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
Those two of course, not to mention many other potential candidates who would almost certainly be better.
When people talk about obvious choices, those are the ones that come to mind for me. They are both too old and too established. Turner is the pragmatists choice on Bond.
He's not even cast yet. So you should say "it would be great". Anyway apart from his fans do we have any indication that he's being seriously considered?
Like BB's new darling Jamie Bell of course.
Not long ago you were calling SP a masterpiece. Has that changed? I find your train of thought 'rather difficult to follow'.
Of course I love OHMSS and enjoyed GL's naivety and almost thoughtless physicality (at times he just seems all legs and arms), and I found, and find, RM unbelievably charming, and an unbelievable assassin for the British Government (apart from a few scenes scattered through his tenure); I do find TD hard to like since, once again, in my opinion, he's a stagey and hammy actor who always seemed pissed off. Brosnan I am up and down with, and the last time I tried my own marathon, I stopped in the middle of TWINE, and failed to watch DAD-- but this had more to do with the scripts/directing; I still admired Brosnan for holding the franchise together.
When DC came, I was floored. I never thought anyone could rival Connery. And, as I said last night, it was like SC, Fiona and Fleming had an orgy-- what came of it was DC. This is all strictly my opinion and my perspective.
To me, SP is by far his weakest outing. However, I have found developments in DC's portrayal that has evolved his 007 in ways I don't see in the others; like he is a living, breathing human, who has aged, changed and evolved-- again, in my opinion.
And, personal opinion again, when I am desperate for a piece of Bond, my choices are immediately the first three DC films, or the first four SC films... My hard wiring, and what i am attracted to in the character, is the rugged bastard, the arrogant, flawed orphan, who can't accept defeat-- perfectly exemplified, I think, in CR, where he's desperately fighting a battle in the sinking house, that he knows, somehow, that he's already lost... but he keeps going anyways...
And this, above all else, is what I see in DC more than any Bond before him, and; I found this sadly, lacking in SP.
I suppose we're all looking for something in our Bonds. Whatever it is that SC and DC brought, that, to me, is what this character is all about.
@RC7 dont wonder, he changes his mind all the time.
I guess it depends on how you define 'Bond'. A lot of people on here haven't read the novels. Does that mean they don't know what Bond is? Not really. It's many things to many people so to flat out say he isn't Bond is disingenuous. Bond is what you want it to be.
Could have fooled me.
As you said, there have been many different takes on Bond over the first 40 years. Certainly the Bond that Connery portrayed can't be viewed as stylistically similar to Rambo-Bond that we got from TND through the end of Brosnan's tenure. And both differ quite a bit from Moore's tongue-in-cheek and one raised eyebrow take on the character.
I must have missed it as well. SPECTRE is the only Bond film that I can't sit through. Even SKYFALL, a Bond film that I do have some issues with, I can have some fun with mainly due to Craig being so good in the role. That, and much more, is absent from SPECTRE, a film that falls flat on its face in so many respects it's actually quite amazing.
Your theatre experience was quite different from mine. I've never seen such a sombre group of people running for the exits after it finished.
Yes, I'm sure the VIP thing may have influenced your perspective. Didn't you see it in some high class restaurant/hotel theatre? I seem to recall a really cool theatre experence?
Sounds similar to mine. There was quite a bit of silence as people shuffled out. Upon a first viewing, I felt OK about the film, as I have for every Bond film the first time through (including DAD), but it was a pretty somber mood leaving the theater. My dad, a lifelong Bond fan going back to the beginning, seemed pretty disappointed with it, considering that it was probably the last Bond film he'll be able to see in a theater.
That high class restaurant/hotel was my second viewing. The first was the official Swiss Premiere in a VIP section. Naomie Harris and Bautista were there as well.
I don't think the Blofeld angle or the odd mix of Craig trying to be more of a Roger Moore-inspired Bond in a story that's very much a Craig-Bond story sat well with him. Like I do now, ultimately I think he just found it boring on top of everything else, though.
Luke Roberts is best known to UK viewers for his stint in Holby City but his career trajectory since then makes me wonder why he spent so long in that show. A part in the BBC's acclaimed Wolf Hall was followed by a small but memorable role in Game Of Thrones. Earlier this year he proved a worthy foe for Toby Stephen's pirate in Season 3 of Black Sails. Currently Roberts is headlining the US hostage drama Ransom, the future of which is uncertain at the moment.
From what I've seen of him Roberts is a decent actor who can do confidence and charm with ease although I'm less sure whether he has the physicality required for Bond. He has the height but at 39 time is not on his side.
Yes, I think I see that as well. Especially in these two:
In that latter one, he gives of that wolfish vibe.