for Bond. He's really aces in the Richard Sharpe series though he doesn't sound like the dockside dregs of London fellow he should be as Sharpe, either, LOL!
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Apr 12, 2005 1:35:59 GMT -5
A nice round up of rumors, actually labeling them as rumors and documenting how the rumour mill operates A quibble; the writer doesn't seem to understand that most blockbusters (and many smaller films) now unless very US centric regularly do much more business over seas (and Bond has always made more overseas) . The market is *gasp* bigger out there. Houston Chronicle: So far, all James Bond updates are rumors, just rumorsBy LOUIS B. PARKS April 11, 2005, 5:06PM It's a stirring but shaky time for Bond, James Bond. Rumors fly like bullets from a Walther PPK. Will the next film, Casino Royale, be retro and gritty, like the first Sean Connery Bonds, or over-the-top, high-tech glitzy like the last one, 2002's Die Another Day? And when will Bond's bosses � at Eon Productions and MGM/Sony � make up their minds and get started? Five different Bonds have appeared in the 20 "official" 007 films (not counting brand-x Never Say Never Again and the parody version of Casino Royale). Every change of actor brings months of wild rumors. Pierce Brosnan has anchored the last four Bond films, and there has been some speculation that he could return for the fifth. But his is hardly the only name circulating. This time the Bond guessing, fueled by the Internet, has been rampant and often absurd. "There are a few pathetic, pasty-skinned, wifeless guys who sit in their apartments in London with nothing better to do than make up crap," says an irate John Cork, author of James Bond: The Legacy and director of many "behind the scenes" Bond documentaries. Even the flimsiest Bond rumor now gets treated with astounding respect. Internet reports, based more on wishful thinking than anything substantial, surface almost daily. What is scarier than Oddjob's bowler is how many mainstream media reports buy into the e-rumors. A fan site prints a rumor on a Monday, a tabloid runs it as "has been reported news" on Tuesday and its denied by the actors or producers on Wednesday. But by then a score of other papers are printing it as fact. Most of those were non-U.S. newspapers, but some domestic papers also joined in. "Someone hears something and it gets out there," says Brad Frank, a prominent Bond collector. While all things Bond stir rumors among the faithful, casting a new 007 fires interest in even casual fans. Among the most recognized film characters in the world, Bond made stars of Connery and Roger Moore, though he did little for George Lazenby and Timothy Dalton. The guessing game seems to have been reduced to two. Clive Owen, the 40-year-old who was an Oscar nominee this year for Closer and who has been mentioned as a future James Bond since his 1998 breakout film Croupier, headed some lists. Others were topped by 37-year-old Daniel Craig (Tomb Raider) a virtual unknown here but more recognized in Europe where Bond films do best. Owen would probably have more advance appeal in the American market, where the Bond folks desperately want to score better. Though U.S. box office shot up with Pierce Brosnan, even his Bond films did about $100 million less here than in the rest of the world. After Owen gave a vague response to the Bond question at a Sin City premiere, fans twisted it into saying he would be Bond. A few days later the London paper the Sunday Express said Owen had signed for Casino Royale, and that it would be announced this week. (Still waiting.) Last week Owen again denied he has even been contacted about it. But stories kept appearing in newspapers, mostly foreign, for days, all based on the first reports. Last Tuesday the British tabloid the Sun "revealed" that Craig had definitely been offered the job in a three-picture deal. That story was picked up by several other news publications and run as fact as late as Friday. They ignored an April 6 BBC report saying Eon was refusing to comment on all casting rumors and stories, including the Craig signing. On Thursday some papers reported that Craig flatly denied he would play Bond but others kept saying he was it. Then, bam, all those rumors were topped by the biggest Bond rumor of all: Brosnan was coming back. According to this story, the yearlong split between Brosnan and Bond producers had all been posturing because Brosnan had wanted a huge fee to do another Bond and Eon and MGM had balked. Brosnan had feigned disinterest. Eon, perhaps calling his bluff, said it was planning to take Bond back to his start (Casino Royale was author Ian Fleming's first Bond book) in a grittier, more realistic story. (The film would be set in current times, not the early 1950s like the book.) Though reported as fact in several newspapers, the Brosnan-return story got its start, like so many others, on a fan site. Even the site, www.darkhorizons.com, said it was an unconfirmed story from an unverified "MGM insider," so "take it with a grain of salt." But guessing had gotten too furious for that to get in the way of a story many fans were eager to believe. As late as Monday some papers were still reporting either the Brosnan or the Craig story as fact. The truth should be close at hand. Last Friday's completion of the Sony purchase of MGM may affect everything from the tone of the film (the studio is expected to want a high-tech film, Eon wants the more realistic style) to who gets the role. The studio is believed to prefer going back to Brosnan, a proven 007. Eon boss Barbara Broccoli is, well, rumored, to prefer a new actor. The Sony deal should move things forward. And none too soon. The long-delayed film is supposed to shoot later this year for release in November, 2006, four years after Die Another Day. That's the longest break in the 43-year Bond franchise since legal complications caused a six-year hiatus between Licence to Kill (1989) and GoldenEye (1995), when Brosnan replaced Dalton as 007.
