Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1116511661168117011711234

Comments

  • Posts: 3,327
    Benny wrote: »


    I'm fairly sure you can find bad photos of any actor out there if you look for it. Craig had a few shockers too.

    I'm sure there are, I haven't ever seen any truly bad ones of Timothy Dalton from memory.
    And it would be near impossible to find one of Roger Moore surely.

    ;)

    Dalton was too cool for school. Even in his early days he looked cool.
    As for Moore, well...

    Roger_Moore_at_the_sets_of_Sea_Wolves.jpg

    Not bad for a 52 year old. Actually better looking than 32 year old backstreet boy ATJ.

    Oh dear. I can see you having a few issues if ATJ is chosen. Like the craignotbond movement that started in 2005, you can helps steer the new movement too.

    Look, there is even a website to help kickstart it - https://www.aarontaylorjohnsonisnotbond.com/

    That’s a funny site. 😂 But who is the princess?

    No idea. Princess Kate Middleton maybe? She had allegedly gone missing for a few days until she was photographed shopping recently.
    Not sure about you, but I am in fact a true fanatic of Bond, especially the Connery classics.
    I wouldn't be here otherwise. ;)

    Tim as your favourite Bond, LTK fave film. A connoisseur, good man.

    Connery and GF are a close second.
  • buddyoldchapbuddyoldchap Formerly known as JeremyBondon
    edited March 22 Posts: 190
    Benny wrote: »


    I'm fairly sure you can find bad photos of any actor out there if you look for it. Craig had a few shockers too.

    I'm sure there are, I haven't ever seen any truly bad ones of Timothy Dalton from memory.
    And it would be near impossible to find one of Roger Moore surely.

    ;)

    Dalton was too cool for school. Even in his early days he looked cool.
    As for Moore, well...

    Roger_Moore_at_the_sets_of_Sea_Wolves.jpg

    Not bad for a 52 year old. Actually better looking than 32 year old backstreet boy ATJ.

    Oh dear. I can see you having a few issues if ATJ is chosen. Like the craignotbond movement that started in 2005, you can helps steer the new movement too.

    Look, there is even a website to help kickstart it - https://www.aarontaylorjohnsonisnotbond.com/

    That’s a funny site. 😂 But who is the princess?

    No idea. Princess Kate Middleton maybe? She had allegedly gone missing for a few days until she was photographed shopping recently.
    Not sure about you, but I am in fact a true fanatic of Bond, especially the Connery classics.
    I wouldn't be here otherwise. ;)

    Tim as your favourite Bond, LTK fave film. A connoisseur, good man.

    Connery and GF are a close second.

    Are you my spirit animal?

    Edit: Sean and Tim are easily my favourites, as well as Goldfinger and TLD, LTK high up there as well.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,154
    Well, at this moment aarontaylorjohnsonisnotbond is the literal truth, so...
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited March 22 Posts: 5,970
    Venutius wrote: »
    Well, at this moment aarontaylorjohnsonisnotbond is the literal truth, so...
    We know…

    Just gonna quickly say guys, there’s a chance you might not like who they pick. As the website says, it’s not the end of the world. Just wanted to say that because I’ve noticed some comments are heading down the bitter/bullying route as opposed to here’s why he shouldn’t be Bond argument.
  • meshypushymeshypushy Ireland
    Posts: 146
    I’ve been thinking further about The Sun’s report about EON “waiting to hear back” from ATJ - maybe he has been calling but because Barbara doesn’t have the hearing range of a dog, his attempts have been unsuccessful.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    meshypushy wrote: »
    I’ve been thinking further about The Sun’s report about EON “waiting to hear back” from ATJ - maybe he has been calling but because Barbara doesn’t have the hearing range of a dog, his attempts have been unsuccessful.
    I rest my case ;)
  • bondywondy wrote: »
    bondywondy wrote: »
    I don't think Henry Cavill and Idris Elba have ever been popular. The internet/social media can brainwash people to think certain actors are popular but the box office stats tell the harsh reality.

    In 2015 The Man From Uncle made $110,045,109 worldwide.

    In 2015 Spectre made $880,707,597 worldwide. Seven times more money.


    Cavill brought zero fanbase to Uncle.

