Who should/could be a Bond actor?

18658668688708711235

Comments

  • Posts: 15,229
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    He’s very good in The Tourist, I expect that’s why.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Yeah, although I’m not against the idea of Bond Begins, that B15 draft never really sounded very good to me.

    Well, it was not exactly "Bond begins" as he was established as a 00, but from what I understand there were flashbacks from earlier on in his career.

    Not in the version I've seen reported on: the whole premise was he's a lieutenant basically kicked out of the Navy and is recruited by M, teaming up with the old 007, who goes on to die on Bond's first mission, with Bond taking the 007 number in honour of him.

    In what I've read the previous M was the one who apparently died and turned out to be the villain/Trevelyan character. But I don't know if it was just a rumour about the early drafts or genuine content in the early drafts.

    For Bond 15? Sounds more like a Bond 17 draft you’re talking about there.

    Yes I was talking about Bond 17, or what would become Goldeney from the beginning.

    Right, I was talking about Bond 15: that's what I meant by 'that B15 draft'. That was the one after Roger where Wilson & Maibaum planned a young Bond begins story- that's what we're all talking about.

    I guess they were not merely influenced by Batman Begins.
  • ToTheRight wrote: »
    I firmly feel Eon already did an excellent Bond Begins with CASINO ROYALE and we don't need another origin story.

    This.
    talos7 wrote: »
    I want to see Bond in his prime as an established agent .

    And this.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,382
    I think a younger Bond a la MR would work well. Show him "working" in his office. That way, there is room for him to age over 4-5 films, with maybe a TMWTGG at the end of his run.

    With NTTD, I think Barbara and Michael are demonstrating a willingness to go back and bring in more Fleming.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,602
    I think they’re more fun when he leaves the office :D
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    mtm wrote: »
    I think they’re more fun when he leaves the office :D

    We've chewed this over multiple times, but at the end of the day, I think you're right. There is the Bond fan wish of having all of the background-building Fleming does in Moonraker on the screen and I think there have been multiple attempts on here to outline a way for this to work. A central part is always how the character of May would work nowadays. But at the end of the day, the important parts of the Bond films are what happens once he steps into M's office and then into the world.

    However, while we are on the topic, I still think the idea that someone here had of Bond as an adrenaline junkie who just cannot relax and will throw himself into affairs with married women and high stakes gambling and car racing and every available suicide mission because otherwise he just dies of boredom is a great way to approach the next Bond.
    The proper function of man is to live, not to exist. I shall not waste my days in trying to prolong them. I shall use my time. But not as stately read by Ralph Fiennes, but more like a knife-tip of Benzedrine in a flute of champagne.

    It's a delicate balance, because he shouldn't be jittery per se. Bond is cool. But that drive to do something could be a good starting point for the character and then extend to the filmmaking, going for a full-throttle action piece.
    I actually think Nic Hoult could play that version of the character; Bateman maybe less so. I don't really see it in Aidan Turner. Kaluuya would probably be good at that; Page less so. And I shudder at the thought of what Tom Hardy would do with such a characterisation.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 2022 Posts: 16,602
    Yeah I like that. I think that's as close to an explanation of why Bond does what he does as anything: although he's not an evil man it's not like he's Superman, believing in everything that's honourable and righteous. And he's not even really very patriotic, even: he seems to prefer being out of the UK more than he does at home. There's certainly a sense that he does what he does for his own gratification: he's not a selfless hero.
    So a new Bond which explores that side of him a little would work for me.
  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 575
    mtm wrote: »
    I think they’re more fun when he leaves the office :D

    We've chewed this over multiple times, but at the end of the day, I think you're right. There is the Bond fan wish of having all of the background-building Fleming does in Moonraker on the screen and I think there have been multiple attempts on here to outline a way for this to work. A central part is always how the character of May would work nowadays. But at the end of the day, the important parts of the Bond films are what happens once he steps into M's office and then into the world.

