Classic Bond Forum

Countach wrote:

Daltonite Toothpaste wrote:

ml94 wrote:

Countach wrote:I think Henry Cavill would be THE James Bond!

Yeah, but he is already SUPERMAN.

And I hope that's what he remains (keeps him well away from Bond).

At least he is 30 000 times better looking than Craig!

That doesn't mean anything, and I would prefer a Bond cast not based simply on him fitting the Bond template look.

Cavill is better actor than cregg...

ml94 wrote:Cavill is better actor than cregg...

Agreed! LOL I hope Craig come in and read all the hate on him but actually, he only bring it upon himself with all the stuck up interviews he gave. Maybe he want to channel Bruce Willis.

ml94 wrote:

Countach wrote:I think Henry Cavill would be THE James Bond!

Yeah, but he is already SUPERMAN.

I don't see why that is even an issue. He played Napoleon Solo after he was cast as Superman, and whilst that film didn't do well enough to justify a sequel, it was obviously intended to launch a franchise. Likewise, Daniel Craig appeared in three movies that were supposed to be franchise-starters after he was cast as Bond (four if you count Tintin, but his character in that was non-recurring). There shouldn't be any logistical problem with Cavill being both Bond and Superman, provided they schedule the two around each other (probably even easier if Warner Bros takes over Bond).

Kristatos wrote:

ml94 wrote:

Countach wrote:I think Henry Cavill would be THE James Bond!

Yeah, but he is already SUPERMAN.

I don't see why that is even an issue. He played Napoleon Solo after he was cast as Superman, and whilst that film didn't do well enough to justify a sequel, it was obviously intended to launch a franchise. Likewise, Daniel Craig appeared in three movies that were supposed to be franchise-starters after he was cast as Bond (four if you count Tintin, but his character in that was non-recurring). There shouldn't be any logistical problem with Cavill being both Bond and Superman, provided they schedule the two around each other (probably even easier if Warner Bros takes over Bond).

"Why BOND is SUPERMAN"? EON has never cast BIG STAR as 007.

ml94 wrote: "Why BOND is SUPERMAN"? EON has never cast BIG STAR as 007.

Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan were both well-known from TV when they were cast.

Kristatos wrote:

ml94 wrote: "Why BOND is SUPERMAN"? EON has never cast BIG STAR as 007.

Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan were both well-known from TV when they were cast.

Cavill is moviestar not tv actor...

ml94 wrote: Cavill is moviestar not tv actor...

Hardly. Headlining a blockbuster movie doesn't automatically make someone a movie star, otherwise Mark Hamill and Harrison Ford would be considered equals. I don't mean any disrespect to Hamill, he was great as the Joker in the DCU cartoons, but he's not an A-list star like Ford. And even sticking with Superman, what's Brandon Routh doing nowadays? Moore and Brosnan arguably had bigger name recognition when they were cast as Bond than Cavill does now.

Kristatos wrote:

ml94 wrote: Cavill is moviestar not tv actor...

Hardly. Headlining a blockbuster movie doesn't automatically make someone a movie star, otherwise Mark Hamill and Harrison Ford would be considered equals. I don't mean any disrespect to Hamill, he was great as the Joker in the DCU cartoons, but he's not an A-list star like Ford. And even sticking with Superman, what's Brandon Routh doing nowadays? Moore and Brosnan arguably had bigger name recognition when they were cast as Bond than Cavill does now.

Would EON want to share their star with another franchise/studio...?

ml94 wrote: Would EON want to share their star with another franchise/studio...?

If WB gets the Bond distribution rights, they won't be sharing him with another studio. And again, they didn't know that Cowboys and Aliens, The Golden Compass or The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo were going to be flops when Craig signed on for them, so evidently they had no problem with (or were unable to stop) their star appearing in other franchises.

Kristatos wrote:

ml94 wrote: Would EON want to share their star with another franchise/studio...?

If WB gets the Bond distribution rights, they won't be sharing him with another studio. And again, they didn't know that Cowboys and Aliens, The Golden Compass or The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo were going to be flops when Craig signed on for them, so evidently they had no problem with (or were unable to stop) their star appearing in other franchises.

What you think about RUPERT FRIEND as BOND...?

ml94 wrote:]
What you think about RUPERT FRIEND as BOND...?

I've never seen him in anything, so I have no opinion one way or the other. But this is a thread about Henry Cavill.

Kristatos wrote:

ml94 wrote:]
What you think about RUPERT FRIEND as BOND...?

I've never seen him in anything, so I have no opinion one way or the other. But this is a thread about Henry Cavill.

I still think that CAVILL is too famous & expensive for EON.

I think he has just the right level of fame. The track record of using complete unknowns is patchy. Connery and Craig were popular with the public, Lazenby and Dalton weren't (I am talking about the general consensus - as you know, I much prefer Dalton to Craig). But Moore and Brosnan were already well-known before they were cast as Bond, and the public accepted them instantly.

Kristatos wrote:I think he has just the right level of fame. The track record of using complete unknowns is patchy. Connery and Craig were popular with the public, Lazenby and Dalton weren't (I am talking about the general consensus - as you know, I much prefer Dalton to Craig). But Moore and Brosnan were already well-known before they were cast as Bond, and the public accepted them instantly.

FRIEND is right level of fame, BOND is not SUPERMAN.

I'd never heard of Friend before you joined this forum.

Kristatos wrote:I think he has just the right level of fame. The track record of using complete unknowns is patchy. Connery and Craig were popular with the public, Lazenby and Dalton weren't (I am talking about the general consensus - as you know, I much prefer Dalton to Craig). But Moore and Brosnan were already well-known before they were cast as Bond, and the public accepted them instantly.

I think the general opinion on Craig is different in different countries. In Croatia the opinion is really split and maybe even more people have negative opinion about him. Those people who like him seem like they were never really Bond fans in the first place and think of old Bond movies as trashy. oh well,it's their loss if they don't see how awesome these movie are.

Veronica wrote:

Kristatos wrote:I think he has just the right level of fame. The track record of using complete unknowns is patchy. Connery and Craig were popular with the public, Lazenby and Dalton weren't (I am talking about the general consensus - as you know, I much prefer Dalton to Craig). But Moore and Brosnan were already well-known before they were cast as Bond, and the public accepted them instantly.

I think the general opinion on Craig is different in different countries. In Croatia the opinion is really split and maybe even more people have negative opinion about him. Those people who like him seem like they were never really Bond fans in the first place and think of old Bond movies as trashy. oh well,it's their loss if they don't see how awesome these movie are.

Again, I agreed with you!

To my understanding, I think a lot of the Craig fans are from the US.

I was going by box office totals. LTK is one of my favourite Bond films, but it didn't do that well at the box office, whereas Skyfall is the biggest-grossing Bond film ever, even adjusted for inflation. Wishing it were otherwise doesn't change that fact.

Kristatos wrote:I was going by box office totals. LTK is one of my favourite Bond films, but it didn't do that well at the box office, whereas Skyfall is the biggest-grossing Bond film ever, even adjusted for inflation. Wishing it were otherwise doesn't change that fact.

LTK was last "summer" BOND.