The New 007

Scott Hardie | October 16, 2005
Any comments on the casting of Daniel Craig as the next James Bond? (link) I for one could do without the "Blond. James Blond." jokes about his hair color. But more seriously, I'm glad that the news media is mentioning the negative fan response, which mostly seems to amount to "So what?" Bond has been a cartoon for the last few movies, and that's not going to change as long as the same producers and same writers keep their iron grip on the franchise. Changing the actor makes no difference, especially since Brosnan has said he always hated the puns and wished he could have done a more serious take on the character. Here's hoping there's a better future for the character someday.

Amy Austin | October 16, 2005
I notice that the linked article made absolutely no mention of the very short incarnation of Timothy Dalton as Bond. One, maybe two films should be enough to determine whether or not Craig suffers the same fate.

I don't understand why the change... it sounds as if Brosnan had nothing to do with the decision and was dropped involuntarily. Think the execs decided he was too expensive and needed a relative "no name" to keep costs down in this age of "declining" Hollywood revenues???

Kris Weberg | October 16, 2005
Well, there had been reports during the last few years of Brosnan increasingly demanding that certain plot and story elements be included int he series. Perhpas he simply overestimated his importance to the producers and the franchise and therefore got the boot.

Scott Hardie | October 21, 2005
That and age. Brosnan's 52 now. As I understand it, "Remington Steele" was about to be canceled when the producers offered him the role of Bond, which made him a big star and revived the show, making him contractually unavailable and opening up the part for Dalton instead.

Actually, my favorite Bond anecdote is a fanwank I once read that explains how the character keeps looking different: It's a different man each time. The name "James Bond" is only a codename; when one agent 007 is killed in action or retires, a new man replaces him with the same name. This also explains how he has served his nation for four decades without seeming to age. In my mind that's the way it is, but I doubt the producers will ever begin to explain the recasting canonically.

Michael Paul Cote | October 21, 2005
Kind of explains why you could have two bonds simultaneously - Connery in "Never Say Never Again" and Moore in which ever movie came out at the same time.

Kris Weberg | October 21, 2005
Well, that, or Bond's a Gallifreyan.