    However, while we are on the topic, I still think the idea that someone here had of Bond as an adrenaline junkie who just cannot relax and will throw himself into affairs with married women and high stakes gambling and car racing and every available suicide mission because otherwise he just dies of boredom is a great way to approach the next Bond.
    The proper function of man is to live, not to exist. I shall not waste my days in trying to prolong them. I shall use my time. But not as stately read by Ralph Fiennes, but more like a knife-tip of Benzedrine in a flute of champagne.

    It's a delicate balance, because he shouldn't be jittery per se. Bond is cool. But that drive to do something could be a good starting point for the character and then extend to the filmmaking, going for a full-throttle action piece.
    I actually think Nic Hoult could play that version of the character; Bateman maybe less so. I don't really see it in Aidan Turner. Kaluuya would probably be good at that; Page less so. And I shudder at the thought of what Tom Hardy would do with such a characterisation.

    Great post.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited January 2022 Posts: 8,231
    mtm wrote: »
    I think they’re more fun when he leaves the office :D

    We've chewed this over multiple times, but at the end of the day, I think you're right. There is the Bond fan wish of having all of the background-building Fleming does in Moonraker on the screen and I think there have been multiple attempts on here to outline a way for this to work. A central part is always how the character of May would work nowadays. But at the end of the day, the important parts of the Bond films are what happens once he steps into M's office and then into the world.

    However, while we are on the topic, I still think the idea that someone here had of Bond as an adrenaline junkie who just cannot relax and will throw himself into affairs with married women and high stakes gambling and car racing and every available suicide mission because otherwise he just dies of boredom is a great way to approach the next Bond.
    The proper function of man is to live, not to exist. I shall not waste my days in trying to prolong them. I shall use my time. But not as stately read by Ralph Fiennes, but more like a knife-tip of Benzedrine in a flute of champagne.

    It's a delicate balance, because he shouldn't be jittery per se. Bond is cool. But that drive to do something could be a good starting point for the character and then extend to the filmmaking, going for a full-throttle action piece.
    I actually think Nic Hoult could play that version of the character; Bateman maybe less so. I don't really see it in Aidan Turner. Kaluuya would probably be good at that; Page less so. And I shudder at the thought of what Tom Hardy would do with such a characterisation.

    Yes, this is a very nice approach. I don't have an issue so much with the office/home stuff or anything, but it would be far more fitting for a mini-series (or some such) than a feature film.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    edited January 2022 Posts: 1,675
    There's good filmmaking on the table in the concept of starting small with the character miserable in the office and itching for something to do, establish the new regular crew, and then contrast that hopefully by the end with a series of near-unbelievable world-stakes events that makes Bond almost yearn to go back to his boring office. Audience should almost completely forget about London until Q shows up in a holiday shirt to kick off the third act.
  • Posts: 1,650
    In terms of whether to bring in some of the Fleming elements in films to come, and whether to bring in some of the elements of earlier films...From the books: I do not see what having May in the story would do for it. It could serve as part of establishing Bond as a creature of habit -- sometimes and for some things. He is that - sometimes and for some things - but those things may have been in the books because they were fairly normal and typical for someone of some means at the time. So, for a film in period, then perhaps -though the producers have refuted the idea of a film in period...so far. If set in the present day, nah. From the films: Bringing back Sylvia Trench ? It makes sense that Bond would have a relationship, focused on the intimate and physical aspects, when he is in London. Objectifying the lady would not serve well unless the producers want to go with a presentation of Bond as a guy who got a taste of upper crust life when in school, and cares primarily about his own pleasures. But even Fleming wandered off from a strict presentation of Bond as being that way. He respected the lady's life choices in just the third book, and he lived with Ms. Case for a while after the events of DAF, and appears to have been faithful. There were other instances wherein Fleming's Bond seemed interested in the leading lady as a person, such as in TB, where we are treated to a prolonged scene of Domino and Bond enjoying lunch together, though, certainly, her life story fed the plot, too. At any rate - there's room and materials for the producers to go with a self-centered, brutal Bond. I just think the films are due for a tonal shift, and it's time to go with less of an intense, brutal killer Bond.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    I was a bit too young to remember what it was like during Daniel's casting, but was it as wide open as it appears to be right now?
  • edited January 2022 Posts: 88
    IF you followed it closely it was. There were rumuors every day it seemed like about another actor and this actor and that actor. As we got close to the casting it started to dwindle down and there was this big deal about a final four which was rumuored to include a number of actors but we know Craig and Cavill were two. Rumuored for the other two were actors such as Alex O'Loughlin (Hawia Five-0), Goran Vinjs (ER) Sam Worthington (Avatar) and Julian Mcmahon (Nip/Tuck) among others.
  • Posts: 15,229
    parkert5 wrote: »
    IF you followed it closely it was. There were rumuors every day it seemed like about another actor and this actor and that actor. As we got close to the casting it started to dwindle down and there was this big deal about a final four which was rumuored to include a number of actors but we know Craig and Cavill were two. Rumuored for the other two were actors such as Alex O'Loughlin (Hawia Five-0), Goran Vinjs (ER) Sam Worthington (Avatar) and Julian Mcmahon (Nip/Tuck) among others.

