Who should/could be a Bond actor?

16936946966986991235

Comments

  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    edited September 2020 Posts: 1,351
    So who's the German James Bond voice actor? Is it the same guy every time?

    Bigger actors usually have a set synchro actor so they have the same voice every time. Craigs voice is done by Dietmar Wunder who was apparently cast for CR and has done Craigs movies ever since. Wunder also does Adam Sandler, Cuba Gooding Jr., Sam Rockwell and Rob Lowe! That is a pretty common thing, as voice dubbing is its own craft and there aren't as many good voice actors as there are American actors.
    If I recall correctly, Christian Bale and Johnny Depp have the same voice actor, so when they appeared together in a movie, one of them had to be switched.
    Some of them get quite famous. Bruce Willis' voice is in advertisements quite a lot and will sometimes have allusions to Die Hard written into the ad copy (yippie ka yeah and so on). A few years ago the intro to the biggest German news bulletin show was redone and the intro is now spoken by the voice of Angelina Jolie, which was widely commented on.

    Edit: Didn't actually now this, but apperently Pierce Brosnan shares a voice with Kevin Costner and Al Pacino.
  • @ImpertinentGoon Cool stuff! I've been watching Money Heist which is English dubbed and I did a bit of digging into the process, it is a craft in itself! Gonna watch Liverpool now.
  • Posts: 727
    Reading this thread has been eminently fascinating. Thank the maker that this is Craig’s final Bond. If he was to make another Bond film, he would go into it as an American citizen. We don’t wanna think about how perverted that would be.

    Craig knew this. Hence why he delayed being an American until after filming was complete. He also made sure he would never be Bond again. He couldn’t be. You clever bugger!
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    I don't remember his name now, but I once taught the Albanian voice of Harry Potter. How's that for a claim to fame?
  • Finally, got to watch Jack Huston and Emelia Clarke in Above Suspicion last night. Huston continues to grow on me as a potential Bond the more I see of him.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    After seeing Tenet, it is a shame that Pattinson is doing Batman. He has an attractive “strangeness” about him that I think would have translated well onto James Bond. In this film he was handsome and charming, moved well in his action sequences, but there was something a little “off” about him when he smiled... Very appealing, he made his performance come off as effortless, natural.
  • DrClatterhandDrClatterhand United Kingdom
    Posts: 349
    peter wrote: »
    After seeing Tenet, it is a shame that Pattinson is doing Batman. He has an attractive “strangeness” about him that I think would have translated well onto James Bond. In this film he was handsome and charming, moved well in his action sequences, but there was something a little “off” about him when he smiled... Very appealing, he made his performance come off as effortless, natural.

    Yes, he's got confidence in his performances. It's a very difficult thing to do whilst being naturalistic too. I think he would have really made something of Bond.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,604
    Reading this thread has been eminently fascinating. Thank the maker that this is Craig’s final Bond. If he was to make another Bond film, he would go into it as an American citizen. We don’t wanna think about how perverted that would be.

    Oh I expect he was American while making this one.
    I don't remember his name now, but I once taught the Albanian voice of Harry Potter. How's that for a claim to fame?

    Ha! That's wonderful!
    peter wrote: »
    After seeing Tenet, it is a shame that Pattinson is doing Batman. He has an attractive “strangeness” about him that I think would have translated well onto James Bond. In this film he was handsome and charming, moved well in his action sequences, but there was something a little “off” about him when he smiled... Very appealing, he made his performance come off as effortless, natural.

    Yes I think he could have made a good Bond and given it a fresh flavour. I like that he's got a bit of a 50's style to his looks anyway which I think would make it interesting visually.

  • Posts: 727
    How about Sam Worthington? His CV does not seem keen to keep him busy. He has been sitting on his arse, like Bond at the beginning of You only Live twice (book).
  • ThunderballThunderball playing Chemin de Fer in a casino, downing Vespers
    Posts: 815
    He’s 44. Might be pushing it.
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,169
    How about Sam Worthington? His CV does not seem keen to keep him busy. He has been sitting on his arse, like Bond at the beginning of You only Live twice (book).

    According to his IMDb profile he's got quite a lot going on.

    https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0941777/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0

    I also find him to be an actor of limited means. His age might rule him out as well.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,604
    He auditioned for Casino Royale of course.
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,169
    mtm wrote: »
    He auditioned for Casino Royale of course.

    Luckily he didn't get the part. Too workman like for Bond.
    I don't think we'd have got much with a Worthington Bond.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 2020 Posts: 16,604
    Benny wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    He auditioned for Casino Royale of course.

    Luckily he didn't get the part. Too workman like for Bond.
    I don't think we'd have got much with a Worthington Bond.

    Yes I agree: although Hollywood wanted him to be a big star back then I don’t think audiences were hugely convinced. Nothing wrong with him, he just never had that extra something special.
    Presumably he’ll be back in the movies if they ever get around to releasing those new Avatar films.

