Who should/could be a Bond actor?

18498508528548551231

Comments

  • cwl007cwl007 England
    Posts: 611
    But an American actor as Bond.

    I wouldn't have a huge problem with that TBH. So long as he was good. The best actor for the role, end of as far as I'm concerned. Spiderman and Batman have been played by English and Welsh actors and the world is still spinning.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2021 Posts: 16,420
    It is weird how the current Superman, Batman and Spider Man are all played by British actors, and it's not even a new situation (although we are now in the slightly odd situation where there's more than one of most of them!). In a way I'd expect a bit more backlash about that.

    I don't hate the idea of an American playing Bond as long as he can do it convincingly, but that is a tough ask. Mind you, Brosnan's accent was fine and I'm not entirely sure what that was! :D
    Technically we've just had an American playing Bond, apparently! :)
  • Posts: 9,847
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    There was recently a bit of a kerfuffle around the idea that straight actors shouldn't play gay characters in future - if that becomes accepted practice, wouldn't it work the other way too? Seems a bit undermining of the very idea of 'acting', really!

    I wouldn't want to know how they'd intend to "prove" an actor's sexual orientation! ;)
    Lazenby would love to tell you some stories.

    It's a weird one. I know places like Twitter aren't the majority but it's one hell of an echo chamber for a vocal minority that can and has caused serious damage to people's reputations. I remember people going crazy and "cancelling" JK Rowling for her comments regarding her position on the trans community. Elizabeth Olsen had to quit social media due to the harassment she endured because she didn't make a statement that was scheduled in time with the timeline of MCU fans about Chadwick Boseman's death and we have Eddie Redmayne lamenting his role for the Danish Girl (which he won an Oscar for) to avoid backdated backlash. You can't sneeze these days without grossly offending someone.

    you sneezed that offends me ;)

    In all seriousness we have three issues

    1. if the net bond actor checks off a minority box there will be many who will wonder if its just because of that minority aspect rather ten that they were the best candidate for the role.
    2. Even though I have moved past the days of being ignorant about actors and actresses (the later Craig era has actors and actresses I either saw in something else like Rami Malek and Lea Seadoux or that I heard on this forum as the best next villain in the case of Javier Bardem and Christoph Waltz) I dont see a frontrunner that isn't already huge because of (insert comic book movie role they did)
    3. Even in terms of direction I hate to say it but post 2020 and Me Too I feel for the first time since the end of the cold war does Bond fit in this world? now obviously I want the answer to be yes as Bond is someone I want to learn from be etc but yeah
  • Posts: 1,078
    Risico007 wrote: »
    3. Even in terms of direction I hate to say it but post 2020 and Me Too I feel for the first time since the end of the cold war does Bond fit in this world? now obviously I want the answer to be yes as Bond is someone I want to learn from be etc but yeah

    I've been reading 'is Bond outdated?' for years, possibly back to the first Brosnan picture, (where he was even called a dinosaur). But like you, it's only recently I've actually thought current sensibilities have made even the recent cinematic Bond redundant.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2021 Posts: 16,420
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    There was recently a bit of a kerfuffle around the idea that straight actors shouldn't play gay characters in future - if that becomes accepted practice, wouldn't it work the other way too? Seems a bit undermining of the very idea of 'acting', really!

    I wouldn't want to know how they'd intend to "prove" an actor's sexual orientation! ;)
    Lazenby would love to tell you some stories.

    It's a weird one. I know places like Twitter aren't the majority but it's one hell of an echo chamber for a vocal minority that can and has caused serious damage to people's reputations. I remember people going crazy and "cancelling" JK Rowling for her comments regarding her position on the trans community. Elizabeth Olsen had to quit social media due to the harassment she endured because she didn't make a statement that was scheduled in time with the timeline of MCU fans about Chadwick Boseman's death and we have Eddie Redmayne lamenting his role for the Danish Girl (which he won an Oscar for) to avoid backdated backlash. You can't sneeze these days without grossly offending someone.

    you sneezed that offends me ;)

