Who should/could be a Bond actor?

13063073093113121229

Comments

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited June 2017 Posts: 9,117

    'He's landed a shared main role'

    So 50% of the lead.

    And the film hasn't even been released yet so not sure how you can tell? Henry Cavill has been cast in the lead in MOS and UNCLE and is terrible so just because a casting director says so it doesn't make you leading man material.

    But by all means keep believing.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2017 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    Any thoughts on Harry Lloyd? I've only seen him on Season 1 of GoT. He has an edge.

    33 & 5ft 11.

    Ok9jSFm.jpg
    Ciye6y8.png

    I honestly can't remember who he was in GoT but he has a great look. He's young but not baby faced, seems like he could age into the role nicely. Good shout @bondjames
    Thanks @thelivingroyale. He played the Khaleesi's devious blond brother Viserys Targaryen, who met an unfortunate end.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,277
    Not to get all numerical but if Craig does one more Eon Bond:

    Lazenby: 1
    Dalton: 2
    Brosnan: 4
    Craig: 5
    Connery: 6
    Moore: 7

    Therefore, Bond #7 might do 3.
  • Posts: 15,106
    Getafix wrote: »
    Strange response to a good looking chap. Why on earth would you rule him out on his looks?

    Don't really understand why his looks alone make him suitable for Superman but definitely not Bond.

    Cavill almost got Bond and would have if many people's hero Campbell had had his way, but went off to do Superman instead...

    People associate him too much with Viserys Targaryan I suppose. To be honest if I'd only seen of his face in his GoT character I'd laugh at the idea he could be Bond. But without his blonde wig he sure looks Bondian to me. And he has the perfect age.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,960

    Taylor Lautner and Hayden Christensen have led films, too. Doesn't make it a good idea.

    I'm still indifferent regarding Turner because I've yet to see him in anything but 'The Hobbit,' which didn't give me a proper look at how he may handle Bond.
  • Posts: 15,106

    'He's landed a shared main role'

    So 50% of the lead.

    And the film hasn't even been released yet so not sure how you can tell? Henry Cavill has been cast in the lead in MOS and UNCLE and is terrible so just because a casting director says so it doesn't make you leading man material.

    But by all means keep believing.

    Yeah but did Henry Cavill play the historical role of the man who killed Hitler and THEN Bigfoot?
  • Ludovico wrote: »

    'He's landed a shared main role'

    So 50% of the lead.

    And the film hasn't even been released yet so not sure how you can tell? Henry Cavill has been cast in the lead in MOS and UNCLE and is terrible so just because a casting director says so it doesn't make you leading man material.

    But by all means keep believing.

    Yeah but did Henry Cavill play the historical role of the man who killed Hitler and THEN Bigfoot?

    I'm more curious whether Turner shares lead status with Hitler or with Bigfoot...
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited June 2017 Posts: 15,423
    Ludovico wrote: »

    'He's landed a shared main role'

    So 50% of the lead.

    And the film hasn't even been released yet so not sure how you can tell? Henry Cavill has been cast in the lead in MOS and UNCLE and is terrible so just because a casting director says so it doesn't make you leading man material.

    But by all means keep believing.

    Yeah but did Henry Cavill play the historical role of the man who killed Hitler and THEN Bigfoot?
    Nope, but Henry Cavill killed Billy Goat on steroids and then a beautified Yzma, the rogue advisor to Kuzco, that Incan emperor...
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Turner only kills Hitler. Sam Elliot plays the older version of the character, who kills Bigfoot.
  • Posts: 15,106
    Turner only kills Hitler. Sam Elliot plays the older version of the character, who kills Bigfoot.

    They wouldn't have Bigfoot against Turner because Bigfoot has far more charisma and that would be detrimental to Turner.
  • Posts: 2,081
    bondjames wrote: »
    Tuulia wrote: »
    I can see Fassbender as Bond (both on screen and off) much better than Hardy. I'm not sure I necessarily like him (maybe I'll learn to someday), but that's not a problem for me. (I mean, I can't say I like Connery, but I think he's a great Bond.) He fits the bill and is a good actor, so. I can't quite see Hiddleston as Bond, though he can be an interesting actor in some roles - as well as sort of irritating and too self-conscious at times, too (both when acting and otherwise).
    Fassbender seems to be the one most (myself included) think could nail Bond. He gives off Bondian vibes in most of his roles naturally.

