Classic Bond Forum

Poor old Clive seems to get a lot of stick elsewhere. I don't think he was ever sufficiently interested (bit too established) but could he have handled Casino Royale? Personally I think he would have been fine.

This is a tough question.

I would have liked him to play Bond.

However since the reason for him not playing Bond is becasue he's not interested then it's better off he doesn't play Bond.

Say he was offered so much money he couldnt refuse...He would have gotten the role but he wouldn't try his best to make a good movie.

It would be like Connery in DAF. He'd just be doing it for the money and he wouldn;t be playing the character as well as he would had he actually been interested.

I do wish him luck in the future, I adored Children Of Men.

Never saw Clive Owen as Bond material. But royal staring him could have been great, I think a lot more would have been done with it. I get the feeling the reboot was because craig is so un-bond.
iF the story was the same as the royale they made, owen would have been very cool as 007.

Say he was offered so much money he couldnt refuse...He would have gotten the role but he wouldn't try his best to make a good movie.

It would be like Connery in DAF. He'd just be doing it for the money and he wouldn;t be playing the character as well as he would had he actually been interested.

Isn't that what craig is doing now? in it for the money

I certainly hope not.
Geez 3 million isn't that much when making a movie!

Dcbn wrote:I certainly hope not.
Geez 3 million isn't that much when making a movie!

Compared to how much the movie made its an insult.
For craig it was more money then he ever saw before. might never have if didn't take this role. that motivated him more than the role of 007 .

same thing happened to the new guy playing superman, the studios spent more on styrofoam cups saying Superman Returns than on what they paid him to act.

Anyone know what he's getting for bond 22?

Dr. No wrote:

Dcbn wrote:I certainly hope not.
Geez 3 million isn't that much when making a movie!

Compared to how much the movie made its an insult.
For craig it was more money then he ever saw before. might never have if didn't take this role. that motivated him more than the role of 007 .

same thing happened to the new guy playing superman, the studios spent more on styrofoam cups saying Superman Returns than on what they paid him to act.

I think actors in general these days are motivated by money. If I was in their shoes, I'd probably do exactly the same thing.

And if I recall correctly, Brozza was no angel either in the `asking for money' department.....

I quite like Clive Owen but he was never interested was he? At 42 he was pushing it too agewise. I think if the 007 part had become vacant in 1999/2000 he'd have been a shoe-in.

Clive Owen has been my choice for years. Didn’t realize he became too big to do certain films like 007.

I would have gone for Christian Bale after I saw him in American Psycho. However, after he chose to play the BAT he may have missed his chance.

Christian Bale; Don't associate him too much with the Batman. His other roles come to mind first. But im not a big Bat fan.

I was actually supporting Owen as Bond before Craig was hired.

I'm more than happy with Craig's performance, though. I don't think Owen could've played Bond nearly as well as Craig.

Jack Wade wrote:I was actually supporting Owen as Bond before Craig was hired.

I'm more than happy with Craig's performance, though. I don't think Owen could've played Bond nearly as well as Craig.

I disagree. CO has the ability to perform to a similar level as DC. I actually think he's better suited to the role.

Skywalker wrote:

Jack Wade wrote:I was actually supporting Owen as Bond before Craig was hired.

I'm more than happy with Craig's performance, though. I don't think Owen could've played Bond nearly as well as Craig.

I disagree. CO has the ability to perform to a similar level as DC. I actually think he's better suited to the role.

Clive Owen was Sony's choice as well as mine own.
Owen is a world class, A-list actor who's performance would have been amazing no doubt.
His "pink panther" 006 cameo was a jab at the whole franchise.
Or was that just a nod to the (early) 2005 Bond rumors?

I think Clive would have been too expensive.

ID wrote:I think Clive would have been too expensive.

What is too expensive when $400-500 million is going to be made?
I don’t like this not paying an actor a fair wage when the movie is going to be BIG.

I'm not entirely sure about this but I think the Bond producers don't pay the sort of money that an Owen or Jackman would be used to. They also take a whopping producer's fee. When you think about it none of the Bonds were huge stars when they got the role. Brosnan and Moore were tv stars, Connery & Lazenby unknowns, and Dalton & Craig under the radar actors who had been around for a while.

Eon do seem to go for the slightly less famous actors. This is probably because they are cheaper and more grateful. Although as actors become established as Bond, they do tend to make bigger pay demands and want more control over the series. I wonder if Craig will do this!

Craig's biggest selling point must have been his cheapness. I'm not sure about his contract, but he should ask for a big pay rise for the next one.

If Bond disappeared for 10 years and new owners took over, then a "big star" would be paid lots of money to relaunch Bond. But I think Eon will stick to their slightly unknown/cheaper/grateful choices for Bond.

carl stromberg wrote:But I think Eon will stick to their slightly unknown

Good. I'd rather have an actor who's good for Bond over a big named star. Some roles are cast for the "star" just for the name when they don't actually work for the character, this is why I was glad Owen wasn't cast.

carl stromberg wrote:
Craig's biggest selling point must have been his cheapness.

I'd say his acting ability myself

I'm not sure about his contract, but he should ask for a big pay rise for the next one.

After the huge success that is Casino Royale, I'd have to agree a moderate pay rise would be reasonable. Though who's to say he hasn't been rewarded already?

If Bond disappeared for 10 years and new owners took over, then a "big star" would be paid lots of money to relaunch Bond.

I hope I never see the day we have 'new owners' running the Bond franchise

But I think Eon will stick to their slightly unknown/cheaper/grateful choices for Bond.

Well it's worked for more than 40 years, why stop now?