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
Fassbender is most likely to old now.
And here. (bet @barryt007 secretly wishes he was Dalton here!)
I used to be of the mind that Hardy is a top echelon actor. During the time of Inception, and before that Rock n Rolla and especially Bronson, he felt edgy and fresh. As I continued to follow his career, I felt less this way, unfortunately, and see him playing too much a variation of the same character (mumbling, thuggish, and too often doesn't feel intelligent). There are flashes of his brilliance (Legend, Dunkirk), but too often, for me, it's the same guy over and over (I liked him in Warrior, but that sameness is found in The Drop, The Revenant, Peaky Blinders and it seems his Eddy Brock is more of this). Just my opinion, and more my disappointment that it feels I'm onto his bag of tricks (which every actor has, but the more tricks an actor collects, the more varied their performances). So this is my long-winded way of saying I hope Hardy never becomes Bond.
My issue with turner has nothing to do with Craig one day leaving the role but everything to do with fassbender Hardy Hiddleston Cavil and even both hemsworth’s existing not to mention Luke Evans and a few others who I just happen to prefer over Turner so much so that Aidan Turner is not in my top 10
That being said don’t think I would become one of this silly people if he was cast. But yeah my issues with him are simply because there are so many other good actors
I never saw many similarities between Craig and Dalton myself.
I also think the difference of tone between Craig and his successor might not be as important as people think (hope?). Yes there was a shift in tone with Dalton but let's not forget that: 1)that change was not unanimously accepted by the audiences and 2)Dalton was second choice in any case.
And was Roger Moore's Bond that different to Connery's Bond when Connery left the role in DAF? Don't get me wrong: I think there will be differences but not as steep as people here seem to assume.
Dornan has humiliated himself with those chick flicks he made. I doubt he's a contender anymore, although he could once have been.
He looks neither psychotic nor suave. He wasn't even convincing as a sadist. As a spoiled brat however I guess he was OK.
Same here, I have other favourites; that being said, I have few issues with the guy being cast. Poldark seems like a popular series (it airs outside UK too - at least here in Scandinavia), and that doesn't hurt his chances, I guess. We might see a similar situation as with Moore, who was cast coming from success with two TV series, in The Saint and The Persuaders (I might forget some major acting credits, though).
Luke Evans is (as I've mentioned earlier) my favourite, but I fear he's a few years too old now. Younger than Fassbender, but only by two years.
He’s got “Crazy” eyes .
He's probably just drunk.
Hey, everyone sees things differently; every time I see him , I see serial killer. Lol.
It's the only thing I've seen him in and he was excellent. Looking at photos though he's one of those men who looks so much better with a beard. Which is a shame I guess.
I do have a lot of time for Hardy and he can be varied, Locke is worth a look and he pretty much carries that film, his work in Dunkirk is a great tribute to his abilities considering he's behind a mask for most of the film. Although I've never got this desire to see him as Bond.
Great actor but it doesn't necessarily make you Bond, Fassbender is too old but boy he would have made a stunning Bond at the right point.
As for Turner I just don't see it, it takes more than just looking good in a tux and looking like you are trying cos play Bond.
Personally I see more in James Norton, he's done a far more varied set of roles than Turner, his Tommy Lee Royce in Happy Valley is terrifying but he can play the dashing lead. Also McMafia showed me he was a better candidate than Turner all the way.
Maybe Turner needs to do something outside of his previous roles to convince, being Ross Poldark is far from Craig's performance in Layer Cake, this is where I saw it and I wasn't on my own. So I'm open to Aidan Turner proving me wrong but on the evidence so far, must try harder.
Tom Hughes would be my next choice apart from being most well know for playing Prince Albert in Victoria he already played a spy in The Game, a rather good BBC drama that only got one series but is worth a look, more LeCarre than Bond but it has it's Fleming like moments.
To be honest if DC is gone after Bond 25 and I don't think it should be a given he won't be back for Bond 26, I think that the whole it's his last suits DC at the moment but if they want 26 out for the 60th don't count out DC's return.
If he goes after B25 then maybe some of the people bandied around here are up for a shot at the role but if DC sticks around I can imagine a whole new set of candidates for the role we don't even have on our radars yet.
Also it will depend on which way they choose to go, I think a reboot is pretty much a foregone conclusion and it will come down if they want to introduce Bond younger, I'm thinking they'll be looking for a younger man and trying to get more mileage out of him than they've had off DC but I guess we'll see.
If there's no plan for a 60th, especially if B26 comes in 2023 or later, I think DC will have safely passed the baton onto the new actor.
