| Author |
Message |
|
Bradley Witherberry
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
|
 Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Yeah right! I don't believe it either, but there it was in yesterday's edition of the Daily Mail. Quote: It has been 25 years since he ordered a martini, shaken, not stirred.
But Sean Connery, who played James Bond in seven of the classic spy movies, has a sudden taste for a comeback - as a villain.
Preliminary discussions are said to have taken place between the 77-year-old actor and Bond producers since Daniel Craig reinvigorated the 007 role two years ago with Casino Royale.
But it would take an exceptional pay-cheque to lure Connery, who usually commands £10million a film, out of retirement.
He first played Bond in 1962's Dr No, followed by From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, Thunderball, You Only Live Twice, Diamonds Are Forever then Never Say Never Again in 1983.
"I wouldn't mind coming back as a Bond villain," he said. "But I don't think they would pay me enough money."
Beyond the fact that this story was first floated back in the early 90's, the part that made me realize it's not true, is the money. Heh. That's hilarious. To my mind however, this article does guarantee one thing - - that he will indeed be making a cameo in the new Indiana Jones movie...Yep... ya read it here first!
|
| Sat Mar 29, 2008 7:27 am |
|
|
|
Maverikk
Award Winning Bastard
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:03 am
Posts: 15310
Location: Slumming at KJ
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? I've been dreaming about Connery playing the ultimate Bond villian since Dalton was in the role!
Pay him what he wants and bring him out of retirement for this!!!
It was Pierce Brosnan, not Daniel Craig, who reinvigorated the 007 role.
|
| Sat Mar 29, 2008 7:42 am |
|
|
|
Dr. Lecter
You must have big rats
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 92093
Location: Bonn, Germany
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Maverikk wrote:
It was Pierce Brosnan, not Daniel Craig, who reinvigorated the 007 role.
Both did in their own way. _________________The greatest thing on earth is to love and to be loved in return!
|
| Sat Mar 29, 2008 9:44 am |
|
|
|
Dr. Lecter
You must have big rats
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 92093
Location: Bonn, Germany
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? And Daily Mail is hardly what I consider a trustworthy source...
_________________The greatest thing on earth is to love and to be loved in return!
|
| Sat Mar 29, 2008 9:45 am |
|
|
|
Cleric
Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 2:48 am
Posts: 409
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Goldeneye was the only good Pierce Bond movie. Mostly for the cast, Sean Bean as 006 was perfect, and the director.
It would be great to see Connery in a Bond movie again, even if he is a villain. Most reports though, put Connery well into retirement. I doubt they will lure him out of it.
|
| Sat Mar 29, 2008 10:54 am |
|
|
|
Chippy
KJ's Leading Pundit
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:45 pm
Posts: 63026
Location: Tonight... YOU!
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? I liked Casino Royale more than any Brosnan 007.
_________________trixster wrote: shut the fuck up zwackerm, you're out of your fucking element trixster wrote: chippy is correct
|
| Sat Mar 29, 2008 2:38 pm |
|
|
|
Bradley Witherberry
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? I liked any Brosnan 007 more than Casino Royale, but that's not what this thread is about.
As I said, I don't believe this rumor (as much as I'd like to), but what I really want to know is:
Who's man enough to join my club?
As I mentioned in my original post - - this announcement is a sure sign that Sean Connery is making a cameo in the new Indiana Jones movie...
Who's in?
|
| Sat Mar 29, 2008 3:59 pm |
|
|
|
El Maskado
Arrrrrrrrrrgggghhhhhhhhhh!
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 8:17 pm
Posts: 21572
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Dr. Lecter wrote: Maverikk wrote:
It was Pierce Brosnan, not Daniel Craig, who reinvigorated the 007 role.
Both did in their own way. Pierce did alot more than Daniel. Try crediting the man who brought Bond back in a big way where Dalton pretty much destroyed the series that it took 6 years to relaunch a new one
|
| Sat Mar 29, 2008 7:52 pm |
|
|
|
Grill
Forum General
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:01 am
Posts: 8684
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? On Sean Connery, I thought I read that he didn't want to return as Indy's father as he was retired. Was that true? I would have first liked to have seen him in #4.
|
| Sat Mar 29, 2008 7:56 pm |
|
|
|
Jmart
Superman: The Movie
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:47 am
Posts: 21230
Location: Massachusetts
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? As for the rumor, someone mentioned that this has gone back since when Dalton was Bond. If it didn't happen then, it's not going to happen now especially since Connery is retired.