    I guess it does show how they were looking a little younger for CR though: he’s close to being a decade younger than Craig.
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 395
    For me Pattinson is more Batman than Bond.
  • Posts: 727
    I’m wondering if would still claim such if he wasn’t already cast as Batman.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    I think he's good for Batman, and would've been good for James Bond. But WB got him first.
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    Posts: 1,318
    There is something about Pattinson's face I find quite annoying. Not Bond.
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    edited September 2020 Posts: 1,318
    (delete)
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    There is something about Pattinson's face I find quite annoying. Not Bond.

    Me too, i really can't see what's so special about him? I find his acting mediocre. He is good looking fellow no doubt, just not for bond.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    Some of the suggestions on here are laughable. We don't need a true these. What we need is someone, who of course, can act, but they really need an alpha male vibe, and a big screen presence.

    Definitely not someone, like Timothy Chalamet, who whilst being a decent actor, seems as though he is barely of his mother's teet.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    edited September 2020 Posts: 737
    Roadphill wrote: »
    Some of the suggestions on here are laughable. We don't need a true these. What we need is someone, who of course, can act, but they really need an alpha male vibe, and a big screen presence.
    .

    We all know that. The problem is nobody fits the bill.
  • edited September 2020 Posts: 6,710
    Roadphill wrote: »
    Some of the suggestions on here are laughable. We don't need a true these. What we need is someone, who of course, can act, but they really need an alpha male vibe, and a big screen presence.
    .

    We all know that. The problem is nobody fits the bill.

    Not an excuse for going full on surrealist :)

    And there are some who fit the bill. What I find is that people are having a though time thinking an approach to the source material would be a good thing, for whatever reasons.

    It seems the names that fit the bill are becoming taboo around here. If one talks about Aidan Turner, one gets instantly labeled as a fanboy. But if one talks about Chalamet, he has a right to an opinion and should express it how often as he wishes. Weird times, these, eh? ;)
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737

    Univex wrote: »
    Roadphill wrote: »
    Some of the suggestions on here are laughable. We don't need a true these. What we need is someone, who of course, can act, but they really need an alpha male vibe, and a big screen presence.
    .

    We all know that. The problem is nobody fits the bill.

    Not an excuse for going full on surrealist :)

    And there are some who fit the bill. What I find is that people are having a though time thinking an approach to the source material would be a good thing, for whatever reasons.

    It seems the names that fit the bill are becoming taboo around here. If one talks about Aidan Turner, one gets instantly labeled as a fanboy. But if one talks about Chalamet, he has a right to an opinion and should express it how often as he wishes. Weird times, these, eh? ;)

    I agree completely. I suppose that there are always drawbacks to everyone, otherwise the thread would be unnecessary, right?

    Can I just make one comment on Chalamet that I think gets overlooked? First, I don't think anyone is suggesting that he should be Bond now. In that regard, his lack of beefiness, age, or manliness of whatever, is not an issue. He will/could/should fill out and look older in ten years. If any of the other names on the list were judged by how they looked at 24, then pretty much everyone would get ruled out.

    The second thing regarding Chalamet is that those who don't want him for Bond always either look to his acting roles where he plays an effete boy, or else post publicity photos when he is either on the red carpet or in a photoshoot. They do not pick the roles where he shows far more Bondian qualities. If you haven't seen it, go and watch The King, and imagine that was all you had seen him in and hadn't seen anything of him before. Just that one role. I think if anyone was honest, they would have to admit that the idea of him being Bond in 10 or 15 years was not completely ludicrous (disregarding what you may feel about his nationality) or surreal.

    Anyway, that's just my point. I don't want him for Bond, but I am just pointing out that if you took his performance in The King, the suggestion would be as valid as many other names that get suggested.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 2020 Posts: 16,604
    Univex wrote: »
    Roadphill wrote: »
    Some of the suggestions on here are laughable. We don't need a true these. What we need is someone, who of course, can act, but they really need an alpha male vibe, and a big screen presence.
    .

    We all know that. The problem is nobody fits the bill.

    Not an excuse for going full on surrealist :)

    And there are some who fit the bill. What I find is that people are having a though time thinking an approach to the source material would be a good thing, for whatever reasons.

    It seems the names that fit the bill are becoming taboo around here. If one talks about Aidan Turner, one gets instantly labeled as a fanboy. But if one talks about Chalamet, he has a right to an opinion and should express it how often as he wishes. Weird times, these, eh? ;)

    Well suggest Aidan Turner again if you want, it's fine- you're allowed to. Tell us how you don't like Chalamet again, it's fine.
    Some people aren't sure about Chalamet, some aren't sure about Turner. As Craig said, if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen.

    If you're complaining that you don't think you've been treated well enough... well I don't know what to say.


