New Casino Royale stills

I really don’t get all this hate for Craig. Just because he’s blond? Come on. I see no reason why he can’t do a good job.

I really don’t understand Eva Green, though. As Bond producers you’ve pretty much got your pick of the most beautiful actresses in the world, and THAT’S who you pick? Even fully glammed up as Vesper Lynd, she still looks like a painted crackwhore to me.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/2006/casino/royale1.php

Well, there was a report that Craig got in the car to start a driving shot and had to announce that he couldn’t drive stick. That’s kind of weak, but in the end, I think he could prove to be an interesting Bond.

Eva Green was a mistake, in my opinion. But on the good side, she can act, so that also might makes things more interesting.

Didn’t that turn out to be bullshit, though? I never thought it sounded right. Craig is British. If you’re British and you have a driver’s license, you can almost certainly drive a stick.

I could’ve sworn I heard that about Brosnan back when Goldeneye came out.

No way I heard it about Timothy Dalton when he did The Living Daylights.

No way I heard it about Roger Moore in Cannonball Run I.

Edited because Whitta humbled me. :(

Roger Moore was in the original Cannonball Run, not the sequel. And I thought we had real cineastes on this board!

You have seen The Dreamers, right? If you can see that movie–well, if you can suffer through it–and still say you don’t understand Eva Green despite how terrible most of the Bonds photos make her look, well… you just have different tastes in women.

As Bond producers you’ve pretty much got your pick of the most beautiful actresses in the world, and THAT’S who you pick?

But they don’t have the pick of the most beautiful actresses in the world. Being a “Bond girl” isn’t a big thing any more, particularly with a new, unknown Bond.

Meh… the Bond girl is close to irrelevant. And to some extent so is the Bond. I am far more worried about “re-imaging” of Bond than I am of the person they picked to play Bond. New Bond, chance to change things. Overall I want light action Bond (like we have seen), and must wait and hope that the director agrees with me.

I especially fear the continuation of the “serious director” Bond. Bond does not need subtext! Lee Tamahori/Micheal Apted are hacks!

Tell that to Halle Berry, Sophie Marceau, Denise Richards and Michelle Yeoh, who were the four most recent Bond girls.

And if anything, having a new Bond re-energizes the franchise and makes the next movie a bigger deal. That’s partly why they switch them every few films. Brosnan wanted to make another Bond and his movies have been hits, but there’s a huge groundswell of media buzz and public interest around the first movie unveiling of a new Bond.

I fear you are going to be disappointed when you read this story:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060310/en_nm/bond_dc

Sophie Marceau and Denise Richards haven’t really gone anywhere, and unfortunately neither has Isabella Scurpico or whatever. Sure they’ve been in other movies but not a whole heck of a lot of anything. Marceau most notably was snorting coke, Denise Richards kicked Charlie Sheen to the curb and Isabella was in Vertical Limit and that’s it.

In fact Bond girls have bene famous for not launching careers more often than not.

— Alan

That story makes me a lot more interested in Casino Royale. Looks like they’re really going to try to capture the Bond in that first book. Not sure I entirely buy the stripped-down approach and lack of gadgets, as they’ve been lying about that since GoldenEye. But this does look promising.

I wonder if the next step is remakes? It’d be interesting to remake some of the Bond classics, now that they’re supposedly rebooting the whole franchise. A new Goldfinger or You Only Live Twice would be sort of nifty, and would really rev up interest in the franchise if Casino is a hit. I’d rather see remakes, or adaptations of the latter-day Bond books like the Gardiner ones, than all-new stories and scripts, as I don’t trust the Hollywood approach. All of the “whole cloth” Bonds featuring Brosnan were awful.

Still think that the best bet for the series would have been to go back to the 60s, though. Maybe a fill-in-the-blanks approach setting new movies between the old Connery ones. They had a real window to get into that in the late 90s when the Austin Powers movies had kids interested in spy flicks from that era. But instead we got racing avalanches and invisible cars. Ugh.

Yeah, that Halle Berry “Jinx” spinoff they talked about was huge. Oh wait, she did Catwoman instead.

Being a Bond girls used to launch careers. Those actresses were all established. Now the new generation of hotties doesn’t see it as a launching pad for bigger or better things, not with them getting so much publicity elsewhere.

That’s partly why they switch them every few films. Brosnan wanted to make another Bond and his movies have been hits, but there’s a huge groundswell of media buzz and public interest around the first movie unveiling of a new Bond.

Craig was probably cheaper.

Supposedly Green was something like the tenth actress the producers approached for the part, after being turned down by all the others. Which I suppose says something about how much respect the franchise commands these days.

Most of the Bond actor changes are because the actors are either sick of being Bond and/or typecast as Bond (Dalton and Brosnan, and basically Connery), get too old (Moore, and Brosnan is in his 50s already), or just didn’t work out at all (Lazenby).

Brosnan of course was typecast as Bond even before he was Bond so was rather unique.

Sean Bean would have been a great Bond had he not been in Goldeneye as the friend then villain.

Originally I thought Clive Owen would have been great, but watching him in the movies since he got his name on the radar with The Driver series I have a lot of doubts now… he just doesn’t seem right.

I still like Ewen McGregor for it.

— Alan

Frankly, I haven’t looked forward to a Bond movie this much since Goldeneye.

Brosnan was typecast as Bond for years before he got the part. He was offered the job after Moore and wanted it, but couldn’t get out of his contract for “Remington Steele.” But once he got it, he tried to turn Bond from the misogynist cold-blooded killer in a tux into a more “sensitive” Bond.

Reading Whitta’s link to the Bond preview makes me think, “Holy shit, they may actually get this one right.”

And nobody better say anything even remotely bad about Lazenby. Lazenby was excellent; he just got ran over by a train named Connery.

I don’t think Brosnan is too old; wasn’t the problem one of money?

Money primarily. I think Brosnan wanted $20 or $25 million. But age was a factor too- he wasn’t planning on doing more than one more. So from the standpoint of EON, they were going to have to switch Bond actors soon anyway.

Personally, I think they made a mistake dropping Brosnan now. He has wanted to do a more “back to basics” Bond for a while now and I think they would have an easier time with public acceptance if it had been with someone the audience already knows and likes in the role.

What steve is trying to say, Gary, is Green is so hot in The Dreamers you may very well work up a batch to her in it, like I did. 2 or 3 times.

I’m fine with whatever nameless dude that is who’s playing Bond, but man that picture with him holding the gun, he looks like Nic Cage and Kevin Spacey’s love child.