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
Ask yourself who are the top five male actors that men go to see a movie starring nowadays? Without looking at any crappy online lists, I'd say The Rock, Liam Neeson, Tom Hardy, Jason Statham and perhaps Mark Wahlberg? With the exception of Wahlberg, none of them are what I'd call pretty boys but they do have a certain aggressive masculinity that goes beyond their movie character traits.
I didn't buy what @Tuulia was selling mostly because she believed that because she's seen a number of women in her movie theatre watching a Bond movie that it automatically makes them all 007 fans. Well, newsflash: Mrs. Bondsum dragged me to the Fifty Shades of Grey movies, the same as a lot of other guys who sat with me in the very same theatre. Did I want to go see Grey and all its sequels? Hell, no. Did I enjoy the movies? Hell, no. But it's not always about me and what I want to see. Put it another way: in all my years of going to the cinema seeing a Bond movie, which started with 1969's OHMSS (and I've seen every Bond movie at the theatre numerous times since) I've never in all my time going, ever seen a group of girls unaccompanied by male chaperones, take an entire row of seats with the purpose of enjoying a Bond movie as a good girl's night out. Never. I only wanted to point out that it's not about pleasing the female cinema-goers choosing the next Bond actor, as they tend to be dragged along to see these movies by their boyfriends or spouses. Sure, there are some female Bond fans, but it's a small minority. The majority of women don't tend to like violent movies. They prefer romantic comedies or dramas. If that's pigeonholing women's cinematic tastes then so be it, but I've yet to see the trend change. @Tuulia was quick to point out that she didn't agree with me, but she didn't offer up any of her own choices for the next 007 actor. If I came over too aggressive or too alpha male, I apologise, but my point still stands. Bond has a bigger, more sustained male following than it does a female one.
With regards to Matt Smith, nice bloke in an oddball kind of way, but ten kinds of wrong for a future Bond.
And by the way, love this debate. And right now I'm sliding on the side of bondsum, especially when he punched out this:
Indeed. The chances that ones personal favourite ends up being cast is quite slim, so it's best to keep an open mind. As you write, the Bond we'll get after Craig might be quite different, and EON's choice will reflect that – be it a Cavill type, Turner type, Hiddleston type, etc. I write "type", as there's probably more candidates who would be of similar looks, built etc. that we haven't named here.
It's not likely to ever happen, but if EON put in an effort to jump on to producing Bond 26 quite quickly after Bond 25, I still live in the hope for a couple of Luke Evans Bond films! :-D
Well I would expect women and men to judge women and men in a different way (strictly talking heterosexual here). Coming back to that later.
I share your 50 shades experience, as I have no doubt all men in that theatre did. My Bond-experience however is completely different. I had a female friend of mine asking me to accompany her, because she wanted to see CR in the cinema. My wife also loves action-adventure movies. Not the shoot-them-up Stratham action films, but thankfully Bond has far more to offer then that. @Tuulia herself doesn't need to be dragged, as most other female fans who frequent(ed) the forums, and over the years there have been quite a few. I've also seen groups of female friends go to Bondfilms in the past. admittedly my run is only from GE onwards, but especially the Craig-films have had quite the appeal.
And that brings be back to @Tuulia's point: Craig may be masculine, he brings far more to Bond then the (mispercieved, later more on that) alpha male role. He brings depth to the character. To quote said female friend after CR: "Now I know why he treats women the way he does". Bond, especially the Fleming incarnation, has always been human, with his weaknesses. He appeals bcause he's got an iron will to overcome hardship and difficulty (to the point you might think he's addicted). It's this human connection that makes him far more appealing to the female audience.
Your idea of alpha male is, I'm afraid, misconceaved. https://www.ted.com/talks/frans_de_waal_the_surprising_science_of_alpha_males
And that makes sense. Because, also without looking at those online lists, I would at least add Tom Hanks, Gary Oldman and Tom Cruise to that list. Now I know the latter is very fit, but he's nowhere near 'The Rock', who, by the way, is an Alpha male due to his behaviour more then his muscles. Johnson is famous for helping people who're in trouble and bringing parties together.
Given how long this change will have taken, I'm pretty certain most people here will not have heard of the next Bond actor. They'll be more shocked than hostile. I'd also say that we'll learn from Craig's casting to be carefully optimistic. I hope we learned anyway.