As for the Pierce/Dalton debate, Pierce put the series back on the map. If QoS is as good as Casino Royale, Craig will be on his way to reinventing the character. Pierce as of right now has done more for the character, but that might not be true come November.
_________________My DVD Collection
Marty McGee (1989-2005)
If I’m not here, I’m on Letterboxd.
|
| Sat Mar 29, 2008 8:04 pm |
|
|
|
billybobwashere
He didn't look busy?!
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 3:59 pm
Posts: 4308
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Roid wrote: Dr. Lecter wrote: Maverikk wrote:
It was Pierce Brosnan, not Daniel Craig, who reinvigorated the 007 role.
Both did in their own way. Pierce did alot more than Daniel. Try crediting the man who brought Bond back in a big way where Dalton pretty much destroyed the series that it took 6 years to relaunch a new one The World is Not Enough and Die Another Day were two of the worst Bond films out there...if Casino Royale had been as bad as them, its $40m OW probably wouldn't have turned into a $100m total. Craig saved Bond, even if Brosnan also saved it. _________________ Retroviral VideosA film-based project created for the purpose of helping raise awareness about HIV/AIDS, specifically in South Africa.
|
| Sun Mar 30, 2008 12:42 pm |
|
|
|
Snrub
Vagina Qwertyuiop
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:14 pm
Posts: 8767
Location: Great Living Standards
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Dr. Lecter wrote: And Daily Mail is hardly what I consider a trustworthy source... Actually The Daily Mail's not really a tabloid-type paper. It's fairly well-respected, albeit among the despicably right wing and old. That said, I wouldn't trust any UK newspaper when it comes to film news. They tend to be remarkably misinformed and, in the case of the tabloids, mostly fabricated.
|
| Sun Mar 30, 2008 12:48 pm |
|
|
|
Maverikk
Award Winning Bastard
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:03 am
Posts: 15310
Location: Slumming at KJ
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? billybobwashere wrote: The World is Not Enough and Die Another Day were two of the worst Bond films out there...if Casino Royale had been as bad as them, its $40m OW probably wouldn't have turned into a $100m total. Craig saved Bond, even if Brosnan also saved it. Die Another Day had strong legs, so you are projecting, and it doesn't work that way. Had Pierce stayed, Casino Royale would have opened higher, and depending on quality, grossed more. Make no mistake, Daniel Craig didn't "save" anything or make James Bond "invigorated" again. That's just silly uniformed nonsense.
|
| Sun Mar 30, 2008 12:49 pm |
|
|
|
Bradley Witherberry
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Maverikk wrote: billybobwashere wrote: The World is Not Enough and Die Another Day were two of the worst Bond films out there...if Casino Royale had been as bad as them, its $40m OW probably wouldn't have turned into a $100m total. Craig saved Bond, even if Brosnan also saved it. Die Another Day had strong legs, so you are projecting, and it doesn't work that way. Had Pierce stayed, Casino Royale would have opened higher, and depending on quality, grossed more. Make no mistake, Daniel Craig didn't "save" anything or make James Bond "invigorated" again. That's just silly uniformed nonsense. Not to mention that Die Another Day was in fact the best of the modern Bond movies, with The World is Not Enough being the second best. This came as a complete surprise to me, because the film before those two, Tomorrow Never Dies was the easily the worst of the Brosnan movies and amongst the worst of all Bond movies... My intense dislike for the new Casino Royale has been well documented here at KJ, though I retain faith in Daniel Craig as the new Bond, if the producers can just put him in a proper Bond movie...
|
| Sun Mar 30, 2008 12:58 pm |
|
|
|
Darth Indiana Bond
007
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:43 pm
Posts: 11625
Location: Wouldn't you like to know
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Bradley Witherberry wrote: Maverikk wrote: billybobwashere wrote: The World is Not Enough and Die Another Day were two of the worst Bond films out there...if Casino Royale had been as bad as them, its $40m OW probably wouldn't have turned into a $100m total. Craig saved Bond, even if Brosnan also saved it. Die Another Day had strong legs, so you are projecting, and it doesn't work that way. Had Pierce stayed, Casino Royale would have opened higher, and depending on quality, grossed more. Make no mistake, Daniel Craig didn't "save" anything or make James Bond "invigorated" again. That's just silly uniformed nonsense. Not to mention that Die Another Day was in fact the best of the modern Bond movies, with The World is Not Enough being the second best. This came as a complete surprise to me, because the film before those two, Tomorrow Never Dies was the easily the worst of the Brosnan movies and amongst the worst of all Bond movies... My intense dislike for the new Casino Royale has been well documented here at KJ, though I retain faith in Daniel Craig as the new Bond, if the producers can just put him in a proper Bond movie... Welp you just lost all credibility with this post. _________________
|
| Sun Mar 30, 2008 2:30 pm |
|
|
|
Darth Indiana Bond
007
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:43 pm
Posts: 11625
Location: Wouldn't you like to know
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? To me Casino Royale brought back the early to mid 1960s Bond feel back to the series, all it needs is the big brass score to help match it.