    In 2017 The Dark Tower starring Idris Elba made $113,231,078 worldwide. Idris Elba brought zero fanbase to that planned franchise.
    By 2019, producer Ron Howard was silent on any discussion of a sequel when he admitted that the film had failed to capture the basis of the Dark Tower source material, because they had tried to reduce it to PG-13 rather than the dark R-rated horror story it should have been

    Noone supported Elba nor Cavill.

    Cavill was front and center promotion for Argylle. So called 'popular' Henry Cavill didn't equal box office.
    Box office
    As of March 19, 2024, Argylle has grossed $45.2 million in the United States and Canada, and $50.7 million in other territories, for a worldwide total of $95.9 million. Variety noted that for a traditional studio release, the film would need to gross around $500 million worldwide to break even.

    Argylle is one of the biggest flops in film history. Apple may have lost 400 million dollars on the film 😧 so if you think Eon Productions want to hire an actor with a 400 million dollar loss on his resume, I doubt it! Same with Elba.

    To be fair it's not their fault if people don't want to see their films, but from Eon's perspective they don't need the hassle of hiring Cavill or whoever if they have an awful box office history. If you want to be a film star and your films flop you can't expect Eon to pay you top dollar to be Bond.

    Of course hardly anyone thinks about that when they post social media comments like the ones here:

    https://www.gbnews.com/celebrity/henry-cavill-james-bond-snub-aaron-taylor-johnson

    None consider Argylle may have lost Apple 400 million dollars (apparently it's a stinker so maybe it was fated to fail!) and none consider the possibility Cavill would still want a hefty fee for a three or four film Bond contract. People don't think like that!

    They just say "Cavill must be Bond!"

    Yeah, well, good luck convincing Babs and MG to spend 100 million or so dollars (or rather Amazon's dollars) on Cavill. That could be the amount he'd want over four films given a pay increase per each film. 100 million to play Bond in all films vs his last film Argylle losing 400 million. Kinda not worth it. I think Babs and MG will pass on Henry.🤭



    I can't tell if you're trolling given the emojis you include, and statements like "To be fair it's not their fault if people don't want to see their films", but putting the failures of those movies on both Elba and Cavil as if they're the "sole cause" for why those movies weren't successful is incredibly inaccurate. Those movies failed for plenty of other reasons, none to do with Cavil or Elba. If you're bored by the prospect of their names being thrown around for Bond then fine, I am too. But don't go making strawman arguments about their "lack of popularity" when it's quite clear as day that both actors are incredibly popular and actually do have large (if not to the size of Bond's) fanbases.

    Please provide a film which proves beyond reasonable doubt "both actors are incredibly popular." I can't find one example. Cavill has had no hit films (be they moderate or big success) when not playing Superman (and Superman, the character itself, was the overwhelming reason people went to see Man of Steel, it wasn't due to Cavill) and Idris Elba has never had a hit film (be it moderate or big success).

    Argylle has lost Apple around 400 million dollars, maybe more, and Cavill was marketed as the main attraction in the trailers, he's center stage on the poster. He's standing in the middle as if Apple want you to believe he's the main star:

    s-l1600.jpg

    He was doing press junkets and he never said or hinted "well, I'm only in a few scenes, Sam Rockwell is the main star."

    And I'm repeating myself but it's a fact, go check out his resume on Box Office Mojo, Idris Elba as a leading actor, has never had a moderate to high box office successful film.

    Both actors are depreciable assets. Their market value has dropped so there's far less reason for Eon to consider or agree to any high salary they want. Bond is a very long commitment. Given the snail pace of recent Bond films we could get three or four year gaps between Bond 26, 27, 28 etc. That's close to or more than a decade so an established actor will want a large sum of money to commit to the franchise. And it's Bond, arguably the most prestigious acting role in the United Kingdom so actors are going to expect to be paid very well. If you ask anyone "what's the most famous film character in UK film history?" most people will probably say Bond or Harry Potter. Potter may appeal to gen z people.

    It's not my trolling to say both actors are not popular. It's a fact based on a decade or so of box office results.

    I accept studios do cast actors with bad box office records. Colin Farrell bombed in Miami Vice and Alexander. Despite those films failing to find an audience, for some inexplicable reason he was cast as the leading man in Total Recall (remake). That film also flopped. Yes, Hollywood can reward box office failure actors with more highly paid roles and that's unfair. In Hollywood you can fail up but it doesn't last throughout your entire career. Colin Farrell is no longer making Total Recall high budget films with him as the main star. Hollywood won't cast him in those roles anymore.

