Bloom, Orlando Bloom
Submitted by jim on Tue, 02/10/2004 - 13:14
Tags:
Brosnan's Bond won't be back. They want to go younger. But Orlando Bloom?
Brosnan's Bond won't be back. They want to go younger. But Orlando Bloom?
The problem with future Bond films is that EON Productions is wanting to cater to a younger audience by enlisting such current heartthrobs as Colin Farrell and Orlando Bloom. Sure, the money's going to be flowing in with all the tickets that are going to be sold, but they're only ending up alienating the core audience - and believe me, there's a million-wide audience that makes up this core. It's also painfully obvious that Bond, the character, has become somewhat irrelevant. The only way I strongly believe life can be injected into the series is to revert back to what made Bond work during the Sean Connery era. Hiring Britney Spears as a Bond girl won't work at all.
So, without further ado, here's my pitch: We know Bond is a commander in the British Navy. We also know that Bond graduated from Cambridge (mentioned in You Only Live Twice. And if you know your history, Cambridge and Oxford were breeding grounds for spy recruitment, evidenced by the infamous Cambridge Five case (quick primer: five British students were recruited by the KGB in the 1930's to work for British Intelligence and spy against them). Being that Bond films worked best in the Cold War era, wouldn't a prequel of sorts work best? Let's say Bond is merely a bright, unassuming student at Cambridge, whom is recruited by someone at MI6 who sees potential in him (a certain moral flexibility, perhaps?). After giving it some thought, he agrees to join British Intelligence and is groomed to become 007. This idea in turn would lend more creedence to casting someone like Orlando Bloom who could lend some youthfulness to the role without vainly trying to attempt to make the role his own and failing miserably.
That's my pitch...so there!
My pitch is so similar to Sean Connery's own, I won't even claim it.
Put the Bond films back in the late 50s, and let somebody like Quentin Tarantino have a whack at it. Leave the character alone, but experiment with the style. Inject some cool retro vibe while restoring the delicious cold war paranoia. The character is the backbone of the series; nearly every other element can (and, perhaps, should) be tweaked.
I'd also add the grit back into the films. This tough re-invention will help capture a new, younger audience and win back many of the old folks. Only the small generational strip that loves Roger Moore will be left out, and yet, statistics show they are the segment most willing to give any film they are remotely interested in a shot on opening night. They might grumble, but the brand will still get them in the door.
As for who should play Bond, that's a tough one. It helps if the actor is a bit unknown, British, and the right age and height. It also helps if he can act, and if the ladies dig him, all the better.
Ladies and gentlemen, I nominate...
Jason Flemyng.
He even has the name for the job. :)
Of course, he is nearly too perfect. EON would never even consider him.
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
I don't know about Tarantino; Bond films just aren't grindhouse enough for him. I'm at a loss as to which director should helm this retro project of ours (heh, heh). But I do like Jason Flemyng as a young Bond.
Oh, who are we kidding. Orlando Bloom is going to play Bond and he gets to chase Britney around (who will, most likely, sing the theme song).
Actually, I guess I was thinking more of 1961, when James Bond was 37, which is closer to Flemyng's age (he can look much younger!).
I tend to favor the literary history, which has Bond getting kicked out of Eton (there are hints he seduced a maid), going to military school, lying about his age to enter WW II at the age of 17, joining MI6 afterwards. 1961 also puts him before his brief marriage.
I think he joined MI6 in 1946, and he earned the 00 rank around 1950, I believe. There could certainly be a younger Bond, but if it is to be pre-007, he needs to be 25 or younger, I believe. I'm not sure I or many hardcore fans desire the series to be hijacked by a 24 year old Bond.
You know, a 1956, 32 year old Bond intrigues me. Of course, I'd have to cast a new actor (I'm pretty sold on Flemyng), but...
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
Y'know, if we had a Rolodex full of numbers, I'm sure we both could have these ideas greenlit and hash out a screenplay in no time. But I seem to have lost my Rolodex full of important numbers...
Next, Barbara Broccoli will withdraw all Bond DVDs. She'll create a box set of Special Editions with horrible effects glued into the films, ruining them, and she'll refuse to sell each film separately.
Next, she and George Lucas will marry.
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
Anyway, back to Bond.
We've got three problems here. First off, Bond is perpetually 40. Are any of those actors out of their 20s yet? (Seriously, I'm asking.)
Next, Bond is a Commander in the Royal Navy. The thought of Colin Farrell in uniform is pretty funny.
Third, James Bond is a pretty refined, cultivated gentleman. Again, Colin Farrell, funny.
Ewan McGregor's name has been mentioned in the past, and maybe with a few years (and a bit of bulk) on him, he could probably pull it off.