    Univex wrote: »
    Roadphill wrote: »
    Some of the suggestions on here are laughable. We don't need a true these. What we need is someone, who of course, can act, but they really need an alpha male vibe, and a big screen presence.
    .

    We all know that. The problem is nobody fits the bill.

    Not an excuse for going full on surrealist :)

    And there are some who fit the bill. What I find is that people are having a though time thinking an approach to the source material would be a good thing, for whatever reasons.

    It seems the names that fit the bill are becoming taboo around here. If one talks about Aidan Turner, one gets instantly labeled as a fanboy. But if one talks about Chalamet, he has a right to an opinion and should express it how often as he wishes. Weird times, these, eh? ;)

    I agree completely. I suppose that there are always drawbacks to everyone, otherwise the thread would be unnecessary, right?

    Can I just make one comment on Chalamet that I think gets overlooked? First, I don't think anyone is suggesting that he should be Bond now. In that regard, his lack of beefiness, age, or manliness of whatever, is not an issue. He will/could/should fill out and look older in ten years. If any of the other names on the list were judged by how they looked at 24, then pretty much everyone would get ruled out.

    The second thing regarding Chalamet is that those who don't want him for Bond always either look to his acting roles where he plays an effete boy, or else post publicity photos when he is either on the red carpet or in a photoshoot. They do not pick the roles where he shows far more Bondian qualities. If you haven't seen it, go and watch The King, and imagine that was all you had seen him in and hadn't seen anything of him before. Just that one role. I think if anyone was honest, they would have to admit that the idea of him being Bond in 10 or 15 years was not completely ludicrous (disregarding what you may feel about his nationality) or surreal.

    Anyway, that's just my point. I don't want him for Bond, but I am just pointing out that if you took his performance in The King, the suggestion would be as valid as many other names that get suggested.

    I keep forgetting to watch that, must give it a try.

    I guess 10 years time is probably exactly the wrong time, in a way: as we'll need a new Bond in 5 years max. The next guy will probably stay for less than 10 years though so who knows, maybe 15 years does work. I'm not onboard with him as a suggestion but happy to keep my mind open: he is at least a movie actor and lead. With the amount of work he seems to be getting at the moment though I wonder if he'd want to be tied down to something like Bond.

    Which is the weird thing really: you need a star about to break through but any that are stars might well not want to do it! :)
    The Clafins and Hoults feel in about the right sweet spot of experience vs. star level, the Turners possibly need a little more experience. Chalamet is possibly actually too far advanced in his career and rise to stardom to do it.
  • edited September 2020 Posts: 6,710
    @mtm, stop it. I thought we had a silent agreement. Or an agreement on silence regarding each other, if you will. Don't push it.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited September 2020 Posts: 5,970
    Again in my books, we're looking for an actor to play James Bond in about four-five years (give or take), not tomorrow, so what might seem like strange choices now, may seem perfect by then. I don't mean Chalamet by the way, he's still on my future villain list.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 2020 Posts: 16,604
    I'm not sure why..? All I said is that if you want to say again you don't like the idea of Chalamet then go for it, no-one's stopping you. No-one's being nasty to you: say what you want.
  • Posts: 6,710
    mtm wrote: »
    I'm not sure why..? All I said is that if you want to say again you don't like the idea of Chalamet then go for it, no-one's stopping you.

    Can you believe this guy? Again, don't push it.
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Again in my books, we're looking for an actor to play James Bond in about four-five years (give or take), not tomorrow, so what might seem like strange choices now, may seem perfect by then. I don't mean Chalamet by the way, he's still on my future villain list.

    I actually think he has a lot of potential as a future villain. He does have that intensity and awkwardness, doesn't he? And he seems to be really smart, with the intelligence behind the eye. I didn't really like him in The King, but he's done marvellous roles in the last couple of years. Still, a bit overrated, but a promise, no less.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,604
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Again in my books, we're looking for an actor to play James Bond in about four-five years (give or take), not tomorrow, so what might seem like strange choices now, may seem perfect by then. I don't mean Chalamet by the way, he's still on my future villain list.

    Yes it's true: I think our man will have had to have had a bit of a breakthrough role by then though.
    Chalamet is about to star in a massive blockbuster which may lead to a series (although do we expect Dune to be a hit? I'm not so sure) so I think even if he were the most perfect candidate in everyone's eyes, with that and the pretty successful more arthouse dramatic stuff he's been doing, his career is looking like it's going to be in almost too strong a position to consider being tied to Bond. Although I guess they make these films so infrequently, and you've had folks like Bale and Pattinson doing Batman, so perhaps not.
    Univex wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I'm not sure why..? All I said is that if you want to say again you don't like the idea of Chalamet then go for it, no-one's stopping you.

    Can you believe this guy? Again, don't push it.

    No idea what you're objecting to. I presume you're trying to start an argument so I'll leave you to it.
Sign In or Register to comment.