    In all seriousness we have three issues

    1. if the net bond actor checks off a minority box there will be many who will wonder if its just because of that minority aspect rather ten that they were the best candidate for the role.
    2. Even though I have moved past the days of being ignorant about actors and actresses (the later Craig era has actors and actresses I either saw in something else like Rami Malek and Lea Seadoux or that I heard on this forum as the best next villain in the case of Javier Bardem and Christoph Waltz) I dont see a frontrunner that isn't already huge because of (insert comic book movie role they did)
    3. Even in terms of direction I hate to say it but post 2020 and Me Too I feel for the first time since the end of the cold war does Bond fit in this world? now obviously I want the answer to be yes as Bond is someone I want to learn from be etc but yeah

    Yes, fair points I think. I think in terms of the first one it's tricky because the person who gets the gig is never just the best candidate, there are lots of other real world issues too: just look at Brosnan and Dalton and how, despite being good enough to eventually get the job, they weren't able to actually take it first time. I'm a fan of Doctor Who and I think Peter Capaldi was great as the Doctor, and you might say he was the best candidate when he got it, but it's not as if he wasn't acting when the previous four or five Doctors were cast! :) There is no one best person in the world to take a role; there are just those who available, want to do it, and fit the job at that particular moment in time.
    So it will be a decision to even choose to consider non-white actors, and I think all the signs are that they will do that, but anyone who wonders whether that person was 'the best person they could have picked' is oversimplifying the task they have. And if their race is part of the decision and they've decided that they want to say something with that, well that's up to them. I don't think calling it 'box-ticking' is helpful.
    Ultimately people will complain about anything. Look at all of the ridiculous complaints about Nomi in NTTD we got before the film came out. Besides all of the stupid 'I won't accept another character as 007' stuff, we had people on here who knew for certain that she would make Bond look bad and old and show him up and she'd be totally perfect all the way through the film. And then we saw the film and guess what: it was all absolutely fine: none of those terrible things actually came to pass, and it turned out that another character being 007 didn't actually make any difference after all. So if folk go on Twitter or here and whine about the new guy not looking exactly how they want, well so what. It happened last time and, guess what? Yup, it turned out fine then too.

    Regarding your point .3; well I know what you mean, sometimes I wonder if Bond really does belong. But when you look at the Craig Bond films I actually think Bond has changed quite a bit from the guy with the slightly dodgier traits of the past and yet remained recognisably Bond, I'm not too worried that they'll find a way ahead with that. I certainly didn't see any objections which gained traction about NTTD being an offensive film from the perspective of social justice. They need to lose that 'old dog' thing which gave them a bit of an excuse for him to be a bit less than progressive in some of his attitudes and make him fit in today's world, but I don't think that's impossible to reconcile. He'll still be a male fantasy figure driving fast cars and all that, but I think you'd have to be quite the entrenched feminist to object too much to that.
    But if you're a Bond fan you've had Dalton's safer sex Bond, Roger's Bond packing in the fags, Pierce's even had a cry quite regularly etc. - he's always moved with the times, albeit not too fast.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited December 2021 Posts: 3,152
    mtm wrote: »
    we had people on here who knew for certain that she would make Bond look bad and old and show him up and she'd be totally perfect all the way through the film. And then we saw the film and guess what: it was all absolutely fine: none of those terrible things actually came to pass, and it turned out that another character being 007 didn't actually make any difference after all. So if folk go on Twitter or here and whine about the new guy not looking exactly how they want, well so what. It happened last time and, guess what? Yup, it turned out fine then too.

    Much truth, here. I learned this lesson in 2011, when I heard the rumours that SF was going to be a full-on gags and gadgets fest - I was gutted and sulked and pouted for a long time. Then, when I finally saw the film, it wasn't at all the trope-by-trope reversion that'd been threatened, so I'd been narked for nothing. These things can drain your energy and it's all pointless, because they're going to make whatever film they like anyway, so...
  • I think Bond in today's overly sensitive climate still works. Things just need a bit of adjusting here and there. In the last 35 years, what exactly has Bond done that was offensive to women? The closest thing I can think of is the Severine shower scene (which I didn't see a problem with).
    The films need to unashamedly embrace who Bond is and not try to turn him into something he's not. The Craig era started off great, exploring how Bond became the man we know him to be but then it all changed with SF and it became something else.
    It's simple. Bond is a licensed hitman/spy for the British government. He's a lady's man that enjoys the indulgences and trappings of the finer things in life, while beating up bad guys to save the world. That's the only blueprint you need to build a compelling story that honors the character and silences those think Bond is an abominable misogynist who has no place in today's entertainment.
  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 575
    I always think the Severine shower scene is so overblown. She literally has the champagne on ice expecting him to show up and when he doesn't is visibly disappointed.