    Henry Cavill may have one more chance to have a hit if Highlander remake happens but based on his past box office record it's doubtful it will be a hit. Doubtful not impossible. And at the end of the day it's the film goers that have to support Cavill and Elba and Farrell and Chris Pine etc. Just posting " they're incredibly popular" (Cavill and Elba) when the box office stats clearly prove beyond reasonable doubt they're not incredibly popular, is a very misguided comment. If enough people go see Cavill and Elba in some of their films they're popular but they don't go see them! Uncle/Argylle/Dark Tower etc prove that.



    Guess what? Bad films aren’t going to be making a lot of money if the word of mouth on them isn’t that strong. Word of mouth on Argylle/Uncle/Dark Tower was incredibly poor; they weren’t great films and they didn’t connect with audiences. But that doesn’t take away from Cavil or Elba’s popularity. If you want proof, look at their presence on Social Media; that’s more than enough.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,311
    Murdock wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Mr. T was a hot commodity and The A Team was created with him in mind. ATJ is not in the same league as Mr. T.

    So your saying Mr T would make a better Bond then Mr ATJ

    Yeah i can see that

    The man can rock a tux so maybe he is our man.
    4eLkCer.png

    Not quite, he can't fly, especially not when you're the pilot.
  • edited March 22 Posts: 355
    007ClassicBondFan wrote

    Guess what? Bad films aren’t going to be making a lot of money if the word of mouth on them isn’t that strong. Word of mouth on Argylle/Uncle/Dark Tower was incredibly poor; they weren’t great films and they didn’t connect with audiences. But that doesn’t take away from Cavil or Elba’s popularity. If you want proof, look at their presence on Social Media; that’s more than enough.


    Yeah but Bond is a feature film, not a social media meme or TikTok short. Social media popularity doesn't mean box office popularity. Completely different worlds.

    You also don't mention the fee. A HUGE FACTOR! If you were the Bond producers and you knew Henry Cavill's last two spy films tanked... would you say "yeah, have 80 to 100 million dollars for making four Bond films, Henry."

    Would you be prepared to pay Henry Cavill in the region of 100 million dollars for four Bond films knowing his box office track record is poor? Why would you think he's deserving of such an amount?

    It's reasonable for Eon to say "no, you're not worth it, Henry." I would say yes, that is a reasonable response. And the same could apply to past candidates that may have overpriced their value. I would hazard a guess Hugh Jackman and Clive Owen wanted too much money and Eon said no. Just my gut feeling.


  • Informe_James_BondInforme_James_Bond Dominican Republic
    Posts: 112
    To this day I still don't understand how you guys still mention Henry Cavill. Please forget that now! First to all, he was Superman. Su-per-man. One of the most popular superheroes in the world. Despite that, he was Geralt of Rivia, Sherlock Homes, he will be in Guy Rictchie's next movie for 2025, he's going to be Highlander and there are rumors that he will be in the MCU too. His schedule is booked until after 2027.

    James Bond is not just a pretty face, we need an actor.

    STOP WITH HENRY CAVILL FOR BOND!!

    :-S
  • edited March 22 Posts: 2,287
    bondywondy wrote: »
    007ClassicBondFan wrote

    Guess what? Bad films aren’t going to be making a lot of money if the word of mouth on them isn’t that strong. Word of mouth on Argylle/Uncle/Dark Tower was incredibly poor; they weren’t great films and they didn’t connect with audiences. But that doesn’t take away from Cavil or Elba’s popularity. If you want proof, look at their presence on Social Media; that’s more than enough.


    Yeah but Bond is a feature film, not a social media meme or TikTok short. Social media popularity doesn't mean box office popularity. Completely different worlds.

    You also don't mention the fee. A HUGE FACTOR! If you were the Bond producers and you knew Henry Cavill's last two spy films tanked... would you say "yeah, have 80 to 100 million dollars for making four Bond films, Henry."

    Would you be prepared to pay Henry Cavill in the region of 100 million dollars for four Bond films knowing his box office track record is poor? Why would you think he's deserving of such an amount?

    It's reasonable for Eon to say "no, you're not worth it, Henry." I would say yes, that is a reasonable response. And the same could apply to past candidates that may have overpriced their value. I would hazard a guess Hugh Jackman and Clive Owen wanted too much money and Eon said no. Just my gut feeling.