|
|
Kristýna
Jewel Thief
"?ivot napodobuje to, co jsme si vysnili." (Agent z Panamy)
Posts: 172
|
Post by Kristýna on Apr 12, 2005 8:15:36 GMT -5
So do you think, Pierce is gonna continue with the role?? I want him tö be Bond, noone else
|
|
|
Post by Yuliya on Apr 17, 2005 13:33:02 GMT -5
Posted by Chayna to another group. My kingdom for a BondMore than 70 contenders and still no new 007. Surely it can't be that difficult to find an actor to tread in Connery and Brosnan's footsteps - can it? Jason Solomons Sunday April 17, 2005 The Observer In the light of current events, the beginning of Ian Fleming's novel Thunderball seems strangely prescient: 'It was one of those days when it seemed to James Bond that all life was nothing but a heap of six to four against.' The race to become the next James Bond has been the favourite topic of conversation inside film circles for months, but, although Pierce Brosnan retired last year, it seems we are no closer to finding a successor. No other film role engenders as much public debate and speculation as Bond, especially in the British media and the list of actors who have been linked with the role of MI6's best known operative is growing. It's a fascinating process because, in all likelihood, the new Bond will be a youngish actor from these shores who finds himself propelled to global prominence and stardom. So we feel we can cheer him on. As Philip Larkin once wrote of the Bond novels: 'Far from being orgies of sex and sadism, they are nostalgic excursions... England is always right, foreigners are always wrong.' Last month, William Hill closed the 007 book after heavy betting on Dougray Scott, then reopened it when he wasn't confirmed in the role. Two weeks ago, Clive Owen was favourite to don the tux. Then, last week, Brosnan was back in the picture. But then, a day later, Daniel Craig charged up on the inside, dashing past a pack of challengers as diverse as Ioan Gruffudd, Gerard Butler, Dominic West, Nip/Tuck's Julian McMahon, Colin Salmon, Hugh Jackman, Rupert Everett and Ewan McGregor. Craig is in America, filming with Sandra Bullock, and hasn't even been screen-tested yet. His 'people' are no fools, though, and confirmed Daniel, among others, has been approached and is extremely flattered. EON, the production company formed by Cubby Broccoli and Harry Saltzman to make the Bond films, maintains a poker face. 'We haven't even started preproduction,' says a spokesperson. 'There is no James Bond yet cast. All we can confirm is that it definitely will not be Pierce Brosnan, the film will be called Casino Royale, it is being written by Neal Purvis and Robert Wade and it will be directed by Martin Campbell. If you want anything more, ring back in a couple of months.' Another source at EON told me that the earliest the new Bond can now be expected is the end of 2006 but also revealed that there's a list up in the company's office detailing all the actors who have so far been put forward by British newspapers. 'There are 72 names on there,' I'm informed. 'One of them's a dwarf and two are women.' A newspaper recently suggested Adrian Lester for the role: 'He's impeccably English, he knows how to wear a suit and tie, and he is capable of being as arch and twinkly as Roger Moore, and he can also act.' So I ask Lester, currently starring in the latest series of Hustle, and he is as surprised as anyone by his inclusion in the race. 'Being mentioned has done me a lot of favours,' he says. 'I don't know how it happened, but the phone went mad, the photographers turned up outside my house and, without even having entered, I was in the running.' Lester, I understand, has now been considered by EON and is a possible Bond. He's on that list, anyway. So why has casting one of the world's great film roles become some sort of reality TV show? I'm surprised Endemol, the TV production company behind Big Brother, hasn't yet come up with Bond Idol, putting hopefuls through exhausting auditions - the dealing with Miss Moneypenny scene, the walk, turn and shoot bit for the opening titles, the withering aside to a villain. Bond, after all, is merely a series of nine moves, as once defined in a famous essay by Italian critic Umberto Eco in a book called Il Caso Bond. Writing about Ian Fleming's novels, Eco observed: 'The reader knows the game, its pieces and its rules - and, perhaps, its outcome - and thus draws pleasure from the minimal variations by which the victor draws his outcome.' Bond also inspires avid fan worship and various chatrooms hum with the opinions of devotees. The James Bond International Fan Club is probably the largest such organisation and its chairman, David Black, has been unsettled by all the current speculation. 