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
Photos? Just go and watch something you can actually see him act and then judge?
Photos?
I think they're pretty much even. To me anyway. Their look is fine, it's their acting skills I find lacking. And Cavill seems made of plastic now, don't know why.
I must confess I prefer the idea of Richard Madden. Height aside, what's so un Bondian about his look for some?
Madden doesn't look Bond to me, at all. More like 006, or even Leiter. Haha.
This.
What about ‘acting’, though, rather than ‘posing’?
That being said, he's not the worst choice.
Why pretend some people know the difference?
Agreed Turner was good in it, it was terrific production all round, any BBC Christie adaptation since has been hugely disappointing.
If it comes down to Cavill or Turner I'm on board with Aidan, this is by no means an endorsement.
It's an example for me and others but not all by far that replacing Craig isn't going to be a walk in the park some here think it is.
I disagree about Poldark, I think he shows a commanding presence and if one wants to see more of an actor then there’s currently 35 episodes to become more familiar with his range. I know some perhaps see Poldark as not manly enough for their own tastes, as it certainly has a large female audience, but that doesn’t mean Turner isn’t good in it. Look upon it as watching Timothy Dalton in the TV-mini series of the gothic romance Jane Eyre in ‘83. Both were and are historical romances that show the potential of a future Bond. It should be essential viewing for any person posting any antipathetic sentiments about Turner without doing any proper research first.
I think Turner did quite well in And Then There Were None. Anyone who like a bit of period crime drama can enjoy that mini series. There's a Bond connection too, as Toby Stephens, Charles Dance and Sam Neill (who had a screen test in the 80's) are all a part of the cast.
As for watching candidates act, and not just photos; here's Richard Madden in Bodyguard:
EDIT: Motivated by that Madden Bodyguard Clip, I actually searched for some Turner Clips. I´m surprised myself a bit, but my Impression is very much the same as from the stills. He Comes across to me like a competent tv Actor, but not big screen material, despite having a strong voice.
Madden on the other Hand surprised me in a much more positive way.
Well as you say about Turner it isn't about how they 'look', more about whether they can deliver on screen. Of the favourites being bandied about my opinion is that Madden has a little more of the charisma required to pull it off in the near future (just a year or two too soon at the moment). Not entirely convinced that Turner has the same. He looks ok in photos, but acting wise smacks too much of a top TV star who won't make the transition. Madden I think can make it.
Is there a standard on how 006 should look like? What makes Madden looking like 006?
As far as I'm concerned he has a bit of a baby face... But so did Roger Moore to a degree.
I will try to give Bodyguard a watch too, eventually. Everything I've seen so far is this clip. Bodyguard seems to have become quite popular, so that might be a platform for Madden to get big roles.
The same used to be said of Roger Moore, just a TV star, not a real movie star. I like Madden but his diminutive stature does bother me, if I’m being honest.
I agree that it probably was the last good Christie adaptation, which is regrettable.
You may have to accept that the next iteration is likely to disappoint you either way, at least in comparison with Craig.
I agree. Turner was quite excellent in And Then There Were None, which is the only thing I've seen him in.
I respectively disagree, as the look of Bond is most definitely important to the character. Fleming is quite clear about that and it contributes to the believability of said characterisation. The archetypical tall, dark and handsome with a dangerous twist adds to the character of Bond. Fleming certainly didn't typify him looking like Craig, who imo looks more like a Russian KGB agent. Because of this I never really 'experienced' Craig as Bond, as he just looks too different to me. Madden is a decent actor, but nothing about him, at least to me, seems 'Bondish' to me. To me that is an important criterium. Ymmv.