    They'd have more to cling onto with his seduction of Lucia Sciarra IMHO.

    I also think that Bond being called a misogynist is way off the mark. He likes women because of what they provide (whether that be sex or anything else - depending on if they become important to him). If anything then you could argue he has chauvinistic beliefs but misogyny? No, I never saw it that way.

    However, he can still have some of those archaic beliefs and "be in our time". There are plenty of men that think that way and even though it may not have been stated in NTTD there was an element of Nomi still having to earn his respect. You can choose to view this through that lens or not. It's really up to the viewer. It's ambiguous on purpose.

    Well, this is the wrong thread for it, I guess, but I felt compelled to reply.

    But I agree with @mtm overall. They will think long and hard about it and I trust in EON to make something that will resonate regardless... And not completely trash Bond or his ego/persona/legacy while completely reinventing him for the time. Whether this turns out to be a POC or not they will end up making a great film (Just like they did with CR even with the backlash for Craig) and people will be chomping at the bit to see it.
  • Posts: 15,124
    Luke Evans sexuality is a complete non-issue, he's convincingly played straight characters throughout his career and an actors real-world sexuality should have no bearing on their ability to play Bond. They are ACTORS paid to ACT. Some may be surprised to know that Daniel Craig is in fact not a self-destructive, cold-blooded killer, but a warm family man who is a pretty sweet guy.

    The only issue for Evans for me is his age, but I think he's similar to Craig in the sense that he could convincingly play Bond into his 50's, but this likely would still put a ticking clock on his run and effectively eliminate any "early years" type reboot.

    I agree it's a non issue. Or rather it should be, because I think for some unfortunately it always will be. As for Luke Evans specifically he could give masculinity lessons to a lot of straight men. He doesn't quite look like I'd imagine Bond, but he can certainly play a masculine hero convincingly. At 43, I think he's too old now however, especially since the next Bond movie might take a long while to be shot. A couple years ago, I would have certainly given him an audition.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,266
    I gather, as the same discussion is still raging 12 months on, there are no new candidates for Bond? That's worrying...
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,420
    We've been waiting for you to suggest some!
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,801
    My choices:
    1) Timothy Dalton de-aged. Okay, you don't like the idea, fine.
    2) Clive Owen. Wow, missed the bus on that by going with Craig.
    3) Jason Isaacs. Too late, Trek has him.
    4) How about an actor who is moving into just the right age now? HENRY flucking floggin' CAVILL?????????
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited December 2021 Posts: 3,152
    BB and MGW have both said things to the effect that 'Bond is always a contemporary character', so I think you're exactly right that they'll reinvent him for the times while not trashing his persona. Agreed, re. Severine too - the lust was quite clearly entirely mutual. Also agreed re. Bond not being a misogynist: he, equally as clearly, doesn't hate women!
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,551
    chrisisall wrote: »
    My choices:
    1) Timothy Dalton de-aged. Okay, you don't like the idea, fine.
    2) Clive Owen. Wow, missed the bus on that by going with Craig.
    3) Jason Isaacs. Too late, Trek has him.
    4) How about an actor who is moving into just the right age now? HENRY flucking floggin' CAVILL?????????

    It takes more than looks to play Bond, I would hope. Cavill is fine in the stuff he's been in, but the acting bar has been set much higher than him, I'm afraid.
  • Posts: 15,124
    chrisisall wrote: »
    My choices:
    1) Timothy Dalton de-aged. Okay, you don't like the idea, fine.
    2) Clive Owen. Wow, missed the bus on that by going with Craig.
    3) Jason Isaacs. Too late, Trek has him.
    4) How about an actor who is moving into just the right age now? HENRY flucking floggin' CAVILL?????????