_________________
|
| Sun Mar 30, 2008 2:39 pm |
|
|
|
Maverikk
Award Winning Bastard
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:03 am
Posts: 15310
Location: Slumming at KJ
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Darth Indiana Bond wrote: To me Casino Royale brought back the early to mid 1960s Bond feel back to the series, all it needs is the big brass score to help match it. Minus the exciting leading man and fantastical plots and villians. I'm glad to hear they realize that they need to go back to formula.
|
| Sun Mar 30, 2008 4:35 pm |
|
|
|
Bradley Witherberry
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Maverikk wrote: Darth Indiana Bond wrote: To me Casino Royale brought back the early to mid 1960s Bond feel back to the series, all it needs is the big brass score to help match it. Minus the exciting leading man and fantastical plots and villians. I'm glad to hear they realize that they need to go back to formula. They also need to restore the humor they forgot to put in Casino Royale - - that has been an integral part of the formula since day one in the Bond movies with Connery. CR ended up being just a generic spy thriller. Luckily, the producers have already acknowledged this error, and have promised to bring back the laughter!
|
| Sun Mar 30, 2008 5:26 pm |
|
|
|
Bradley Witherberry
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Darth Indiana Bond wrote: Welp you just lost all credibility with this post. You are a discredit to your screen name...
|
| Sun Mar 30, 2008 5:51 pm |
|
|
|
billybobwashere
He didn't look busy?!
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 3:59 pm
Posts: 4308
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Maverikk wrote: billybobwashere wrote: The World is Not Enough and Die Another Day were two of the worst Bond films out there...if Casino Royale had been as bad as them, its $40m OW probably wouldn't have turned into a $100m total. Craig saved Bond, even if Brosnan also saved it. Die Another Day had strong legs, so you are projecting, and it doesn't work that way. Had Pierce stayed, Casino Royale would have opened higher, and depending on quality, grossed more. Make no mistake, Daniel Craig didn't "save" anything or make James Bond "invigorated" again. That's just silly uniformed nonsense. umm, he did kinda save it. Brosnan's about fifteen years too old for the Bond part in Casino Royale (Bond Begins), and his casual-funny personality wouldn't have fit what the film was going for (a Bond who actually feels pain) at all. So no, he would've killed the film at the box office. Maybe a higher opening, but a way lower total, and Bond in general would've lost more appeal. _________________Retroviral VideosA film-based project created for the purpose of helping raise awareness about HIV/AIDS, specifically in South Africa.
|
| Sun Mar 30, 2008 6:02 pm |
|
|
|
Bradley Witherberry
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Daniel Craig looks the same age as Pierce Brosnan.
|
| Sun Mar 30, 2008 6:25 pm |
|
|
|
Chippy
KJ's Leading Pundit
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:45 pm
Posts: 63026
Location: Tonight... YOU!
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Bradley Witherberry wrote: Daniel Craig looks the same age as Pierce Brosnan. The main difference is... Brosnan looks tired. Craig looks like he's having fun. Bond needs fun. _________________trixster wrote: shut the fuck up zwackerm, you're out of your fucking element trixster wrote: chippy is correct
|
| Sun Mar 30, 2008 6:44 pm |
|
|
|
Bradley Witherberry
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Munk·E wrote: Bradley Witherberry wrote: Daniel Craig looks the same age as Pierce Brosnan. The main difference is... Brosnan looks tired. Craig looks like he's having fun. Bond needs fun. They both have a twinkle in their eye!
|
| Sun Mar 30, 2008 6:47 pm |
|
|
|
Chippy
KJ's Leading Pundit
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:45 pm
Posts: 63026
Location: Tonight... YOU!
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Like my twinkle for you?  _________________trixster wrote: shut the fuck up zwackerm, you're out of your fucking element trixster wrote: chippy is correct
|
| Sun Mar 30, 2008 6:49 pm |
|
|
|
Bradley Witherberry
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
|
Re: Sean Connery Back As Bond Villian?!? Munk·E wrote: Like my twinkle for you? I said in their eye, not their pants... 
|
| Sun Mar 30, 2008 6:59 pm |
|
|
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/72943395/HERON_img_7.0.jpeg)