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
Ouch! :D I remain to be convinced that Turner has what it takes to be a movie star, but he is at least a better lead than Harrington! :D
Of all of the main actors Spooks had over the years, what a shame they used him for the film version! :) I said on the previous page that Richard Armitage was the weakest they had, but he would have been way better in the film than Kit!
Totally! I am certain I watched the film at the time, but re-watching the trailer now, cannot even remember it. I get it that they wanted to capitalise on Kit's popularity in GoT, but there is no way he can carry a film - not even alongside Peter Firth.
The problem with most of these actors suggested for me is, is I've never seen them in any Bondian roles and also most of them have beards, so it's tough to imagine them as Bond.
Perhaps I lack the required imagination, and I'm not an accountant 😉
Plus there’s the new Batman reboot heading in that direction, which could inspire them in the same way Batman Begins did CR. Young, edgy lead. Stripped down budget. That’s what I’m expecting. I still think Jack O’Connell could pull that off nicely, but I’m not sure if it’ll be him. The smart money might be on a POC getting it next. I think that’s probably inevitable one day, and if it’s going to happen, now seems like a good time to do it, because they’ve got such a clean slate. Everyone knows the next one will be a whole new man to Craig, there’s no question of him playing the same incarnation, so I think it’d be easier for audiences to accept.
Isn't Robert Pattinson 35? It seems that 35 is considered young, but 39 is considered too old. That's a very tight window to work in!
I used to think Jack O'Connell would be good, but I have finally been convinced that he might be too short at 5'8.
I didn’t realise Pattinson was that old to be honest, thought he was younger. I reckon the next guy will be somewhere in the 25-35 bracket. As well as younger being the current trend, it just makes sense to get someone with longetivity when you’re casting for a franchise, especially one with such staggered releases as Bond.
Was rooting for Tom Hardy and thought that he was a shoe in. But after the luke warm acceptance of NTTD. And on line grumblings from some quarters for a return to form of a more debonair and charming Bond. I think it would be better to go in a new direction. The suggestions above for Nicolas Hoult are interesting. He almost was cast as Batman/Bruce Wayne.
Why would it have to happen anyway? There are certain things you can change, but there are certain things you'd have to get rid of full stop if you went too young. It would have been plausible for a 30-year old to be a Commander in the 1950s, but not so plausible for that age bracket now. If you go too young, you'd have to adjust Bond's service record, and when you do that......it somewhat dilutes the whole "for Queen and Country" aspect. He just becomes another assassin. So I don't think you can go too young. That's just how I see it.
But it is more possible for someone around the age of 35-36 to achieve that rank. They already changed Bond in the Craig era to being an SBS commando to make that work but you wouldn't get away with much below that (I don't think - if there's any military experts here I would love to hear their thoughts). I think that age - 35 or 36 years old - is about right, especially when it comes to casting someone who (from an acting point of view) has good experience at carrying a film. Best of both worlds.
Although, personally...I'd be fine with a 40 year old actor for a couple of films playing a seasoned agent who is in the midst of enjoying his work.
much impossible for Bond to still be a commander, but then someone pointed out that in the novels, it was a sort of honorary rank anyway, given to him as a cover (or as a reward?) for his war time espionage. So, maybe they could keep that aspect after all. Just make it some sort of honorary rank given to 00s. As long as Bond is still old enough to have done some sort of military service beforehand, I don’t think it really matters too much.
My preference would be for a 40 year old too, even if they could only give us a couple of films, but I’m not sure how likely that is. And like @mtm said, a younger actor would feel pretty fresh, especially after a few films of Bond as an “old dog”. I’m warming to the idea of an actor in their late 20/early 30s doing it personally. The only problem I can think of is that it immediately makes the list of viable candidates even shorter. You’d have to be really, really good to pull it off so young, and so far I can only think of a couple of actors that age who could manage it. It’d be a risky move, but I think it could feel very fresh if they found someone that age who could do it.