    I will never for the life of me understand the appeal of Clive Owen to some. And Cavill hasn't really been outstanding in anything. He's good looking, but that's it. And he's Superman. And the Witcher.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    Maybe I am overblowing it, but there just is a climate at the moment, where the „middle ground“ is very thin and you can find somebody to complain about just about everything. I really don’t think there is a way for them to make a film that will not get some nutjob say is either too woke or too um-woke and crucially, the British press will gleefully write these stupid little aggregator articles about „Twitter AFLAME with criticism of Bond for XYZ.“ when two people make a lame joke.

    So what’s there to do? Even though it’s a bromide, I think the only way is for EON to choose an actor that they think fits the role right now and for a filmmaker to make a film they think tells a good Bond story for right now and take what may come.
  • Posts: 15,124
    Maybe I am overblowing it, but there just is a climate at the moment, where the „middle ground“ is very thin and you can find somebody to complain about just about everything. I really don’t think there is a way for them to make a film that will not get some nutjob say is either too woke or too um-woke and crucially, the British press will gleefully write these stupid little aggregator articles about „Twitter AFLAME with criticism of Bond for XYZ.“ when two people make a lame joke.

    So what’s there to do? Even though it’s a bromide, I think the only way is for EON to choose an actor that they think fits the role right now and for a filmmaker to make a film they think tells a good Bond story for right now and take what may come.

    I think they need first to know what they want next, not only the next film, bit the next tenure. I think full standalone movies in a franchise are a thing of the past, or at least won't happen for a while. I think they will keep most if not all the recurring cast (M, Moneypenny, Q, etc.), if only to keep things simpler. Casting a new Bond is time and energy consuming enough. So until they find this new Bond, they can ask themselves what if anything from the previous era(s): do they want more gadgets, less gadgets (I think the DB5 is here to stay), Spectre and Blofeld again, Bond as a widower, or grieving for Vesper, etc? And after NTTD, we won't take Bond for granted.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2021 Posts: 16,420
    Maybe I am overblowing it, but there just is a climate at the moment, where the „middle ground“ is very thin and you can find somebody to complain about just about everything. I really don’t think there is a way for them to make a film that will not get some nutjob say is either too woke or too um-woke and crucially, the British press will gleefully write these stupid little aggregator articles about „Twitter AFLAME with criticism of Bond for XYZ.“ when two people make a lame joke.

    Well sure, but as you say, if that’s the situation regardless of anything they do they’ve just got to get on with it and not worry about that stuff.
    Although I did think it was interesting that Mr Wilson said in the Being documentary that he still thought CR would have made more money had it not been for the Craig backlash. So it’s perfectly possible that they will be mindful of that this time around.
  • Posts: 2,165
    mtm wrote: »
    Maybe I am overblowing it, but there just is a climate at the moment, where the „middle ground“ is very thin and you can find somebody to complain about just about everything. I really don’t think there is a way for them to make a film that will not get some nutjob say is either too woke or too um-woke and crucially, the British press will gleefully write these stupid little aggregator articles about „Twitter AFLAME with criticism of Bond for XYZ.“ when two people make a lame joke.

    Well sure, but as you say, if that’s the situation regardless of anything they do they’ve just got to get on with it and not worry about that stuff.
    Although I did think it was interesting that Mr Wilson said in the Being documentary that he still thought CR would have made more money had it not been for the Craig backlash. So it’s perfectly possible that they will be mindful of that this time around.

    $600m WW box office on a budget of $150m isnt a bad result for poor Mickey 😅
  • This time they got to resurrect the character. A publicist's nightmare I would say. Maybe the new face needs a Superman.
  • Ludovico wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    My choices:
    1) Timothy Dalton de-aged. Okay, you don't like the idea, fine.
    2) Clive Owen. Wow, missed the bus on that by going with Craig.
    3) Jason Isaacs. Too late, Trek has him.
    4) How about an actor who is moving into just the right age now? HENRY flucking floggin' CAVILL?????????

    I will never for the life of me understand the appeal of Clive Owen to some. And Cavill hasn't really been outstanding in anything. He's good looking, but that's it. And he's Superman. And the Witcher.

    Cavill will never get the role. Thankfully.