'It's getting a bit messy and needs to be sorted out soon,' he said. 'Our members take this very seriously and get quite emotional. But all the indecision is nothing new - Sean Connery said he'd never do it again several times, Roger Moore retired at least three times. Our younger members think Pierce is the best-ever Bond and they want him back. Older fans fancy a change.' The casting process has become a public sport, cruel on openly shunned contestants but, it seems, a shrewd game on the producers' part. Anxious to avoid a repeat of the unpopular miscasting of George Lazenby in On Her Majesty's Secret Service in the Sixties, and later Timothy Dalton in the Eighties, the recent delays and leaks have allowed them to gauge public reaction. Clive Owen had some critical support at first and, had he been called on, was generally agreed to have been up to it. But then King Arthur came out and everyone decided Clive was a bit boring. One reason for the deluge of possible Bonds is the now-complete takeover of MGM, the studio that owns the franchise, by Sony. The new studio could do with a surefire box-office hit. A successful Bond fits that $500-million-plus bill. Revisiting Casino Royale seemed like a good idea when the film was originally scheduled for this year; after all, the Batman franchise was going back to its roots for its next instalment and this was to be the year that Star Wars would finally catch up with itself. By the end of 2006, however, this prequel penchant could be out of fashion and Bond has been struggling with the 'dinosaur' tag since Judi Dench's M labelled him thus in GoldenEye a decade ago. Mike Myers's success in sending up the spy game with the Austin Powers series hasn't helped either, although Bond spoofs have been around since James Coburn's mid-Sixties Flint films and Woody Allen, who played Jimmy Bond in the original Casino Royale, double spoofed the genre in What's Up Tiger Lily? by turning a series of Japanese Bond ripoffs about a spy called Jiro Kitami into a story about agent Phil Moscowitz tracing the secret recipe for egg salad. Ian Fleming's novels don't give a casting director much to work with - 'He was good-looking in a dark, rather cruel way' is the best-known description, from The Spy Who Loved Me - but the casting of our most famous spy has been a tabloid front page ever since Sean Connery got the gig, famously against Ian Fleming's wishes. The part had initially been offered to Cary Grant and Fleming desperately wanted David Niven. His reaction to Connery was a surprisingly terse: 'Not exactly what I envisioned.' Broccoli, who ultimately held the power in such matters and gradually edged out Fleming's influence altogether, also wanted Patrick McGoohan, but the actor turned it down as he considered Bond sexist and violent. Broccoli has also confessed to considering Lord Lucan, James Brolin, Michael Billington (who screen-tested five times for the role), Batman star Adam West and even the Swingometer's Peter Snow, who auditioned for On Her Majesty's Secret Service but was considered too tall. Ian Ogilvy, Liam Neeson, Sam Neill and Hugh Grant have all also been contenders. Casting the right Bond is, clearly, key to the success of the films. Then come equally anticipated casting stories for the Bond girls, the Bond villains, the Bond cars. But, after Bond himself, the story that creates the biggest public interest each time is casting the singer of the new theme tune. film.guardian.co.uk/features/featurepages/0,4120,1461480,00.html
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Apr 17, 2005 13:41:00 GMT -5
Yeah I read it. Talk about burying the lead in one's story though. And even this announcement from EON seems to have only come in answer to a phone call and isn't an offiical written press release. And still no statements directly by Broccoli or Wilson. Frankly it's all such a mess now I'm pretty much beyond caring.