As for the kind of Bond the next actor will be, I'm not sure he'll be so different.
Regarding him being different, I think he will be. The evidence over 50+ years suggests this will be the case. It has to be, to avoid inevitable unfavourable comparisons.
-Moore was very different to Connery (DAF notwithstanding)
-Dalton was very different to Moore
-Brosnan was very different to Dalton
-Craig is very different to Brosnan
-Bond #007 will be very different to Craig
This is the case in 'looks' as much as it is in approach. Of course there is a 'transition' in characterization which existed between Moore and Dalton (he went full on in LTK) & Dalton and Brosnan (he adopted his own approach in TND). Craig was a reboot so he was entirely different from the start as he was playing younger.
I don't count Laz because they had no clue what they were doing at that point. Moore established that one could have this series survive by taking a different approach to the main predecessor and that is what I think they will do with the next man. Look for the 'transition' clues in how Craig plays Bond in B25.
I am looking forward to the next time that the Bond character doesn't any longer get in the way of the experience of a Bond movie. I feel like they will find an actor who is comfortable and suited to being a element instead of a whole. I think the introspective character study days are behind us, and movies are becoming a lot more stylised and vibrant again.
It seems like the longer an era goes on, the more it start to lag behind the culture of the times?
Part of the reason I loved GoldenEye growing up is that it felt so much "caught up" with the modern times, from the updated title sequence, to the snappier editing, to how Bond behaves. I really want that experience again, of a Bond film that feel "modern" for today, that rings true.
I think Casino Royale and Skyfall are both excellent examples of this, as they very much represent the era they came from, but even that is over half a decade ago now, and I feel like there needs to be a change of actor before that can happen again. This is why I think the first entry of a new era is always the best of that era, everything is at the freshest creatively.
Moore was very different than Connery overall. But so was Connery in DAF to the Connery of the old Bond. I already acknowledged that both Dalton and Craig were radical departures. Brosnan too, although I'd argue that he kept something from Dalton, the whole personal angle, during his whole tenure. But I'd agree that there is a transition. Which makes the jump from one actor to another less steep.
I dunno-- the new Avengers trailer makes it look like the film's going very dark, with a few more major deaths to come.
I feel EoN has done this quite well, up until SP. One, not very complete film, amongst three good ones (to varying degrees), and we seem to rub our sweaty palms together thinking the sky may be falling.
CF has a track record of great storytelling with great characters, so, to assume B25 will be the same as its immediate predecessor is premature at this point.
I will bet my house on the fact that 25 will be nothing like 24. CF will give us something quite original and exciting. We can discuss our predictions after the release, but, until then, I confidently will say that this upcoming Bond adventure will not be a re-hash of what's come immediately before.
That's true @boldfinger. I suppose it's only natural. Plus most sequels, until very recently tend to be the same (with a little more); so it'd be natural our hard wiring is more prepared for this outcome.
Considering how DAD turned out I wouldn't hold my breath about it. Nobody expected DAD in the way it was made. After Once Were Worriors, Mulholland Falls, The Edge, you would expect a hard-edged film with a good story....
and here again we have a relatively unknown director with some amazing work under his belt taking up Bond 'in a new direction'.....
If he added a bit of muscle he would definitely have the look and I thought he was excellent in Indian Summers with a real swagger.
couldn't agree less but "eye of the beholder" and all that!
I don't know. He looks alright in some photos (like the one above). In others, he looks more like a henchman type. Not a big muscly type, but a Kronsteen type. Maybe he'd be better suited for a period set Bond?
Well, diametral opposite to Daniel Craig, that's for sure. But he does seem like a good actor, and one that uses his brains.
Now that you've said it, I can't stop seeing it. Blast :)
Also that first B&W pic reminds me of Hank Azaria.
Really funny show that was.
So I cant see him as Bond,i only see Donovan .
I saw the clip you posted and I do like this guy. He's a bit retro, but distinctive. Kind of reminds me a little of a younger Jean Dujardin too (hairline I think).
Yes, same hairline, straight from the 30s or 40s type of guy. Good for period pieces. I wouldn't mind him as Bond, would have to exorcise Elvis and Hank Azaria from him. Could take a while ;)