• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

James Bond franchise--the return of SPECTRE and Blofeld?

This is the first time Bond has worn a white tux since Moore left the role. Neither Brosnan nor Dalton were ever seen in one.

As with the shot of Craig in a black polo neck and the Day of the Dead scenes, the picture is a reminder that Live and Let Die is apparently Mendes' favourite 007 picture.
 
I dunno, he's never given the impression he's that happy with the role, and it seems to be the presence of Mendes that has pepped him up during the last two films and Mendes has made it clear this will be his last Bond so maybe Daniel Craig is thinking now might be a good time to bale?

Or for all we know he might do a fifth and even sign on for a sixth, or the producers might decide the time is right to replace him (whatever its faults Die Another Day was phenomenally successful yet they still had no compunction in ditching Brosnan after all)

We'll just have to wait and see.

Brosnan left on his own, there were money problems and he didn't like the idea of playing a 50 year Bond after seeing what happened Roger Moore.
 
^ That's not true, Brosnan has made it clear on numerous occasions that he was happy to return. He was pretty much kept in the dark until he saw reports that Eon were looking for a new 007.

http://www.gq.com/story/pierce-brosnan-bond-fired-interview
I did my full contract, which was for four movies; they invited me back, and I remember distinctly being in the beach house in Malibu and the phone rang, and Michael and Barbara [Cubby's heirs] said, "We'd love you to do the fifth." And I said, "I'd love to." I put the phone down; I said to my wife, Keeley, I said, "OK. Go build your dream-house. Because I'm doing a movie. They've just invited me back." And then I went off to do a movie in that interim time, After the Sunset, and one day I was going out onto the set, and the phone rang, and it was my agent, and they said, "Listen. They've started negotiations on the film." I said, "OK, what does that mean?" He says, "Well, they don't want to negotiate anymore. They'll call you next Thursday." I said, "OK." So I waited a whole week, and then the next Thursday came, and I was in the Bahamas—I think I was staying at Richard Harris's house with Richard and his family; there's an interconnectedness there. And Michael and Barbara said they'd rethought the character and were putting it on hold and we said goodbye. And that was it. Alright. You were a good Bond. So that's how it went down that time. And that certainly dug into the solar plexus of life, just because it was pretty gut-wrenching and because it had been somewhat heralded that I was coming back. So, it's just business. And you're the one caught in the crosshairs. And, you know, my press agent at the time said, "You should resign. You should resign." And I said, "No, I don't want to do that, because that's a lie. It's a lie onto myself; it's their decision. Let it be their decision, and however you want to look at it, however it will be defined, then let it find its own course."
 
Brosnan left on his own, there were money problems and he didn't like the idea of playing a 50 year Bond after seeing what happened Roger Moore.

Uh, ...

BBC NEWS| 2 April, 2004: Brosnan uncertain over more Bond

BBC NEWS said:
"The producers last year invited me back, and I said 'yes'," Brosnan said at a Mexican press conference.
But the actor said producers were in a "malaise of confusion as to how to go forward" with the franchise, he added.
Brosnan is in Mexico shooting the film The Matador. When asked who he thought should be the next Bond, Brosnan leaned toward the microphone and said: "Me."
...
"They [the Bond producers] know where to find me if they want me for the next one," he said.
 
Last edited:
Brosnan left on his own, there were money problems and he didn't like the idea of playing a 50 year Bond after seeing what happened Roger Moore.

Uh, ...

BBC NEWS| 2 April, 2004: Brosnan uncertain over more Bond

BBC NEWS said:
"The producers last year invited me back, and I said 'yes'," Brosnan said at a Mexican press conference.
But the actor said producers were in a "malaise of confusion as to how to go forward" with the franchise, he added.
Brosnan is in Mexico shooting the film The Matador. When asked who he thought should be the next Bond, Brosnan leaned toward the microphone and said: "Me."
...
"They [the Bond producers] know where to find me if they want me for the next one," he said.

He made it pretty clear on the Day Another Day DVD that he wasn't interested in return after turing 50.
 
No, he was worried about overstaying his welcome like Roger Moore. But since critics and the fans were still enthusiastic about him, he reconsidered. As his statement in that BBC article from 2004, as well as in that GQ interview from 2010, make it very clear that he was quite ready to come back for a fifth movie. He might have backed away from a sixth, maybe, but he certainly was willing to do a fifth.
 
As far as I know Brosnan made no formal attempt to come back for a fifth movie. And really by 2004 it was too late in 2005 Daniel Craig was cast as the new Bond. But he did walk away from the part willingly after Die Another Day. And another thing MGM was falling apart.
 
As far as I know Brosnan made no formal attempt to come back for a fifth movie.

Once more, from the linked BBC article:

BBC NEWS said:
"The producers last year invited me back, and I said 'yes'," Brosnan said at a Mexican press conference.

That's pretty unambiguous.

And really by 2004 it was too late in 2005 Daniel Craig was cast as the new Bond.

How was April 2004 too late, if Craig was cast in 2005? What's one have to do with the other?