Ace
|
|
|
Post by Myrtle Groggins on Apr 17, 2005 20:59:49 GMT -5
So, no new Bond yet? They had a perfectly good Bond. The idiots! I hope they lose tons of money trying to cast someone else. ha ha ha Would serve them right. I can just see the headlines now: March 31, 2052 James Bond has just entered his latest re-incarnation since Pierce Brosnan was bumped for the role nearly a half-century ago. It was difficult to replace Pierce because no one alive at the time could measure up to his portrayal of Commander Bond. Production up all Bond films had to be delayed until a suitable actor could be born and grow up! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Apr 17, 2005 21:30:32 GMT -5
So, no new Bond yet? They had a perfectly good Bond. The idiots! I hope they lose tons of money trying to cast someone else. ha ha ha Would serve them right. I can just see the headlines now: March 31, 2052 James Bond has just entered his latest re-incarnation since Pierce Brosnan was bumped for the role nearly a half-century ago. It was difficult to replace Pierce because no one alive at the time could measure up to his portrayal of Commander Bond. Production up all Bond films had to be delayed until a suitable actor could be born and grow up! ;D Is that when they then reveal it took them that long to grow a Pierce clone from the tissue sample they took when his knee was operated on during DAD? Ace
|
|
|
Post by Yuliya on Apr 18, 2005 10:29:53 GMT -5
I think they can use hair clippings - they should've been collecting them. The clone will certainly be younger than the original but how can they make sure he's also more agreeable? Clones are not cheap these days, especially with the cost of production and finding the place where human cloning is not illegal. So, Ace, should we not post rumors anyomre or only those you haven't read yet?
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Apr 18, 2005 17:00:46 GMT -5
I think they can use hair clippings - they should've been collecting them. The clone will certainly be younger than the original but how can they make sure he's also more agreeable? Clones are not cheap these days, especially with the cost of production and finding the place where human cloning is not illegal. Rick's his Bond haridresser, my guess he guards those stray and cut follicles with his life. Only if you're only only positng them for my benefit. But I've heard a rumor that the world does not in fact revolve around me. Shocking but most likely true. Ace
|
|
|
Post by Barbara on Apr 18, 2005 17:56:11 GMT -5
I've decided for my mental health that I will only believe that it is over for Pierce when SONY says they have a new Bond.
Let's remember gang, the Guidette (femine of Guido) B**** does not call the shots. Sony does.
Love...B
|
|
|
Post by Yuliya on Apr 18, 2005 18:33:35 GMT -5
Rick's his Bond haridresser, my guess he guards those stray and cut follicles with his life. That's on DAD; there were other before and they should've kept the hair from 1986 auditions, too. I'm not saying they did, just that they should have. Oh, here's a horrendous thought. What if they didn't keep any hair or tissue sample and now go to eBay and buy those used band aids or nail clippings MysteryNetters hinted about, and they clone themselves a fake Pierce and feel complelled to use him anyway just like they used the wave sequence in DAD?! Only if you're only only positng them for my benefit. But I've heard a rumor that the world does not in fact revolve around me. Shocking but most likely true. Don't believe everything you hear. And no, I don't post them for your benefit; I know you've read them, too. I've decided for my mental health that I will only believe that it is over for Pierce when SONY says they have a new Bond. And show him, too. I stopped taking this seriously long ago. But that's not a reason to stop discussing it, is that?
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Apr 26, 2005 9:00:47 GMT -5
Stop discussing? How can one when there are always things like think cropping up:
NY Post- Page Six
Byline: Cindy Adams
HE'S BOND-ED TO THE ROLE OF JAMES April 26, 2005 -- DAME Judi Dench was here drum- beating for her "Ladies in Lavender" movie, which co-stars Dame Maggie Smith. Dame Judi, a major player in the 007 films, says cool, suave Pierce Brosnan, who's so great as James Bond, will still do his "shaken not stirred" shtick when those cameras roll again. Earlier, I'd asked Pierce if he had the go-ahead to continue in the next go-round as James Bond, and he'd said he "didn't know." Now, there is nothing like a dame, and this one says, "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."
|
|
|
Post by sparklingblue on Apr 26, 2005 12:25:59 GMT -5
Dame Judi has a endearingly positive perspective, hasn't she?