There's also a third thought: this may all depend how Boyle and Craig end 25. Will they do what no other Bond film has done, and conclude the Craig era with a definitive ending? If so, it could be there is no way Craig can come back...
Yeah I think if they don't do one for the 60th I think you are right but if they do capitilise on this like you say too much pressure to put on a newby on such an event.
Guess we'll see.
Interesting, I just got back from seeing MI:F and find myself stepping back somewhat from considering Cavill. He’s got a great look for the part and while he can be a good actor, too often I can sense that he IS acting. Bond should also have a bit of mischief in his DNA; I’m not getting that from Cavill.
If I had to choose between the two super heroes right now, I’d have to go with Hemsworth.
I’m with you. Cavill is a good looking, physically imposing, block of wood.
Hemsworth has far more talent and a natural charm— check out Cavill during the Graham Norton interview: he’s stiff, tries to look relaxed, but, the boy is out of his league. He’s sadly, terrible.
One name keeps cropping up, James Norton, who I agree has a certain masculine appearance in a 6th Form rugby player kind-of-way, but lacks any external or internal kind of threat. He sounds way too nice and too softly spoken to play Bond. He might send a few ladies all aquiver in his bodice-ripping BBC adaptations but beyond that he hasn’t crossed over into the “man’s man” league of actors. Sure, people can cite McMafia, which did nothing to impress or convince me otherwise, but that’s hardly an endorsement or requirement of their first argument (see category a which is used against Turner but not against Norton). Okay, I’m guilty of category b with regards to Norton, but for a reason: He just comes over to me as a pubescent schoolboy in a man’s body that’s way too soft. I’d rather see the other Norton play Bond... Graham Norton, that is.
Then we have actors that are far too short because there’s a belief that said actor will bring something edgy to his performance. This would be suitable casting if Eon were looking for an actor to play Napoleon Bonaparte, but this is Bond we’re discussing here and not about the vertically-challenged French emperor. Personally, I don’t want to see a half-pint-sized 007 and most likely nor does anyone else.
The key and future success of choosing the right actor to play 007 is finding a “man’s man” type of actor. Hiddles and Norton do not fall into this particular category IMO, nor will they ever. Cavill is probably about halfway there with his UNCLE and MI roles, but has yet to convince maybe about one third of you yet. One thing is for sure, we’re never going to be unanimous in our choice of who plays the next 007.
PS. In fairness to Cavill on the Graham Norton Show, neither does Craig come over as particularly comfortable or engaging @peter in front of a live audience. Some might prefer to choose the term enigmatic, though. Same goes for De Niro, who is probably the worst actor in the world to interview. In spite of this, I’m sure you wouldn’t hold that against him as a performer.
I would agree those three films don't necessarily prove Craig had Bond potential.
However Layer Cake you could see little bits of Bond at times.
However based on screen tests, the casting director obviously saw something in Craig that saw him land the role.
Having at least some lead experience has too help to some degree.
You could argue Timothy Dalton was a bit out of his league. Dalton admitted he was "terrified" to be on tv chat show Wogan.
I thought Dalton was a cool Bond but he did struggle a bit with the promotional side of the role. The point being is you can find an actor that fits the role - right look, confident, charming etc - but he is a bit unsure of himself in real life interviews. When I watch Dalton as Bond I don't think of Dalton in interviews. If Cavill has the acting chops for the part (open to debate!) then I'm not too bothered if he's stiff in some interviews. Daniel Craig said he'd only return for the money, that interview did him no favours (!) but I'm sure most Bond fans will forget that when Bond 25's gun barrel starts. Finding the ideal chap to replace Craig - one that can handle the role and the media - is a hard ask. If the next guy is a bit media-unsure, it's not a major problem. Most of the actors these days seem confident with the media. Probably due to social media and selfies and instagram!
I will say this about Dalton-- he may not have been a good interview, but the man had substance. He may've been uncomfortable in the spotlight, but he never came off as anything but an intelligent man.
What worries me about Cavill is he's as empty and vacuous in an interview as he is when he's acting. In M:I I loved his physical attributes-- the man was a monster. But any time he opened his mouth to... speak... his lines... he did so... as if... he was... struggling to... remember... how the... director wanted him... to say it...
And he had to have had some of the shortest lines in the entire film.
The first part of M:I he was raising eyebrows as a way to emote (and he's no Roger). In the second part of the film he might as well have
I'm afraid that's as good as we're going to get with this bloke. And I say this knowing he's actually a really good guy in "real" life (a friend of mine is very good friends with him).