It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Yeah, I don’t know if he’s Bond, but I do find him to be a very interesting actor. I enjoy watching him very much.
I didn’t know he was actually a boxer??
I haven't started watching season 2 yet but I really found him flat in the series. He does have a great look though.
I think he was mentioned on the last page mate. I haven't heard of him or seen him in anything but he has a strong look, although he looks a bit French, maybe that's just me
I think he falls into the "should get a screentest" category, there's a few actors who don't have a lot of credits but they have potential.
Is there anything in particular you don't like about him? I don't think much of him either, I'm just curious what you think.
Otherwise, we may as well bring comedy actors and pornstars in the equation - maybe they could be Bond too! Seriously though, I’ve seen everything Keoghan has done since Love/Hate and it feels to me like he’s giving the same thing each time. He’s good at what he does but what he has brought to the table is very limited thus far.
Agree and with your previous post as well. Keoghan is a one trick pony, again, I will never get the buzz. Let alone him looking like a total cuck in between Turner and Butler. Meet Karen Keoghan.
I have it on my list. I think I mentioned it in this thread.
;)
Back in 2022 I said: He is very likeable in interviews but is overshadowed by others onscreen. He seems very well liked by the cast of HOTD and easy to work with, that might make up for his lack of experience.
I’m a little surprised he’s not had a lot of speculation by the tabloids about becoming Bond, but I guess there are a lot of candidates.
I can very much see why there's been no Bond rumour about him. He seems to have little name recognition (HOTD is essentially his first major thing from what I can tell). Can't speak to his acting ability/potential (although if he's being overshadowed by others onscreen in HOTD I don't think this is an actor at his peak, to put it nicely) so it's tricky to tell, but I can't see anything immediately Bondian about him.
He's too self assured and comes across as cocky. Whilst there's nothing wrong in being confident, Keoghan is overly confident.
In interviews I've seen, he goes into his acting methods and how he finds the character. He comes across as if he'd taught Brando and Olivier how to act.
He's just not my cup of tea.
His character in the show is as a very handsome knight's guard of the crown, and he's supposed to be so hot that
I say unacceptable as in invalid. It's like saying "because I can" when someone asks "why?" I mean sure yeah that's a reason but nobody would accept it as legitimate. As you say, though I'm in no position to challenge it.
Anyway, on that whole "owe" debate, I think "owe" was language a bit too strong for what I was trying to convey. I meant to say that there's no reason for EON to deny updates (with the "because they can"/"don't owe us" logic) because it would be mutually beneficial (for their publicity and for the public). I suppose that's a far cry from what had been seeming to represent so apologies for that.
Unfortunately due to the harsh nature of social media (and in particular casual misandry (hatred of men)... Keoghan has been labelled rat boy.
Definition:
If you type in Google or Bing:
Barry Keoghan rat boy
... you get the misandry. Imagine if the term 'pig women' were used by men. The press and social media would be outraged - "how dare men refer to women actresses as looking like pigs!" - but sadly women can call men rat boys and it's deemed acceptable and not offensive. It's also worth mentioning the Jews were referred to as rats/rodents prior to the second world war so there is a history of negative connotation with the words rat/rodents.
I personally don't see any Bond potential in Barry Keoghan - accepting Daniel Craig didn't look like the established Bond image but even so Keoghan looks even more removed from the image - and I think Eon would have a huge challenge to convince people he's Bond material.
Not saying Keoghan ever will get the part or that he’s necessarily the actor I’d think best (I don’t think he’d even want to do it anyway). It’s more about what qualities we think showcase Bondian potential. As it is, I think Keoghan has much more Bond potential than people realise.
This.
Does Bond have to be a straight, white, male? That's not the question to ask. The question to ask is, why wouldn't he be?
You people need to grow up and live in the real world. Why does Bond want to be white so bad? Why do you personally need him to be a certain race? I don't. Let's ask that question and see how some of you answer it.
Having said that, I think that Sope Dirisu would make a great Bond. But that's not because I think that Bond should be 'raceswapped' or 'blackwashed', it's because Sope seems to have far more of the traits needed to play Bond than any of the other suggested candidates. IMO. Best man for the job - that's what should count, right?
It's Hollywood hypocrisy at its best. They can't create new icons. It's too risky.
We have reboots, remakes, adaptations of 80-year-old characters...pop culture is almost dead.
As you say, the impetus to change it is that they meet an actor who's great, that's it.
I can see Dirisu too.
Can't really believe the conversation has swung this way again!
I think it’s less that Hollywood “can’t” create new icons and more that audiences have become so attached to the things they’ve grown to love that it became easier to continue funding the sequels, reboots and etc because there was at least some tiny guarantee of profit to be made.
But we’re on the other side of that now. Things are much more unpredictable these days with regards to box office.
Yes, it's about branding ultimately. There's a bit less risk in investing megabucks in something where there's a bit of brand recognition which will help draw punters to the cinema. Ultimately it's not that different in concept to the idea of having film stars: people will go to the cinema if they recognise an actor's name above the film, because there's a suggestion that that name will mean quality.
And we can hardly complain about it too much because we're in the glass house, wanting to see another film starring that famous character we all like!