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Apr 27, 2005 9:24:29 GMT -5
BBC: Bond team quiet on Brosnan returnJames Bond producers have refused to confirm reports that Pierce Brosnan will return to play 007 in the next movie in the series, Casino Royale. Dame Judi Dench - who played Bond's boss M in the last four films - said Brosnan would reprise the role, the Mirror newspaper reported. A spokesperson for production company Eon said: "No cast members, locations or release dates can be confirmed." Spokesmen for Brosnan and Dame Judi were unavailable on Wednesday. 'Changed minds' Wednesday's Mirror quoted Dame Judi as saying: "Despite the fact that everyone on the face of the earth has been tested as his (Brosnan's) possible replacement, he'll be doing it again and it will be announced come summer." Goldeneye director Martin Campbell will start work on the next Bond film after making The Legend of Zorro, which is due to be released in October. Casino Royale will be based on author Ian Fleming's first James Bond book, following a 1967 spoof spy movie of the same name which starred the late David Niven. Brosnan, who played the spy in four Bond films from 1995 to 2002, said last November that film-makers originally cast him in the next 007 movie but subsequently changed their minds. He said he was "angry" at the decision but he also felt a "great sense of liberation". "I thought they did me a favour, really," he said on BBC One's Friday Night with Jonathan Ross. "Leave while you're on top." Following his announcement numerous actors have been linked to the role, including Clive Owen, Jude Law, Hugh Jackman, Dougray Scott and Colin Salmon - who would become the first black actor to play Bond if selected. Last month 37-year-old Enduring Love actor Daniel Craig was the latest to be linked to the 007 role in Casino Royale, which is due to be released in 2006. If a new actor is selected, he will be the sixth official James Bond after Brosnan, Timothy Dalton, Roger Moore, George Lazenby and Sean Connery.
|
|
|
Post by Myrtle Groggins on Apr 27, 2005 18:25:51 GMT -5
Thanks for the article. I just saw it on the BBC website and thought I'd make sure everyone is in the know...or not knowing....whatever. I'm hoping Pierce will be back because I'm not ready to give up on him as Bond. He's perfect in my eyes.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on May 17, 2005 20:13:43 GMT -5
Several Bond sites are reporting that Bond will not start filming until summer 2006 and give variety as the source. The full article below htough states teyre still aiming for early 2006 to start filming. VarietyMay 17, 2005 By STEVEN GAYDOS As word circulates along the Croisette that the next James Bond pic is in advanced talks to move from its historic U.K. production base at Pinewood to Prague's Barrandov Studios, it became clear that "Casino Royale" won't be ready to start shooting until early 2006. As recently as a few days ago, Bond's producers were understood still to be juggling their options between Barrandov, Ciudad De La Luz in Alicante, Spain, and South Africa, with a view to start pre-production this summer. Several sources close to the production said Pinewood was no longer to be part of the equation. An Eon spokesperson in London was tight-lipped about the move to Barrandov, commenting, "We haven't confirmed any of our locations for 'Casino Royale.' We're awaiting our director Martin Campbell who should come aboard in June, and we hope to start shooting in January 2006, although there's no definitive date." Barrandov Studios did not wish to comment on the reports, but the production community in Prague is reported to be actively gearing up for Bond's arrival. These reports of Bond's defection have sent shock waves through the U.K. film industry still reeling from Paramount's decision to pull "Watchmen" from Pinewood. But British sources counselled caution: "If you're producing a film on the scale of Bond, you book space at studios all over the place -- Pinewood, Barrandov, Spain. That doesn't mean the decision has been made where it will shoot," said one insider.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on May 18, 2005 10:36:00 GMT -5
Daily Bulletin: 007's producer renews Bond with alma materIf any Harvey Mudd students were disappointed by the lack of gunplay, special effects and babes in the commencement speech Sunday by James Bond's movie producer, they didn't let on. Michael G. Wilson, a 1963 alumnus of the Claremont science and engineering school, urged graduates to be goodwill ambassadors among the science-poor public. He opened by quickly dealing with the Bond curiosity. "I know that many of you have questions about the next James Bond film," Wilson said. "I generally get asked the same questions wherever I go. I've found that nine answers will take care of most of those questions."