We were talking about how implausible it is for Bond to be a Commander anyway a few pages back. Just use the Fleming version which is that he attains the rank whilst basically working for intelligence. And he kind of is just another assassin, isn't he? He's number seven.
We've just had a 31 year old double-O: it'd be fine.
No other actor that hasn't been in the role has ever been such an Absolute dead-on fit for 007 that it actually hurts, as a fan, to know I'll never see him onscreen as Bond.
And he is a completely different case to Brosnan, who was the people's choice only because he LOOKED like a viable candidate.
Fassbender can ACTUALLY act, and do it well. I can confidently say he would have out-acted both Dalton and Craig (whom I both rate as the only true character actors to have taken on the job).
Plus he speaks perfect German and a fair bit of French (007 is after all half Swiss...)
There really isn't a standout anywhere close to him amongst the current crop of 30-38 yr old actors...
If they hustled they could do a trilogy with him
again first film in 2023 at 46
Second film 2025 at 48
third film 2027 at 50
Of course you need strong Plots a good director and strong writers...
But if you go to Fleming you have enough for all three films
The Property of Lady a terrorist organization is using stolen arts and black market sales to create profits to fund terroism
The Diamond Smugglers basically Diamonds Are Forever but with a different fleming title
The Death Collector A mixture of The Man with the golden gun and the supposed backstory John Logan created for blofeld
it could work :D
That is kind of where I'm at with the question of age. I am very bad at guessing people's ages anyway, but to me there is a large corridor that is basically just "grown-up adult man" that goes from like 30 to 50 and with movie magic you could probably tack a few years on the beginning or end depending on the actor. Craig was still a young gun in QoS in 2008 and then a burned out old dog in Skyfall in 2012 and then he is kind of back to being Prime Bond in SP (or rather the second half of SF). He himself has talked about how it would take longer and longer to get back into Bond shape, but you don't see that on film, I think.
This is a long-winded way of saying: For me, they shouldn't adress his age for the next one. Get an actor that can believably be in that range and is young enough to stay there for 15 years. That probably means someone in their thirties.
But I am also wildly fluctuation all the time between what I want the next film to be and what I want from the new actor. And in the end, I will probably have some idea in my head and Eon will do something different, I will like it anyway, because I'm a big-old fanboy :))
+1
They didn't address 007's age in the early Connery years (Sean himself always looked more mature than his 31-36 in DN to YOLT), or with Lazenby and certainly not in Roger's later films :))
This 'Bond is washed out/Bond is a dinosaur/Bond is (<insert woke-ism to put down cool middle-class white dude>)' is all very post Brosnan.
007 being shown to be in his prime - yet still human and with the odd mistake or bout of overconfidence thrown in can also be very effective in the heightened-reality universe in which Bond should exist.
Timothy Dalton still looks more like Bond than Cavill ever will...
When reading Fleming it's ALWAYS Dalton in my mind's eye. Always.
+1
...but I could live with Cavill if it comes to that
Well, I couldn't. Henry is a lovely chap, no doubt, but he has the acting range of a hippo.
He’d have been brilliant, but I think Idris Elba (still the ultimate what could have been for me) and Tom Hardy would have been just as good.
I can see what you mean though. I’m glad Craig stayed as long as he did, but I do think we missed out on some very good contenders because of that. There were a lot more names that excited me a few years ago. But I’m sure whoever it is will convince me. I don’t think Bond has ever been miscast, that’s one area I have complete faith in the producers to get right.
I think it depends on the twenty something. People do generally look younger, because quality of life has improved. But I think you can still tell that some actors from poorer backgrounds have lived and grafted a bit.
And some just have a natural presence and masculinity that compensates for their youthful faces. Young Tom Hardy for example, or Jack O’Connell. That’s the main thing I want to see, and that’s why I never have strong opinions on suggestions from just looking at photos as some seem to. I think presence is what counts, because that’s what really shows on screen. O’Connell could’ve done it a few years ago, when he still looked quite fresh faced, and I think he’d have been more convincing as a hardened killer than some of the older names that have been suggested, because he actually seems tough.
:))