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
Plus the other stuff.
If we’re gonna stretch ages then get Fassbender
Agreed. Far better choice if we're going for someone older.
Are we back in 2005?
Although this would have been after he did Inglourious Basterds not now, again age.
I see some moaning that we need a Bond that we can get plenty of entries out of yet keep advocating 40 something actors, granted Turner, Madden and Cavil are about the age to guarantee long tenure.
Hardy is 40 now and has recently said he's had enough of acting and is too short
Craig's Bond does not look like a thug, and has shown plenty of refinement in the role, no he doesn't look like his hairdresser goes on missions with him but hey that was the previous guy.
I think when you are in such production as GofT, you end up having good and bad memories. I wouldn't call that whining.
I'm not sure he's right for Bond, but I find him more interesting than the other candidates so far.
We all know it is, though. With that in mind my money remains on Cavill.
It really is. If they had recast for Bond 25, it would still be a chance he could do a couple, maybe three films. By the time Bond 26 starts production, we'll need a younger actor. Hardy will most likely be too old too.
I have to admit, not many actors mentioned in the late 20's/early 30's age group interest me at all. Never seen this Richard Madden in anything, but he ticks some of the boxes at least.
Very true. I hope they don't go for a long hiatus though. The franchise could do with a quick (but good) recasting.
At this rate, I'm definitely expecting a year long delay at least, unless things are progressing quickly enough behind the scenes and they've got a new director in place already.
That's means Craig would be 51/2 in B25.
Oh, I misread your comment as being about Bond 26!
At this rate, a Bond 25 delay wouldn't surprise me. Still think i's very likely they have their eyes set on the original release date though. Hopefully they'll get on to thinking about recasting as soon as the Craig era ends. That's probably more unlikely though.
Good points, @bondjames. The Annapurna/Universal involvement can be a good thing going forward, if Bond 25 turns out to be a good deal for them financially (which it should).
Not that these thing necessarily matters, but are there any likely candidates that have worked on projects for either Annapurna or Universal?
Yes! (somehow managed to forget to write that)
I wonder how much impact a studio/distributor can have on the casting if a deal is done for further involvement? Say Universal have good experiences with a few of the names you mention; can they make a case for screen testing one or two of "their" guys?
Really interesting. Might be an idea to keep an eye on if any potential candidates do films for Universal in the upcoming years, in case that this makes any of them more likely to get the part.
I don't see this. Bond distinguishes itself from other franchises through its longevity and its unique formula, which, while admittedly approximated by other films in recent times, is still mainly Bond's territory, because it's centered precisely around the character and lifestyle of James Bond. With that said, there is no real need to tone down the humor forever and go for a serious, profound tone. The Bond formula works well in either case, so it's merely one of several possible and equally valid approaches in which to take a Bond film. So I'm all for going back to happy-go-lucky romps, and I see no problem with that whatsoever. As long as people go see the films, whether funny or serious, Bond will survive.
You see I reacted to Max here. I don't think Hardy is a possibility for Bond--his FURY ROAD experience showed him to be a moody, difficult actor who didn't understand the director's vision. The producers surely know that history.
+10
Murdock-- if you're interested in learning more about Mel, lets chat more. PM me!!
Pretty much how I feel about Hiddleston and Turner.
Starting to warm to the idea of Cavill, though I still feel he's a bit too beefy to be Bond.
Here's hoping Universal/Annapurna get the series in gear for future outings after B25, on a regular schedule. At the rate Eon has been going during the Craig era, I wouldn't be surprised if 6-8 year gaps became the new norm.
That's what we have now. The producers seem fine with it.
So true !!