    There were a couple of other names that came and went. Some very famous and some complete unknowns. I remember there was one who played a small role in that 2005 King Arthur movie, he was barely more than extra and apparently looked a lot like Sean Connery on some pictures. And there was the actor playing the villain in the third season of 24. Not sure if there was any truth to these rumours.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    Thanks guys, it's interesting we're in this weird time were every leading man on any BBC show is linked with Bond.
    It's been the cycle for the last 4 years now
  • Jordo007 wrote: »
    Thanks guys, it's interesting we're in this weird time were every leading man on any BBC show is linked with Bond.
    It's been the cycle for the last 4 years now

    It was the same then to honestly.
  • cwl007cwl007 England
    Posts: 611
    Only in the tabloid press really, particularly in the UK. (Can't speak for elsewhere)
    The reality of the casting behind the scenes may have been a much tighter (and realistic) shortlist. So far as the press were concerned it was wide open.
    Names like Clive Owen, Sam Worthington (where has he gone), Ewan McGregor, the list went on and on and on. Every other day stories ran with the 'bookies odds are slashed' BS just like they do now. Even Robbie Williams was tipped at one point!! I actually think I was the only person not mentioned to be honest.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    edited January 2022 Posts: 1,675
    Did they announce Campbell before an actor? Will they announce the director first this go-round? That could give heavy indications as to what Bond they'll cast if, say, Ritchie or Nolan etc. are attached and involved in casting.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,602
    Campbell was involved in the casting and shot the auditions, I'm pretty sure he would have been publicly announced as well.
  • Posts: 1,631
    LucknFate wrote: »
    Did they announce Campbell before an actor? Will they announce the director first this go-round? That could give heavy indications as to what Bond they'll cast if, say, Ritchie or Nolan etc. are attached and involved in casting.


    If you're referring to Casino Royale, Campbell and the title of the film were announced in February of 2005. Craig was announced in October of the same year.
  • Posts: 343
    Ludovico wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    I think a younger Bond/paternalistic M is the way to go next time around. A newly-minted Bond, which would also be a meta-commentary on the recasting.

    No need to reintroduce elements a la CR (and definitely not the Aston Martin). Bring in elements of LALD and MR, including a younger Leiter.

    I quite like this idea of a younger Bond and father figure M. And the villain as a distorted, perverted father figure.

    How about a younger Bond and father figure M, but the villain being a distorted perverted mother figure
  • Posts: 15,229
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Thanks guys, it's interesting we're in this weird time were every leading man on any BBC show is linked with Bond.
    It's been the cycle for the last 4 years now

    As time goes on there'll be more rumours, probably lesser known actors. Extras in a film or a series, stuntmen, soap actors, what have you. I kind of hope some stage actors will be mentioned.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,602
    I want film actors, they've got to know how to star in a film.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    Posts: 1,675
    mtm wrote: »
    I want film actors, they've got to know how to star in a film.