    I agree with you about Clive Owen. Everything about him is so boring. His voice sounds like he's either just woken up or is about to fall asleep.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited December 2021 Posts: 7,551
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    My choices:
    1) Timothy Dalton de-aged. Okay, you don't like the idea, fine.
    2) Clive Owen. Wow, missed the bus on that by going with Craig.
    3) Jason Isaacs. Too late, Trek has him.
    4) How about an actor who is moving into just the right age now? HENRY flucking floggin' CAVILL?????????

    I will never for the life of me understand the appeal of Clive Owen to some. And Cavill hasn't really been outstanding in anything. He's good looking, but that's it. And he's Superman. And the Witcher.

    Cavill will never get the role. Thankfully.

    I agree with you about Clive Owen. Everything about him is so boring. His voice sounds like he's either just woken up or is about to fall asleep.

    +1. I can only see Owen as Bond in the beginning of a straight adaption of YOLT. Very despressed.

    Which makes me wonder, might be interesting to see a Bond film where multiple actors play the character in the same film, I'm Not Here style. Wouldn't be a popular opinion around here I don't imagine, but it could be interesting.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited December 2021 Posts: 5,970
    The more I take the time to think about it the more I think Sam Claflin might be the best man for the job. He's not too young, not too old. Has been working for a good amount of time, and is well known enough, but not too much, so he'd still be able to embody the character as opposed to other, more famous names mentioned. He also has really good range as an actor, and I think can appeal to everyone. He'd also end up as the most attractive James Bond we've had so far in my opinion.
  • chrisisall wrote: »
    My choices:
    1) Timothy Dalton de-aged.
    That would be Aidan Turner.

  • Posts: 15,124
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    My choices:
    1) Timothy Dalton de-aged. Okay, you don't like the idea, fine.
    2) Clive Owen. Wow, missed the bus on that by going with Craig.
    3) Jason Isaacs. Too late, Trek has him.
    4) How about an actor who is moving into just the right age now? HENRY flucking floggin' CAVILL?????????

    I will never for the life of me understand the appeal of Clive Owen to some. And Cavill hasn't really been outstanding in anything. He's good looking, but that's it. And he's Superman. And the Witcher.

    Cavill will never get the role. Thankfully.

    I agree with you about Clive Owen. Everything about him is so boring. His voice sounds like he's either just woken up or is about to fall asleep.

    For me, he always looked like a tired boxer who had one fight too many and one drink too many.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited December 2021 Posts: 3,152
    Never thought Clive Owen really had the force of personality to be Bond. Not that that stopped Pierce, obvs ;). Aidan Turner looks sort of like the middle ground between Dalton and Adrian Paul, so I could see him as a logical successor to Paul if he'd been Bond - but following Dan? It's a huge ask and I've not seen enough of Turner to gauge if he's up to it. He looks the closest to classic Bond, but Craig raised the acting stakes so high, they can't just cast on looks, surely?
  • OOWolfOOWolf Savannah
    Posts: 140
    Any thoughts on the British model, David Gandy, giving it a go?
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited December 2021 Posts: 7,551
    OOWolf wrote: »
    Any thoughts on the British model, David Gandy, giving it a go?

    Don't you think the next Bond should be able to do more than just look the part?

    Genuinely asking, like... don't you want a good actor to play Bond?

    I mean, none of the Bonds have exactly been Oscar-winning actors, but at least they are actors. I feel a Lazenby-based rebuttal coming on, but clearly we're past that era.

    Despite all that, the Gandyman keeps popping up on my Instagram feed and I can't help but think... I wish he was a great actor! ;)
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2021 Posts: 16,420
    OOWolf wrote: »
    Any thoughts on the British model, David Gandy, giving it a go?

    Don't you think the next Bond should be able to do more than just look the part?

    Genuinely asking, like... don't you want a good actor to play Bond?

    I mean, none of the Bonds have exactly been Oscar-winning actors, but at least they are actors.

    Exchushe me

    _115152488_oscar.png

    :D
  • Posts: 207
    CraterGuns wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    My choices:
    1) Timothy Dalton de-aged.
    That would be Aidan Turner.
    Hear, hear!

Sign In or Register to comment.