    As to your question about whether he or Hardy are realistic possibilities, I don't think anyone knows at this point. With the distribution deal being worked out, I suppose anyone who wants it has as much of a shot at it as the next guy, depending on EON & MGM's vision for the character. I know Hardy has expressed interest, as has Hiddleston. I don't know about Fassbender.

    I don't know how seriously Hardy expressed interest - he said something not dismissive when asked, but I don't know... but maybe he actually is interested.
    bondjames wrote: »
    Tuulia wrote: »
    Turner... from the little I've seen, hell no. I can't say I remember him even being in The Hobbit - nor anything else from that movie for that matter. I suppose it's unfair to judge actors based just on tedious soap opera like Poldark, but really... He's still a clear lead there, and has tons of screen time and lines and practically constant drama, and... eh.
    This seems to be the prevailing point of view among many members, although there are a few strong advocates for him here too. I'm somewhat ambivalent. I saw him in that Christie adaptation recently and think he has potential, but just am not sure if he could be likable enough.

    Okay, I haven't seen any potential so far, but I haven't seen the Christie thingy.
    bondjames wrote: »
    Tuulia wrote: »
    I can't quite see Hiddleston as Bond, though he can be an interesting actor in some roles - as well as sort of irritating and too self-conscious at times, too (both when acting and otherwise)
    Tuulia wrote: »
    Luke Evans? As above, I don't remember a darned thing from The Hobbit (except that I was very bored). And he was also in High-Rise? Okay, that movie was a somewhat interesting mess and I don't remember what his role was. So, can't comment.
    I'm a big Hiddleston proponent, and High-Rise was one of the films (along with The Night Manager of course) that demonstrated his bona fides for me. However, I can see how he may not be everyone's cup of tea and sadly Babs reportedly thinks he's too smug and not tough enough for the role (reminds me of her reported but unconfirmed comments of 'feyness' about Jackman in 2005).

    I'm always extremely suspicious of unconfirmed comments famous people have presumably made about other famous people (or about anything else). Basically, if there's no proof and enough context (a partial quote, even if correct, can be completely misunderstood when taken out of context), I consider such claims meaningless.
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I'm sure if he was actually offered the role,Fassbender would accept it.

    How can you be sure he would? I can't speak about Fassbender specifically, I don't know anywhere enough to even guess, but every actor wouldn't want the role even if offered. He's doing fine as it is (he gets enough work) and may not want to be more famous etc.

  • Posts: 11,425
    I suspect hardy would jump at the chance.

    Fassbender not so sure but I wouldn't be surprised if he took it. Yes he's successful but Bond would keep him amongst the A-list for another 10-15 years. A canny actor knows that would allow them to do a whole load of other stuff in between esp. if EON keep up the long breaks
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Turner only kills Hitler. Sam Elliot plays the older version of the character, who kills Bigfoot.

    They wouldn't have Bigfoot against Turner because Bigfoot has far more charisma and that would be detrimental to Turner.

    But they risk having him up against Hitler?
  • Posts: 11,425
    May be Turner would make a good Tanner
  • edited July 2017 Posts: 15,106
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Turner only kills Hitler. Sam Elliot plays the older version of the character, who kills Bigfoot.

    They wouldn't have Bigfoot against Turner because Bigfoot has far more charisma and that would be detrimental to Turner.

    But they risk having him up against Hitler?

    Hitler had the charisma of a sexually impotent tyrant. Bigfoot is a cool wild beast.
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,129
    Haven't seen him in anything, but Harry Lloyd looks like he could be a potential candidate.
    I'm sure any of the names bandied around in here, along with some that haven't have been in the EON radar.
    The casting of a new Bond is a massive event. When they need to re-cast I'm sure they won't do it on a whim.
  • Posts: 15,106
    @Benny I'd say whatch the first season of Game of Thrones but while he's greay in it he looks NOTHING like Bond.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Wow, I have found our new Bond!
    modal_type_tuxedo.jpg
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2017 Posts: 23,883
    At least that dinner jacket looks to be appropriately tailored.
  • Posts: 1,661
    Apparently the Harold Lloyd clock hanging scene was er.. a bit fake. He wasn't that high up. Sorry to spoil the illusion!
  • Posts: 15,106
    Don't know if it's the script of 50 Shades Darker but I'd rather never see Jamie Dornan as James Bond.
  • Posts: 12,837
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Don't know if it's the script of 50 Shades Darker but I'd rather never see Jamie Dornan as James Bond.