    I was totally opposed to Cavill as Bond re: carrying a movie until I saw him in U.N.C.L.E., and yet I feel like he has slipped back into seeming unable to carry a franchise again.

    I personally feel even Craig only has a truly commanding, consistent presence in two of his Bond movies.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,252
    LucknFate wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I want film actors, they've got to know how to star in a film.

    I was totally opposed to Cavill as Bond re: carrying a movie until I saw him in U.N.C.L.E., and yet I feel like he has slipped back into seeming unable to carry a franchise again.

    I personally feel even Craig only has a truly commanding, consistent presence in two of his Bond movies.

    I can almost always sense that Cavill is acting, and can see him contemplating his lines as he delivers them .

  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,169
    I’d still push for Theo James and Nicholas Hoult as my preferred choices Tom Hughes as well, although his resume is mostly tv based. Very good actor though.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    edited January 2022 Posts: 1,675
    Benny wrote: »
    I’d still push for Theo James and Nicholas Hoult as my preferred choices Tom Hughes as well, although his resume is mostly tv based. Very good actor though.

    Theo seems positioned similarly to Craig by playing the love interest in a woman-led blockbuster franchise. He also just dipped on a show he's on that got renewed as I'm guessing he no longer is interested, or perhaps he doesn't want to put himself in a Brosnan box with a tv show renewal deal.

    From Deadline:
    Theo James, who portrayed Sidney on PBS’ Sanditon, has announced he’s exiting the series following the UK period drama’s surprise two-season renewal.

    James revealed the news Friday on social media.

    “Although I relished playing Sidney, for me, I’ve always maintained that his journey concluded as I wanted it to,” he wrote in the announcement on the show’s official Twitter account. “The broken fairy-tale like ending between Charlotte and Sidney is different, unique and so interesting to me and I wish the cast and crew of Sanditon every success with future series.”

    Sanditon was canceled by British broadcaster ITV back in 2019, but its ratings success on PBS’ Masterpiece prompted a cancellation reversal and a renewal for seasons 2 and 3, announced just yesterday.

    Rose Williams will return to play the high-spirited and independent heroine Charlotte Heywood. The series is based on Jane Austen’s final, unfinished novel and was developed by Andrew Davies.

    Sanditon is produced by Red Planet Pictures with Belinda Campbell as exec producer alongside Masterpiece’s Susanne Simpson and Chloe Tucker for ITV/BritBox.

    I looked it up and I can't tell if Belinda Campbell is in any way related to Martin, but if they are, they don't do credited work together it seems.
  • edited January 2022 Posts: 328
    Benny wrote: »
    I’d still push for Theo James and Nicholas Hoult as my preferred choices Tom Hughes as well, although his resume is mostly tv based. Very good actor though.

    I don't know much about Theo James. What his acting like? He looks in great shape, is good looking and doesn't have a permabeard in all his photos.

    If he's a solid actor then I'll certainly back him along with Jack Lowden.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,602
    LucknFate wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I want film actors, they've got to know how to star in a film.

    I was totally opposed to Cavill as Bond re: carrying a movie until I saw him in U.N.C.L.E., and yet I feel like he has slipped back into seeming unable to carry a franchise again.

    I personally feel even Craig only has a truly commanding, consistent presence in two of his Bond movies.

    I'm surprised by that, I don't agree.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,252
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Benny wrote: »
    I’d still push for Theo James and Nicholas Hoult as my preferred choices Tom Hughes as well, although his resume is mostly tv based. Very good actor though.

    I don't know much about Theo James. What his acting like? He looks in great shape, is good looking and doesn't have a permabeard in all his photos.

    If he's a solid actor then I'll certainly back him along with Jack Lowden.

    Hoult. Lowden and James , as well as A. Turner, are three of my top prospects… at the moment.
  • Posts: 15,229
    mtm wrote: »
    I want film actors, they've got to know how to star in a film.

    Now it's not mutually exclusive. And it's very possible that a person 8s better known on stage, but can very well do the transition on the big screen.
Sign In or Register to comment.