But he did walk away from the part willingly after Die Another Day.

No, he did not. We've given you two seperate sources where Brosnan himself said otherwise.

And another thing MGM was falling apart.

Yes, that's quite another thing. So much another thing that I'm not sure how this relates to whether Brosnan was willing to do another Bond or not.
 
No MGM no partner for Eon, which means no movie til the found another partner.

Brosnan, who has appeared in four Bond blockbusters, said he agreed to film a fifth but was "gutted" when filmmakers changed their minds.
"When they told me, I was angry and the conversation was pretty short and sweet," he told Jonathan Ross' TV show.
Colin Farrell and Ewan McGregor have been mooted as possible replacements.
Brosnan first played the famous spy in 1995's GoldenEye, followed by Tomorrow Never Dies, The World Is Not Enough and Die Another Day.
_40479471_farrelap_203.jpg
Pierce Brosnan has said he wants Colin Farrell to replace him

"They invited me back, and they changed their minds half-way through negotiations. It's hard to find the truth," he said on BBC One's Friday Night with Jonathan Ross.

"If you get uptight it just does your head in so you've got to let it go." He said he felt a "great sense of liberation" after he was told. "I thought they did me a favour, really... leave while you're on top."

OK, but really the decision was out of their handss without proper funding.
 
Brosnan wanted to do another film but was unable to do so when they decided to reboot the franchise. Nothing shocking or surprising about that, imo.
 
Eon backed out of a verbal agreement, I don't think they wanted a repeat of what happened with Sean Connery. Brosnan backed away after Die Another Day,waiting two years before considering to do another one was really too long of a time.

All this talk of Brosnan's departure is making wonder about all this talk of Daniel Craig leaving and now supposedly Tom Hardy is a frontrunner in some circles to play Bond. It all sounds premature to me. Craig's future as Bond still unknown.
 
^ Where are you getting this 'Brosnan walked away' business from? There are three articles there from the horse's mouth saying precisely the opposite. You even posted one of them yourself. Is it so difficult to acknowledge that your original claim was incorrect?
 
^ Where are you getting this 'Brosnan walked away' business from? There are three articles there from the horse's mouth saying precisely the opposite. You even posted one of them yourself. Is it so difficult to acknowledge that your original claim was incorrect?

He had a three movie deal, then they included Died Another Day, two years later they wanted him for another movie. The interest should;ve been there before Die Another Day came out not two later. But he left the role in 2002, any decision to be in another movie should be make before that. Why didn't they call him after Die Another Day came out? Why wait two years when they were making a new movie every two years? Then of cource recast teh part after dropping Brosnan.
 
^ So you admit they dropped him. He didn't leave anything. There were always 2 year gaps between Bond movies during his tenure.
 
^ So you admit they dropped him. He didn't leave anything. There were always 2 year gaps between Bond movies during his tenure.

We didn't get a Bond movie in 2004 though did we? It's fairly clear that when they didn't get the rights to Casino Royale they wanted Brosnan back, until they did get the rights and they dumped him for a cheaper actor and rebooted the seriies. That says nothing about Brosnan's feelings about the part in 2002 though. Had they gotten the rights to Casino Royale the first time out it's dboutful they would called him up.
 
^ You've completely lost me. From saying Brosnan quit because he felt he was getting too old, you now seem to be advancing every possible explanation for his departure. But whatever.
 
Eon backed out of a verbal agreement, I don't think they wanted a repeat of what happened with Sean Connery. Brosnan backed away after Die Another Day,waiting two years before considering to do another one was really too long of a time.

Eon's job is to make a good film. Having Daniel Craig as Bond led them to make a great film. I don't blame them in the slightest. But I don't get this desire to blame Pierce Brosnan for the decision. They made the decision because they wanted to reboot the franchise, not because Brosnan didn't give a firm answer right away when they had no definite plans anyway.
 
Eon backed out of a verbal agreement, I don't think they wanted a repeat of what happened with Sean Connery. Brosnan backed away after Die Another Day,waiting two years before considering to do another one was really too long of a time.

Eon's job is to make a good film. Having Daniel Craig as Bond led them to make a great film. I don't blame them in the slightest. But I don't get this desire to blame Pierce Brosnan for the decision. They made the decision because they wanted to reboot the franchise, not because Brosnan didn't give a firm answer right away when they had no definite plans anyway.

I didn't blame Brosnan at all, but his three movie contract was up and they have to negotiate again and Brosnan could ask for pretty much whatever he wanted. But nobody seems to want to answer the question of why they waited two year after Die Another Day before even talking to him, knowing that MGM was winding down and they'd lose their partner.
 
Barbara Broccoli's mother (and Michael Wilson's Step-mother) was dying of Cancer around that time. They probably had a lot on their plates.
 
And Brosnan certainly remained interested in the role after Die Another Day. He provided voice work for EA's Everything or Nothing, the first (and ultimately only) time he had done so. (Nightfire used Brosnan's likeness, but another actor did the voice.)
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top