› ›

Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1…466467469471472…1228

Comments

  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    edited December 2018 Posts: 17,733
    It will be interesting to see how Turner looks – looks wise, around the time they recast the part (hopefully in not too many years). He's in my top three, but future film and TV parts might be an indication whether he stays a likely candidate or not. Ideally he'll not do too many high profile gigs.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2018 Posts: 23,883
    I agree with the views that Jackman could have made an excellent Bond, blending the cinematic insouciance & charm with a darker interpretation. He has always been a very charismatic screen presence, and is aging well too. The only time I've found him to be outshone is when up against Bale in The Prestige, but then I'm a huge Bale fan and so am likely biased.
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    Just watched the MIB trailer....? Not sure to be honest?
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,709
    RogueAgent wrote: »
    Just watched the MIB trailer....? Not sure to be honest?

    I'll be honest. I'm quite sure. Not Bond material. I always see a surfer dude.

  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    Univex wrote: »
    RogueAgent wrote: »
    Just watched the MIB trailer....? Not sure to be honest?

    I'll be honest. I'm quite sure. Not Bond material. I always see a surfer dude.

    When he was delivering his lines all I could hear was Thor! He looks good suited and booted but would have to sort the voice for Bond if that happened which I do not.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,956
    If people say Michael Fassbender is too popular to play Bond, then Chris Hemsworth is definitely WAY too popular for the role.
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,709
    Voice, face, swagger, for me he's still a surfer dude in a suit. A blondie, cocky, very tall, very fit dude. A good henchman for Bond. Enough with the bouncer type.

    Bring back the tall, dark, suave guy, please.

    cd1d355f73c1dfef966037dc90c26d0a--aidan-turner.jpg

    If not this guy, then another of the same phenotype :)
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    I would say no substitutes but some guy on reddit would probably take offence to it. =))
    l1stQvLm.jpg?1
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,956
    In terms of plausibility and my own interest, Cavill's my number one pick currently.
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,709
    I wouldn't be upset if he got chosen. Just loose a few muscles, please.

    aebe5ca96ba7a94aa80014d139c97928.jpg

    Scratch that, he'd be ridiculous. Sorry, all I see is superdude.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,086
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    In terms of plausibility and my own interest, Cavill's my number one pick currently.

    I'd say he's about ten years too late. I was all for him a decade ago to succeed Craig. Not anymore.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T.
    Posts: 7,019
    Hemsworth is tall and handsome, but not "dark" (mysterious) enough. Cavill's better in that sense.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Cavill all the way.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,383
    There is much of the world who still don't know much of Turner. If he were to land the gig, people would be like "woah, where'd this guy come from!" Whereas if Hemsworth or Cavill got the role people would already have drawn conclusions.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    There is much of the world who still don't know much of Turner. If he were to land the gig, people would be like "woah, where'd this guy come from!" Whereas if Hemsworth or Cavill got the role people would already have drawn conclusions.
    No arguments from me. Besides, Turner has more chances in getting the role than Cavill or Hemsworth.
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,709
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    There is much of the world who still don't know much of Turner. If he were to land the gig, people would be like "woah, where'd this guy come from!" Whereas if Hemsworth or Cavill got the role people would already have drawn conclusions.
    No arguments from me. Besides, Turner has more chances in getting the role than Cavill or Hemsworth.

    Let's hope so.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,193
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Hemsworth is tall and handsome, but not "dark" (mysterious) enough. Cavill's better in that sense.

    Was Moore or Brosnan “dark”(Mysterious) ? Not at all; Cavill certainly isn’t and Hemsworth has more charm and charisma than Cavill has ever possessed.
    I was a huge supporter of Cavill, based on his look, but the more I saw of him on screen the more my support waned. Also, far too often he is obviously “Acting “

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Cavill is certainly no Laurence Olivier, but he's nowhere near as bad as you people are making it out to be.
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,709
    talos7 wrote: »
    I was a huge supporter of Cavill, based on his look, but the more I saw of him on screen the more my support waned. Also, far too often he is obviously “Acting “

    This is very true.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    talos7 wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Hemsworth is tall and handsome, but not "dark" (mysterious) enough. Cavill's better in that sense.

    Was Moore or Brosnan “dark”(Mysterious) ? Not at all; Cavill certainly isn’t and Hemsworth has more charm and charisma than Cavill has ever possessed.
    I was a huge supporter of Cavill, based on his look, but the more I saw of him on screen the more my support waned. Also, far too often he is obviously “Acting “

    Agreed. Hemsworth to me has the charisma and acting range to pull of all incarnations we've had if Bond since day one. I genuinely feel he'd be great in the role and he has my full support if ever considered.
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    edited December 2018 Posts: 17,733
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    Cavill is certainly no Laurence Olivier, but he's nowhere near as bad as you people are making it out to be.