    First of all, you and I don't work for EON. Therefore none of us know what they're thinking with regards to casting the next Bond; even beyond that, Pierce Brosnan wasn't exactly known to have a string of successes prior to Mrs. Doubfire and even then that was followed by the critical and financial failure of Love Affair, yet he still ended up being cast in the role. So throwing around an actors previous failures means nothing ultimately; if EON see's potential in a candidate, they'll go for him no matter what.

    Second you're operating under the assumption that I want Cavill for Bond. I don't. Am I a fan of his? Yes absolutely I think he was a great Superman, but I'd prefer an unknown actor for the most part (or somebody whose work I'm not familiar with), merely I was responding to your claims that both Henry Cavill and Idris Elba are not popular; which I still think is inaccurate.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    I do think the next casting will follow the casting of Craig. If you believe Barbara, she had her eye on him and his career path since Elizabeth (1998) and whether they like to admit it or not, the public and most importantly the studio saw his leading man potential in Layer Cake.

    Perhaps there might be someone in the background that becomes a frontrunner and then is cast?

    I do have my doubts they'll cast ATJ, not only is his voice high pitched, he has a rather boyish persona, but he seems pretty busy with a potential franchise and other projects, same goes with Mescal.
  • edited March 22 Posts: 355
    Can someone answer this question. It's not a trolling question.

    If Henry Cavill is so popular, why hasn't he had any successful films when starring as the lead? After Superman, obviously.

    ?????

    If Henry were so popular after Man of Steel (women were saying he's so handsome etc - some men saying it too)... as seen on YouTube messages in this video:



    ... it stands to reason The Man From Uncle should have been a hit! Man of Steel (2012) made 291 million dollars at US/Canada domestic box office. The Man From Uncle, (2015) made 45 million dollars at the US/Canada domestic box office.

    It was a major flop.

    My point is the fanbase that supported Cavill in MOS didn't come out to support him in Uncle or any other feature film. For all the many "Henry is so handsome, so great yadda yadda yadda" comments on YouTube and elsewhere on social media, it never translated to box office when Cavill was not playing Superman. And that's not my bashing Cavill. Chris Hemsworth has zero box office appeal when not playing Thor. This is just the way it panned out in the 21st century. Film stars with some moderate to large fanbases were made obsolete by the internet, by social media. However, these non existent box office film stars (Cavill, Hemsworth, Pine, Farrell, Owen, Worthington etc) all demand big fees. *That's the grift.* I'm just telling the truth. It's a grift.

    If Barbara Broccoli is dumb enough to pay Cavill or Elba or Hiddlestone or whoever a ridiculous amount when she knows they are not moderate box office then Cavill and Elba etc will chance their luck. I don't believe Hugh Jackman would ever turn down Bond if the offer was amazing. But it wasn't. Barbara Broccoli isn't that dumb. She knew it was cheaper to cast Craig. But the key difference is Daniel Craig wasn't Superman or Wolverine or a big tv star. He could never say to Eon "I'll do Bond but pay me 10 million for Bond 21."
    For his debut Bond film Casino Royale, Craig received a $3.2 million salary. The movie went on to amass $616.5 million at the box office.

    Assuming that is accurate I'm surprised he got paid that much. I would have thought It would be around 1.5 million dollars. Seems he was overpaid but just my opinion! But if we use that figure as a good entry point price for a first Bond film appearance, I can't imagine Cavill, Elba, Hardy, Hiddleston, Madden doing Bond 26 for 3.2 million dollars. If Kraven does well I can't imagine Johnson doing Bond 26 for 3.2.million. My guess is Cavill and Elba (arguably too old now), Murphy (I don't see any Bond in him at all) etc would want 10 million dollars and I just can't see Eon going with any established actor. And if Kraven is a hit ATJ fee will shoot up so maybe Aidan Turner or someone less well known will get the part?

    I suppose the counter argument is Amazon are so wealthy they can pay a big fee to whoever and it won't matter. If Amazon want, say, Jacob Elordi, and his agent said "my client is so popular on social media right now so he wants 10 million to do Bond 26" - I guess Amazon could put pressure on Eon to cast Elordi. He seems to have the boyish, 'handsome but non-threatening' look Babs might like.

    1395074356

    So yeah, at the risk of contradicting myself it's possible Amazon could put pressure on Eon to cast a guy for a larger fee than Craig's CR fee 3.2 million (adding the cost of inflation from 2005 to now) however, my gut feeling is Amazon will view Cavill and Elba as not worth their asking price due to a bad box office record. Elordi or someone similar would be relatively new with less negative box office baggage.