I'd even be willing to make the supreme sacrifice and take on the role of Bond myself, if it means keeping it away from any actor whose voice still crackles. But only if I can name Lucy Davis (of The Office) as my Moneypenny. But only because I care, dammit.
I'm sure you'd make an excellent Bond, but in the event of your unavailability, I suggest Rupert Everett for the role. Not that they'd ever let a uncloseted gay actor have the role, but I think he'd be perfect. He might balk, since playing Shakespeare or Wilde is more his venue, but surely an actor willing to do Inspector Gadget could be persuaded to down a few martinis for the Queen?
Lucy Davis as Moneypenny is a casting coup. Bravo.
Oh, I missed the link! I just clicked through, and I didn't see anything in the article explicitly saying they'd be using the "new effects injected" versions on the Star Wars DVDs. All they say is that the originals will be restored and remastered. Of course, I've heard on numerous occassions that the original theatrical versions will never be released, and that the bastardized versions are the "new official versions", so I'm not really getting my hopes up. But it's still an interesting detail to omit.
Yeah, I noticed the story didn't mention this, and if they actually released the original trilogy unfutzed, I'd even forgive them the 'only available as a box set' sales tactic (and for those who didn't hit my link, we're talking about the announcement that the first three Star Wars films are coming on DVD in September).
I think the chances that these aren't the Special Editions (I've heard that Lucas has done even more work on these) is nill to none. I fear there is about zippo chance that these will be the original films, but my, I hope I'm wrong.
If I'm not, I'm not buying. Those Special Editions are crap. Lucas can hype away. I'll spend my money on stuff worth buying.
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
Okay, as someone who has only seen the Special Editions of the original trilogy, I have to ask - how much was changed, exactly? I know Lucas wanted to improve certain special effects shots, but beyond that, the details are kinda sketchy. What else did he change, and why were his changes crap?
Here's the definitive list of changes.
Whoops, I posted that on accident, so now, I'm adding stuff.
He really stuffed the first film with bad effect shots, some *really* bad 'comedy' bits in the background, and some scenes he wisely chopped for pacing's sake from the original. He also changed the scene between Han Solo and Greedo in a way which really bothered most fans.
Additionally, most of the new special effects just don't mesh into the original film the way they should. They stand out, and they often looked as pasted in as they are. I found this very annoying.
The Special Edition really hurts the overall film, in my opinion, and is quite a bit weaker than the original film.
His reworking of Empire was not nearly as intrusive. I couldn't muster the desire to check out the SE of Return, so I can't help you there.
I hope that helps!
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
I agree with all that. The only thing I have to add is that I don't object to the Silicone Implant edition itself (although it is inferior) nearly as much as I object to the outright suppression of the originals. Star Wars, an iconic movie (for better or worse), and you're never going to see it as the 1977 audiences saw it, unless you hunt down a grainy VHS copy, a format that's fast being obsoleted by DVD. Outrageous.
I bet Lucas was one of the five people that thought colorizing old black-and-white movies was a good idea.
I hear ya, Jim. Companies can remix, recut, reissue, colorize, trim, and change art as much as they want to, and I don't really care, as long as they keep the original out there for people to access if they wish. This is *especially* true when the original versions already attain something approaching classic status.
We usually saw this with colorized films sharing shelf space next to the original. It is often the few artists that retain the rights to their works and won't stop mucking with them that cause the problems.
There is no reason in the world why both versions should not be hitting the stores.
=sigh=
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
Amen brother!
Sadly, digitalbits.com claims confirmation that the box set will be the Special Editions.
Lucas can keep his discs.
Shalom, y'all!
L. Bangs
How's this for a nail in the coffin:
I'm pretty sure that "technically" the movies DO exist. "Practically" is another story.
I think I'm going to refer to them as the "silicone implant" editions from now on.
Right on.
DVD Savant has a few words on the announcement today, basically saying that the tactic that Lucas and Spielberg had of holding the release of their franchise titles to the last possible second may have backfired, thanks to LOTR-mania. Had the SW and Indiana Jones trilogies been released on DVD five years ago (when they should have been) everybody would have been happy. Too little, too late guys.
This tumbled into my news aggregator today: OriginalTrilogy.com.
Yeah, I got my Indy set for Christmas, but haven't watched 'em all the way through yet (the restoration is marvelous though). I'll pass on the Star Wars "silicone implant" versions for sure. Somebody should organize a boycott. Maybe then Lucas would get the message and put the real movies out.
:-) Between this and the Britney Spears rumor, I'm positively dreading the next Bond movie. Nothing against Orlando Bloom, he's just NOT Bond, and imagining him and Spears actually getting cast is too horrific to contemplate. Oops, I've contemplated it. I will try to hit post before I run screaming from the room.