Paul Haggis was recently called upon to completely revamp the script for the much troubled, as of yet Bond-less 007 project, Casino Royale. Haggis dropped some thoughts off with the folks at Hollywood Reporter about his angle on the revision process.
"It's going to be good," Haggis said.
Well, thank goodness for that. I hate it when screenwriters come forward and say that their movie is going to be pure rubbish. But, Haggis had more to say.
"We're trying to reinvent Bond. He's 28: no Q, no gadgets."
What?! No Q-Branch?! It's ironic that they're going to reinvent the spy by getting rid of his inventor and all those cool toys. That's gotta come hard for John Cleese who had been already been signed to reprise his role as 007's techno-wizard in residence. Granted Cleese is no Desmond Llewelyn, succeeding the legend as the new "Q" or "R", but still, Bond won't be the same without his gadgetry. While some of us have great faith in Haggis, the man behind Crash, this will no doubt anger many Bond fans around the world.
Bond being 28 will significantly narrow the playing field of actors who may have a chance to play the secret agent/womanizer. Is the age significant given that Tom Hardy, the British trained actor who played Shinzon in the abismal Star Trek: Nemesis turned 28 just two days ago on September 15? Probably not, since Hardy is only half an inch taller than Ewan MacGregor who was apparently dismissed from the running to play James Bond because he was too short. Still, it makes for a great rumor and I give it about two days before it's all over the place. With Q and R gone I no longer have much excitement for Casino Royale. Shinzon for Bond!