  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,243
    Elordi? God please no…
  • Posts: 9,853
    Murdock wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Mr. T was a hot commodity and The A Team was created with him in mind. ATJ is not in the same league as Mr. T.

    So your saying Mr T would make a better Bond then Mr ATJ

    Yeah i can see that

    The man can rock a tux so maybe he is our man.
    4eLkCer.png

    Perfect we shall sell the story to the sun and make millions millions i say
  • edited March 22 Posts: 4,273
    bondywondy wrote: »
    Can someone answer this question. It's not a trolling question.

    If Henry Cavill is so popular, why hasn't he had any successful films when starring as the lead? After Superman, obviously.

    ?????



    I mean, having success with Superman is all he really needs to be popular. And Witcher had a pretty solid cult following.

    Like I said, often with bombs there are many other factors beyond the lead actor. In fact I'd go as far to say that beyond an Ezra Miller situation the lead actor has very little to do with these things. The Man From UNCLE for instance suffered from a lack of effective marketing, not because people don't like Henry Cavill. Often very good films bomb.

    Obviously we haven't had a situation where the new Bond actor has been quite on Cavill's level of stardom/would demand a salary into the 100 million range from the get go, but it would depend I suppose. If EON really wanted such an actor/saw potential (and remember, Craig and Brosnan had starred in a fair few financially unsuccessful films) then I guess they'd try to get him. Perhaps offer him a cut of the box office gross?

    It's hypothetical though/likely won't happen even with a similar actor, but still.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,007
    @bondywondy, popularity doesn't have to go hand-in-hand with every film you star in being some huge box office success. Popularity isn't even the same as being a true "movie star," I feel. Cavill is popular and absolutely has his legion of fans. There's no contesting that.
  • edited March 22 Posts: 355
    Sam Heughan

    e707dee134a2-sam-heughan-news-t.jpg

    Quote:
    Heughan did audition for the role several films back—Bond 21, but as for the talk he will be the next James Bond, he told Parade.com a while back that those are nothing but rumors. “Absolutely rumors,” he said.

    He's in his 40s so maybe not the ideal age. Not much media hype for him.












  • Posts: 9
    bjmdds wrote: »
    Benny wrote: »
    Hahaha ‘bjmdds’ what a character. I’m not sure how his blood pressure is. He got boiled up over Daniel Craig.
    I’m not sure he or the forum over there will cope if the next Bond isn’t one they approve of.

    As too the ATJ news, it appears more and more news sites have picked the story up.
    Even The West Australian in Perth are reporting it…
    https://thewest.com.au/entertainment/actor-set-to-replace-daniel-craig-in-iconic-bond-role-revealed--c-14005707
    October 2005 was when Cr-egg came down the Thames River wearing a life preserver jacket clutching on for his life. Now, 19 years later, the green vegetable, it appears, has chosen a childish momma's boy type, whose wife is old enough to be his mother, as her next creation. ATJ's wife, being a friend to Broccoli, will probably have some input into how to further emasculate the Bond character with their new iteration of the role. Aidan Turner would make a superb Bond but once again, with MGW in perpetual hibernation, Barbara is making ALL of the decisions. Since 2015 there has been ONE Bond film made. At this rate, if chosen, ATJ will be 60 after his run is completed. Can you just picture him premiere night walking the red carpet arm and arm with his motherly wife as the people ask, "is that his mother"? The franchise has been retired to bedlam it appears.

    Welcome back BJ, old buddy... :-h
    Helloooooo Sweenster! Looking forward to another rotten choice by Broccoli, IF TRUE? Connery looked more mature at 32 when he started. ATJ looks like he could play a camp counselor in a Meatballs 5 sequel!

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    @bjmdds does Broccoli cast in a vacuum? And who were the other "rotten" choices for Bond?
  • Posts: 9
    Since 2005 Broccoli's decisions have cratered the franchise from its glory days at its inception, first with her obsession in Cr-egg, and then rewriting the history with Blowfeld as a step sibling, etc. Watch where this goes with her REDEFINING the future Bond character. People go to see a Bond film for espionage, NOT 'woke' inferences, where they might actually decide to go.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited March 22 Posts: 9,511
    bjmdds wrote: »
    Since 2005 Broccoli's decisions have cratered the franchise from its glory days at its inception, first with her obsession in Cr-egg, and then rewriting the history with Blowfeld as a step sibling, etc. Watch where this goes with her REDEFINING the future Bond character. People go to see a Bond film for espionage, NOT 'woke' inferences, where they might actually decide to go.