    Never had any issue with him at all. Not that the roles I've seen him in offered much script wise either. That's an issue with Bond these days too, I feel…
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,709
    Charisma and acting range doesn't make for a good Bond. Not alone anyway. One needs charisma and acting range, but also the traits that we recognise as being part of the literary and cinematic character. Enough with this character destruction pc garbage. A blonde Bond was quite enough. I like Craig, but it's always hard for me to recognise him as Bond, and I do so because he is a talented actor (or was?, I don't know anymore). Yes, Hemsworth could pull it off. But why should they pull it off just because they are good actos? I don't like Branagh or Malcovich as Poirot for the same reasons. And I put up with Ustinov for the same reason I put up with Craig, he's a superb actor. But when we have a guy like Suchet, why use blondes and and thin tall guys? It's killing off the character as the writer invisioned it. Get a guy for Bond like Suchet is for Poirot. A tremendous actor who looks like Fleming's character. How hard can that be? Doesn't have to be a car salesman, btw.
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    Posts: 17,733
    Good point re. Suchet and Poirot @Univex. He was made for that part, and I struggle to see anyone but him as the character – even those before him.

    I have no problem admitting I have my issues with Craig as Bond. He's the least Bondian actor of the series so far, IMO. Even though he's a great actor, he doesn't convince me as being the same character as Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton and Brosnan (yes, even him).
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T.
    edited December 2018 Posts: 7,019
    talos7 wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    Hemsworth is tall and handsome, but not "dark" (mysterious) enough. Cavill's better in that sense.

    Was Moore or Brosnan “dark”(Mysterious) ? Not at all; Cavill certainly isn’t and Hemsworth has more charm and charisma than Cavill has ever possessed.
    I was a huge supporter of Cavill, based on his look, but the more I saw of him on screen the more my support waned. Also, far too often he is obviously “Acting “

    I think both Moore and Brosnan were, yes. I don't see it with Hemsworth. Cavill has it to some extent, but I'm not crazy about him. It's about a certain presence that has a kind of gravitas and a sense of intrigue to it. It's certainly not the only criteria by which to choose an actor to play Bond but it's a part of it.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,193
    As far as hair color, I have to say that I’m surprised how well Hemsworth pulls off having very dark hair; often when an actor deviates too far from their natural color it looks unnatural; as seen in the MI B trailer, it suits him
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,709
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    Good point re. Suchet and Poirot @Univex. He was made for that part, and I struggle to see anyone but him as the character – even those before him.

    Yes, even Albert Finney. Suchet is just genius casting. He actually cried on the last day he was on set as the beloved character. He built a connection with Poirot for 25 years.

    Now, if we could find that lighting in a bottle again.
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    edited December 2018 Posts: 17,733
    Univex wrote: »
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    Good point re. Suchet and Poirot @Univex. He was made for that part, and I struggle to see anyone but him as the character – even those before him.

    Yes, even Albert Finney. Suchet is just genius casting. He actually cried on the last day he was on set as the beloved character. He built a connection with Poirot for 25 years.

    No doubt! Not many actors than can say they've played the same character over such a long period. He must have enjoyed himself very much!
    Univex wrote: »
    Now, if we could find that lighting in a bottle again.

    EON have a difficult job ahead of them. Not only do they need to find a guy that can both act, move and talk like Bond. They also need to find a guy that can win the audiences. If it's a more familiar name, it can work both ways. If it's a relative "unknown", people might go into the theatre not knowing what to expect – which can also work both ways.
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,709
    Yep, quite right my friend. A very difficult job. Although I'd love to have it. It's History in the making, or more to the case, the making of History. Cinema and cultural History. What fun must they have. What pressure. Fantastic.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,383
    I personally feel like after Craig is gone, there will be a huge hunger for a more light hearted take on Bond again. It will be 20 years since Brosnan by that point, after all. We cannot stay in serious territory forever and I think where cinema is at the moment there is room for some old school charm and fun.
  • UnivexUnivex
    Posts: 6,709
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    I personally feel like after Craig is gone, there will be a huge hunger for a more light hearted take on Bond again. It will be 20 years since Brosnan by that point, after all. We cannot stay in serious territory forever and I think where cinema is at the moment there is room for some old school charm and fun.

    Yes, one hopes so.

    Or, as an alternative, a completely faithful adaptation of the books (what? One can dream).
Sign In or Register to comment.