Regarding 006: "a Royal Marine commando, is mentioned in the novel On Her Majesty's Secret Service (could be anyone really)"
Regarding Leiter: "Felix Leiter is James Bond's CIA ally and friend, played a part in six of the Fleming novels. Originally from Texas, he is introduced in Casino Royale as being thin, tall, about thirty-five years old and a former member of the U.S. Marine Corps who was working with the Joint Intelligence Staff of NATO. Fleming named the character after two of his American friends: "Felix" was Ivar Bryce's middle name, whilst Tommy Leiter was a mutual friend. Academic Kerstin Jütting describes Leiter as "a cool and quiet no-nonsense character who knows 007's strengths and weaknesses well". Physically, Fleming describes Leiter in Casino Royale: "a mop of straw-coloured hair lent his face a boyish look which closer examination contradicted"."
It might be but Poldark doesn't interest me, cozy Sunday T.V is not my thing, I was so relieved when my Wife said she was not interested in watching it.
I've already had to watch all of Downton Abbey and despite all it's trappings it's about as sophisticated as Eastenders & Coronation Street. I doubt Poldark isn't much different.
One actor I touted sometime back although I haven't turned it into a life long crusade, is Tom Hughes.
He has just as a legitimate right to the role as Turner, in fact he's already shown form in a spy drama.
He was in a rather good 60's Le Carresque cold war thriller called The Game on the BBC, Daniel Pemberton did the theme.
Granted he did it in his native Liverpudlian accent but he showed as much form in that role over 6 episodes for me to consider he's as a right to an audition as Turner or Cavill.
He has also playing Prince Albert alongside Jenna Coleman in Victoria, sporting a German accent.
Yet the bookies haven't had him amongst the favourites or he hasn't hardly been mentioned here on the forum.
Watch The Game, I'd say he gives far more of an idea than Turner ever has.
I've cooled on Norton though, I have seen him give good performances and also enjoyed McMafia but I'm not seeing it has much as Hughes.
That being said If Turner was cast I wouldn't boycott the film and would hope he would prove me wrong, at the end of the day it's about Bond and us getting a great film.
So if I had to eat humble pie over it I would be happy to do so, like many had to do over Craig's casting.
Although I maintain that despite those trying to deny DC has changed who wants to play Bond now or who will be cast in the future.
His casting has changed this and if DC had never happened and Pierce had of continued the trajectory of his tenure for few more films with no real change a very different actor would have been his successor.
Possibly the reason why Campbell wanted Cavill over DC is he couldn't see past Brosnan type in the role and maybe Cavill would have easily walked into the role.
Instead they shook up the type of actor they wanted and the approach, hence the type of actor now wanting and being considered has changed, no one would have considered the likes of Hardy for the role before Craig.
Daniel Craig's casting changed the casting of Bond period and I'll eat humble pie if the next actor doesn't have a knock on effect of this and also be influenced by his approach.
Just finished rewatching The Game last week, actually. It was even better than I remembered it. Great cast (Tom Hughes included) - and a Bond connection too, with Paul Ritter (Guy Haines in QoS), and Rachael Stirling (Diana Rigg's daughter) both featuring. Paul Ritter was really great in The Game , and Tom Hughes was a good fit as the rather mysterious Joe Lambe.
Not sure about Tom Hughes as Bond. He's a good actor I think, but probably has a bit untypical look for the part. But if they can cast Craig, then they can cast Hughes, I guess. Give him a few years and have him put on some weight, and he might become a decent choice.
@shardlake, I googled Hughes and came across a Clip with him opposite Rufus sewell, and it´s a damn shame Sewell never got to Play Bond. When I read the part in the CR novel closely where Bond examines himself in the Mirror before going into the Casino, I can´t help thinking About Sewell. Give him a cheek scar, and he´s got that pirate look down perfectly.
As for Hughes, I don´t feel anything for or against him.
My point is more that individual members have their favourites here, based on their own predilections and life experiences, as well as how they see the character of Bond. I suppose this could also depend on when they became a fan, and how they see the novels in comparison to the films. There really has been a lot of variety here over the past 50+ years, and not everyone is onside with all iterations and interpretations.
I can only imagine that those who think the most highly of Craig, and particularly those who see him as the best since Connery (or even, heaven forbid, better than Connery), may not be as impressed by the next man, particularly because of an inevitable directional change which will follow his eventual departure.