    Okay, please explain how decisions cratered the series? This makes no sense. Nothing has been cratered.

    You may not like the films, which you obviously don't, but nothing got cratered.

    The films were wildly successful.

    Re: Blofeld: it's well recorded that it was MGW who came up with the Blofeld angle, not BB.

    I think the series will go on just fine, but, I wonder, why don't you stop watching the new films and just enjoy the ones you do?

    And, @bjmdds , you didn't answer my questions. Does Broccoli cast in a vacuum? And what are her rotten casting choices?

    And have you done a survey on why worldwide audiences go to Bond films? Do you know why people in Banff go and see them? In Dubai? In Ohio? I think they go and see for entertainment...
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,249
    Yes, @bjmdds, reading your posts, it's quite clear who's obsessed with "Cr-egg". May I recommend a stress pill?
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    Will we hear if they have a script or have any production dates penciled in?
  • Posts: 9
    The Mission Impossible films have eclipsed the Bond films in terms of "entertainment" with respect to espionage films. Cr-egg as Bond and the infantile Q were horrific castings. Fiennes was a great choice as M. This notion that people give a damn about Bond's children and his childhood issues with Blowfeld and the motherly-son relationship with Dame Dench's M were dreadful plot lines. Whether Broccoli casts in a vacuum or not is irrelevant. She is attempting to rewrite Fleming's character in HER own mold.
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,163
    Still spouting your personal outrage at Daniel Craig and Barbara Broccoli I see.
    You seem to believe all that you post and pass it off as matters of fact.
    @peter clearly pointed out some of your previous comments were false.
    What’s the big hang up 19 years on?
    Did they not reply to your original outrburst?
    The obsession you have with Craig and Broccoli is unhealthy. Most people would’ve moved on with their lives by now.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    bjmdds wrote: »
    The Mission Impossible films have eclipsed the Bond films in terms of "entertainment" with respect to espionage films. Cr-egg as Bond and the infantile Q were horrific castings. Fiennes was a great choice as M. This notion that people give a damn about Bond's children and his childhood issues with Blowfeld and the motherly-son relationship with Dame Dench's M were dreadful plot lines. Whether Broccoli casts in a vacuum or not is irrelevant. She is attempting to rewrite Fleming's character in HER own mold.

    Well, you have your opinions. I wholly disagree with them and find them presumptuous (that you know what the producers are thinking), and you’re ignoring reality: Craig and Wishaw were wildly celebrated, the themes of mother-son relationships blew the lid off the box office with Skyfall; if M:I floats your boat more than Bond, that doesn’t make it a universal truth, and; whether BB casts in a vacuum IS relevant because you seem to blame her for everything (and then presume she’s re-writing Fleming in her mold, which is utter nonsense).

    On a side note, you definitely come on strong, with a disregard for other members here. Some of us did enjoy Craig and his films. Others liked some, and not others, and some flat out didn’t like them at all. But there’s usually- *usually*- a respectful discussion that takes place. But to immediately come on here with a childish name for Craig is pretty insulting. Just an FYI.

    Personally the Brosnan years weren’t for me. I liked bits and pieces of those films, and I didn’t always enjoy his portrayal. But, I didn’t hold Brosnan and EoN at fault. Those were the films they needed to make at that time for a worldwide audience to enjoy. Unfortunately for me, they just didn’t suit my tastes.

    But to hold a grudge against the producers for making the best possible films, at that time? Or to insult Brosnan because I didn’t like his portrayal would be strange. In fact, I always say: Brosnan was the right man at the right time…

    So, I hope you’ll soften your edges @bjmdds and discuss differences with respect for yourself, and others.
  • Posts: 9
    I NEVER disrespect any posters. To have opposing opinions should not bother anyone, for as you say, they are opinions. The majority of those who love the Cr-egg era are under 35 and many do not relate to the first 20 films, having not even been born when they were made. You obviously find Daniel as the best actor. To make Blowfeld a sibling "IS" rewriting Fleming, 'no bout a doubt it', and it failed miserably.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited March 22 Posts: 3,154
    Infantile Q? Whishaw was the same age in SF as Connery was in Dr. No.
Sign In or Register to comment.