Without naming the questions, he gave this answer: "I don't know which actor; Jan. 17; Oct. 19, 2006; Aston Martin; "Casino Royale'; Martin Campbell; Prague and South Africa; yes, Judi Dench will be back; and no, Halle Berry won't reprise, but I'd love to make another film with her."
To translate for non-Bond fans: who will play Bond; when does filming begin; when's it coming out; which car will Bond drive; what's the title; who's the director; where are the locations; who will play M.; and is Jinx in it.(You're welcome.) Earlier, I had some time with Wilson, who's been involved with Bond since 1974's "The Man With the Golden Gun" through the most recent film, 2002's "Die Another Day," starring Pierce Brosnan. I put the obvious question to him first. "Bond fans are concerned about the casting," I informed him gravely. "Is it true Madonna won't be back?" "I hate to break it to your fans," Wilson replied, "but it's the truth." Actually, the lack of a Madonna cameo was good news. Wilson made only one other definitive comment. Roger Moore, who expressed a desire to play a Bond bad guy, won't: "He was Bond, he can't be a villain."
All other questions about Bond's future were gently deflected.
"Whenever we make a statement like "no,' or "never,' I tend to eat my words," Wilson said.Just like when he decided against a career in entertainment. His parents were actors -- his father, Lewis Wilson, was the screen's first Batman, in 1943 -- and his stepfather, Albert "Cubby" Broccoli, was a movie producer. "I thought it was too flaky," said Wilson, who went in the opposite direction. He pursued the sciences at Harvey Mudd, then got a law degree from Stanford after law classes at Claremont Men's College proved more intriguing than science. While his stepfather was producing Bond movies, Wilson spent eight years as a tax attorney. I suppose that gave him a license to bill. Wilson, though, took a two-year leave of absence to sort out money issues for Broccoli involving co-producer Harry Saltzman, then stayed on to help in a creative capacity. He came up with the ski jump stunt in "The Spy Who Loved Me" and the free fall in "Moonraker," in which Bond wrestles a parachute away from a bad guy in midair. "I guess it was in my blood," Wilson said. He co-wrote and co-produced the 1980s movies. After Broccoli's death, Wilson and his stepsister, Barbara, took control of the series with 1995's "GoldenEye." Has his science training at Mudd helped? "I like the science to make sense," Wilson said. "The technology may be a little beyond the current. But I like to think if somebody put a lot of money and effort into it, they could do it." Fine, but I wasn't sure that explained Bond's invisible car from "Die Another Day." Wilson said the U.S. Army has a rough version of the technology as a cloaking device for tanks, then admitted: "I think we went a little far afield with that one." On Wilson's last visit to Mudd, a professor had told him the Bond series keeps the science "pretty tight." A pleased Wilson said: "Somebody cares." He volunteered the subject of his personal collections -- among them Renaissance-era books, which he donated to Mudd's library, and photography, his real passion. He started a photography archive, staffed by a curator and two assistants, with an emphasis on 19th-century work. He admitted it's more fun to talk about photography than about Bond, in part because there's less pressure. Nobody's blogging about the Wilson Centre for Photography. "I live in a fishbowl," Wilson said. "You can't have a casual remark. So I am somewhat guarded speaking about Bond." I'm relieved he didn't say he could tell me more about Bond, but then he'd have to kill me. Allen, David Allen writes Wednesday, Friday and Sunday. E-mail d_allen@dailybulletin.com , call (909) 483-9339 or write 2041 E. Fourth St., Ontario 91764. ========================================== Basically, Wilson gives the targeted start date and locations. Oh and definative non-casting confirmation on Madonna, Halle Berry and Roger Moore which is what we all really wanted to know, right? Interesting that he doesn't make the no one is cast as Bond yet but it definitely won't be Pierce that was attributed to some nameless EON spokespeerson last month. Ace
|
|
|
Post by Barbara on May 18, 2005 16:50:23 GMT -5
Everyone deep breath and repeat after me....
I (insert name)....will not listen to anymore gossip.....about who will play James Bond.....until the press conference announcing the cast.
-- B
|
|
|
Post by Yuliya on May 18, 2005 20:43:47 GMT -5
Tired, eh? Well, unless I'm confused on your nicks (and I don't think I am) you can't really stop, though can certainly wish for a safe harbor. Do they have to announce the main lead no later than on the first day of filming on can they stall some more, filming around in the meantime?
|
|