English Agent wrote:'Ali'
By the length of your post......i kinda think you like the guy!
Oops.........no i didn't know he was in the running for CR with DC (somehow missed that....or forgotten!
)
Depending how long DC stays in the Bond franchise..........and it could be a while, depending on the success of the films or not, the gap between making the films and him wanting to carry on in the role, will to a certain extent determine who will be the likely candidate for the role.
I think 'Jackman' is out of the running, the timeline is not right for him, due to his age now, and to a lesser extent that he is probably too well associated with the 'X-men' franchise.
'Cavill' has obviously got a chance, but he may get involved in other film projects in the future which could steer his career in another path, which could see him unavailable for the Bond role.
BUT.......one thing to consider is 'WHY' did EON not pick him in the first place, over Craig!
EA ( buona notte)
LOL yes as of now I think Jackman is sadly out due to age (although while being the same age as Craig he looks WAY younger than Craig, not to mention way hotter LOL). And, I don't think Craig will stay past Bond 23, because of his own will and because of the fact the franchise needs something entirely different and much newer, and the new investors know this.
That said, many things can happen meantime so who knows. And EA, the only reason why he wasn't picked (and they said so) was that he was deemed too young back then. (and Campbell clearly disagreed with the assessment, especially since they were to film a rookie Bond movie). Heard this story before? Yeah, very similar to what happened with Dalton and Brosnan.
Looking at those clips, I can now see Cavill's potential as a Bond. He'd be cool in the role.
Sweeney I am very glad those clips made you see Cavill's potential.
They are only an example, I'm sure if you saw more of him you'd be favorably impressed, but just to showcase a more serious scene, here's a brief scene where I'd say he plays the "nasty customer" part pretty well:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62Xk2MGfmfs
wonder. Though if Henry Cavill is brought in to replace Craig for Bond 23 or 24 will he be accepted?
It really is a tough call. What is needed is another actor who has the appeal of Pierce Brosnan, who in my opinion was a wonderful Bond. Had he been given better scripts he could have taken Connery on for sheer appeal to all audiences. At least his films were entertaining. Casino Royale was okay, but it was certainly a film of two parts. And far too long.
Quantum Of Boredom was the shortest Bond film in length, but it felt much longer.
Cavill has a very solid US fanbase already, that he garnered with "The Tudors". He is basically in the same position Brosnan was with "Remington Steele" in terms of popularity. And I agree Brosnan was a wonderful Bond. Also Cavill is similar to Brosnan in terms of not having been picked the first time around because "too young". And he is very much like Brosnan in terms of appealing to many and being very good with press and fans. He's also very appreciated by people he works with because he's a very polite, gentleman-like type. One of the writers of "Immortals", his movie to be released in November this year, said the movie will cement him as the new leading man in Hollywood. And that he really deserves it as he is a true class-act, that when production was halfway through, Cavill threw a party for the whole cast and crew, which he paid for. He then went on to compare him to Clooney, Hanks etc.. the types of leading men that can do anything and that also manage to be likeable, nice people in the process. I heard similar praises to him from the director of "Immortals" as well as the creator and producer/writer of "The Tudors". So my only fear is that if his two movies out this year do really well, he may become too big to be Bond. Better too successful than to tank of course, but still. Other than that, I think he really stands a good chance, AND that he would definitely be not only popular, but also one that allows the franchise to capture the younger audience as well, as he's very popular between young women. Immortals is a movie geared towards younger audiences too, he plays Greek warrior Theseus in it, goes to fight the Minotaur. Mickey Rourke plays his father.
I completely agree about QoS and CR, except I didn't even find CR ok, I found it extremely boring (and I'm aware I'm part of a minority not having liked CR, but it's honestly how I feel). Problem is when even the best effort is too long and still doesn't showcase James Bond as he should be, something clearly is not right. That said, it's always a gamble to take on a new actor for such a popular role, but I really feel EON made the wrong choice back then, especially considering the alternatives they had. Craig certainly wasn't the best of the group. Actually, any of the other contenders (Alex O'Loughlin, Henry Cavill, Sam Worthington) would have been way better than him in the part in my opinion. But again, that's just my take. Not to mention of course Hugh Jackman, who was my no.1 choice back then. And even so, had he been given the awful material Craig has been given with QoS, he couldn't have saved it. I kind of think that with another actor things wouldn't have taken the same direction, though. That said, I felt sorry for Craig in QoS because with such lousy material there's no way an actor can make the film decent. It wasn't his fault.
I do not want Bond 23 to tank because I don't want the franchise to be at risk. But I think Craig will go regardless. And I doubt it can do particularly well at the box office seen as it will stand against some very big movies. I think it can do ok, but nothing more than that. If
This is the release roster so far for November 2012:
November, 2 Monsters, Inc. 2 Walt Disney Pictures
November, 9 Bond 23 MGM
November, 9 Ouija Universal
November, 16 The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn, Part 2 Summit Entertainment
November, 21 The Guardians Paramount Pictures
November, 21 47 Ronin
And this doesn't include Superman: Man of Steel. Which will also most likely be released in November.
I'd say it isn't looking easy for Bond at all. It has a total of a week by itself, and it isn't even by itself because Monsters Inc is released the week before. And Twilight will no doubt be the no.1 movie when it's released. Not to mention they may release Superman: Man of Steel on the same weekend as Bond. I just don't see how Bond 23 can rake in a phenomenal amount of money. It can hold its own but I don't think it can do much more than that. And that's considering it WON'T be anything even remotely close to the horror that was QoS. Because if that's the case, then I think things may not look good. And again, I do not want that to be the case. I don't want Bond movies to tank as I want an alive franchise, not a comatose one (though it could be argued it already is in a comatose state).
at the monopoly man!
hahah, electric company to go with the water supply? What about a free out of jail card? Because at this rate, we may see that too
I am with you in hoping Bond's situation can be rectified, Mulli. Let's just hope this happens sooner rather than later.
BJ is right, it's the artsy at all costs direction that is atrocious, both in terms of writing and in terms of directing. EON has indeed been very arrogant, but I think given the current financial situation that those times will be over quick.
to pop up and offer the Bolivian electric company to go with the water supply. 
that Eon is hiring to direct the liberal screenwriters 
