Quote:
Originally posted by C_Zman:
It's a stinker move because for the Bond films to succeed they need to connect to the masses audience, including Americans which are a huge chunk of the incoming ticket prices for films. When you add in an unknown (I'm assuming he'd be unknown to a lot of moviegoers here, that's why I asked if anyone knows what movies this guy's been in to judge that) to a blockbuster like the Bond films, you could be risking a lot on a big franchise like that. For examples, see Timothy Dalton and the guy that did the "On her Majesty's..." Bond movies. They didn't last long solely for that reason. Just because it's Bond doesn't mean you can stick a totally unknown in the lead. If Christian Bale wasn't tied to Batman forever or Hugh Jackman to the X-men films, I'd see them being great choices. |
thats a load of rubbish. "they have to connect with the mass audience, including americans? "
dont you mean mainly americans? theyre connecting with a good name in britain (origin and heritage of Bond) who is a good actor. why do you have to have an american known person already? thats ridiculous. how do you start out then? slowly? for the american mind to adjust to a familiar face? here i was thinking that a good plot and good acting were main ingredients. the name bond is the main thing that sells. there's a million reasons why the 80's ones didnt do as well.
what matters is if he is good for the role or not. maybe you should start watching films that arent hollywood blockbusters, complete rubbish.