    To be fair he's supposed to be quite good in that Irish serial killer thing, and I saw him in a film on Netflix recently called The Siege of Jadotville and he was quite good in that. So I think 50 Shades is probably a case of the material letting him down, which is a shame because he's going to find it very hard to escape that imo (certainly won't get Bond now). But to be fair I'd imagine it was hard to turn down given how well it must pay.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,247
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Don't know if it's the script of 50 Shades Darker but I'd rather never see Jamie Dornan as James Bond.

    To be fair he's supposed to be quite good in that Irish serial killer thing, and I saw him in a film on Netflix recently called The Siege of Jadotville and he was quite good in that. So I think 50 Shades is probably a case of the material letting him down, which is a shame because he's going to find it very hard to escape that imo (certainly won't get Bond now). But to be fair I'd imagine it was hard to turn down given how well it must pay.

    That was the single worst acting ever hyped on this planet. They could've had an Orang Utan play Gray better than that. At least the 'masculinity' would've been covered. It goes to show you can sell anything if the marketing budget is big enough.
  • Posts: 15,106
    Maybe the script let him down but I certainly saw nothing of even a decent actor in 50 Shades.
  • Posts: 2,081
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Don't know if it's the script of 50 Shades Darker but I'd rather never see Jamie Dornan as James Bond.

    To be fair he's supposed to be quite good in that Irish serial killer thing, and I saw him in a film on Netflix recently called The Siege of Jadotville and he was quite good in that. So I think 50 Shades is probably a case of the material letting him down, which is a shame because he's going to find it very hard to escape that imo (certainly won't get Bond now). But to be fair I'd imagine it was hard to turn down given how well it must pay.

    That was the single worst acting ever hyped on this planet. They could've had an Orang Utan play Gray better than that. At least the 'masculinity' would've been covered. It goes to show you can sell anything if the marketing budget is big enough.

    I wonder which part of the marketing was effective. I only saw the trailer - unfortunately multiple times - when going to see other movies, and it was really boring, bland, uninteresting, and with zero chemistry, and it seemed to suggest the movie was going to be really boring, bland, uninteresting and with zero chemistry. So I wouldn't have bothered to go even if given free tickets. I guess there must have been some better marketing somewhere.

  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,247
    Tuulia wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Don't know if it's the script of 50 Shades Darker but I'd rather never see Jamie Dornan as James Bond.

    To be fair he's supposed to be quite good in that Irish serial killer thing, and I saw him in a film on Netflix recently called The Siege of Jadotville and he was quite good in that. So I think 50 Shades is probably a case of the material letting him down, which is a shame because he's going to find it very hard to escape that imo (certainly won't get Bond now). But to be fair I'd imagine it was hard to turn down given how well it must pay.

    That was the single worst acting ever hyped on this planet. They could've had an Orang Utan play Gray better than that. At least the 'masculinity' would've been covered. It goes to show you can sell anything if the marketing budget is big enough.

    I wonder which part of the marketing was effective. I only saw the trailer - unfortunately multiple times - when going to see other movies, and it was really boring, bland, uninteresting, and with zero chemistry, and it seemed to suggest the movie was going to be really boring, bland, uninteresting and with zero chemistry. So I wouldn't have bothered to go even if given free tickets. I guess there must have been some better marketing somewhere.

    I think it's a very good discription of the film. I had to sit through it because my then girlfriend wanted to go and I had to make up for something, which was paid back in full by watching the first two minutes and if I were still in contact with her she'd owe me a lot for the rest!

    Anyway, the book was poorly written too a.f.a.k., but it all played into the 'housewife fantasies', which says a lot about the people actually going to the film. The advertisements were, again to my knowledge, aimed at this group of people, especially with 'specials' in appropriate magazines and so on and so forth.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,196
    Jamie Dornan looks more like a psycho than a Double O.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    talos7 wrote: »
    Jamie Dornan looks more like a psycho than a Double O.

    Jamie Dorman as James Bond in SPYCHO.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,196
    :D
  • Posts: 15,106
    More like a soft porn actor than anything else really.
Sign In or Register to comment.