Pierce Brosnan came closer to reprising his role as James Bond in Casino Royale than you might think. After a strong start with Goldeneye, Pierce Brosnan's time as 007 is generally considered to be a mixed bag, but 2002's Die Another Day stands out alone as one of the worst offerings in the entire franchise. The negative reaction sparked a complete about-turn for Bond, with Daniel Craig coming in to replace Brosnan and the CGI-heavy ridiculousness of Die Another Day replaced with a more stripped-back, modern action movie ethos.
With Craig as the face of the James Bond movie series, the British spy has gone from strength to strength, with the modernized, realism-based approach grossing record figures for 007 and rejuvenating critical reaction - the current era of Bond contains some of the most widely-praised efforts in the spy's long canon. Bond actors have departed the famous role for a variety of reasons, from fears of typecasting to poor career advice. It's logical to assume that with Die Another Day's failure and Casino Royale representing a complete franchise reboot, Eon always planned to oust Brosnan, especially since Die Another Day was the last of the actor's contracted movies. But this wasn't entirely the case.
Bond's producers acknowledged that 007 desperately needed a change of direction and had resolved to adopt a back-to-basics approach with the next film, but the decision to replace the lead actor wasn't an automatic one. Even though Brosnan's James Bond contract had expired, the actor has since revealed that he was in negotiations with producers to return, and Casino Royale screenwriters, Neal Purvis and Robert Wade, have confirmed that their first draft script was written with Brosnan's character in mind. According to Brosnan, he received a phone call informing him that negotiations had broken down and his services were no longer required.
Evidently, the decision to let Brosnan go wasn't made purely because of Die Another Day's negative reaction, otherwise there wouldn't have been any question of starting negotiations in the first place, and the decision to move forward with a fresh Bond would've been made earlier. This would imply that the two parties couldn't come to an agreement on terms for a fifth Brosnan Bond film. The actor reportedly earned a cool $4 million for Goldeneye, but his salary had quadrupled by the time of Die Another Day. Taking Die Another Day's critical mauling into consideration, Bond's producers perhaps weren't prepared to pay out quite so much, and since Casino Royale was Daniel Craig's first Bond effort, the newcomer's salary was considerably lower compared to what Brosnan would've been paid.
On one hand, the prospect of a fifth Pierce Brosnan James Bond film is an attractive one. Most 007 fans agree that the actor was not to blame for Die Another Day's failings and ably did his best with the material he was given. Consequently, it would've been fascinating to see how the actor would've fared with the kind of grittier, grounded story Casino Royale delivered. With that said, it's also easy to understand why Eon settled on a new face. Having already decided to hit the reset button on the James Bond franchise's tone and style, it made sense to reset the character himself by bringing in fresh blood, saving millions in the process, and the success of the Daniel Craig era has proved this to be the correct decision.
