Who should/could be a Bond actor?

18688698718738741231

Comments

  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,216
    Troy wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    I think it would be a smart idea for them to go with a James Bond about two or three years into being a 00, and have him face a villain connected to his origin. This way they can have a classic mission with 007 but also examine this particular Bond's origin without making the story an origin story.

    Oh no, not more personal stories…

    I don’t see this as overtly personal, as long as the villain isn’t his stepbrother. 😉
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited January 2022 Posts: 8,188
    There's this demand by a subset of fans who want a Bond film that doesn't have personal stakes or a character arc. But let's be honest here. Is there an actor today who DOESN'T ask filmmakers "what is my character's journey?" I doubt Roger Moore was asking those kinds of questions. He just played with what he was given to the best of his ability and moved on.

    Are there any actors like that today? Seems like in every blockbuster we have lead actors talking about how their character grows.
  • Posts: 342
    Whilst I enjoyed Craig’s character exposition, I preferred Connery’s mysterious government assassin working in the shadows, a fully paid up member of the Establishment and therefore untouchable (unlike, say Callan or Harry Palmer, who were only ever one step away from jail).

    A mystery man intrinsically tied to sex and death. A democracy’s dirty secret.

    As with the Royal Family, you more you learn about him, the more the mystique falls away, and you are left with a fallible human being, a middle grade civil servant . Next we will be querying his expenses and discussing whether he broke lockdown by attending parties.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,188
    I dunno, Connery seemed pretty fallible. Fans tend to exaggerate that his Bond was essentially a superman that had no vulnerability, and keep citing that as the reason why he wouldn't have worked in OHMSS. And yet, his most acclaimed film is GOLDFINGER, the one where he keeps failing his mission.
  • Posts: 15,123
    There's this demand by a subset of fans who want a Bond film that doesn't have personal stakes or a character arc. But let's be honest here. Is there an actor today who DOESN'T ask filmmakers "what is my character's journey?" I doubt Roger Moore was asking those kinds of questions. He just played with what he was given to the best of his ability and moved on.

    Are there any actors like that today? Seems like in every blockbuster we have lead actors talking about how their character grows.

    Spot on @MakeshiftPython .
    I dunno, Connery seemed pretty fallible. Fans tend to exaggerate that his Bond was essentially a superman that had no vulnerability, and keep citing that as the reason why he wouldn't have worked in OHMSS. And yet, his most acclaimed film is GOLDFINGER, the one where he keeps failing his mission.

    He makes mistakes in FRWL a lot too. Connery Bond is far from infallible.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 2022 Posts: 16,413
    There's this demand by a subset of fans who want a Bond film that doesn't have personal stakes or a character arc. But let's be honest here. Is there an actor today who DOESN'T ask filmmakers "what is my character's journey?" I doubt Roger Moore was asking those kinds of questions. He just played with what he was given to the best of his ability and moved on.

    Yeah, if it’s going to be slightly dramatic in any way then I want personal stakes and a dramatic arc. Films like CR and OHMSS are fan favourites for a reason: they’re more gripping when you’re emotionally involved.
    Troy wrote: »
    Whilst I enjoyed Craig’s character exposition, I preferred Connery’s mysterious government assassin working in the shadows, a fully paid up member of the Establishment and therefore untouchable (unlike, say Callan or Harry Palmer, who were only ever one step away from jail).

    A mystery man intrinsically tied to sex and death. A democracy’s dirty secret.

    As with the Royal Family, you more you learn about him, the more the mystique falls away, and you are left with a fallible human being, a middle grade civil servant . Next we will be querying his expenses and discussing whether he broke lockdown by attending parties.

    But then another suggestion from fans is they want to see more of his inner life: show us his flat, show us him in the office; give us May, give Sir James Molony, give us accidie etc. It’s odd how we hear so many cries for just a straightforward mission and for Bond to be a robot in it, following orders, and yet at the same time they want to see more of what makes him tick. It’s curious.
    I don't think Bond has ever been a mystery man though: we've always known quite a bit about him.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,188
    Audiences like character development. Who woulda thought?

    "But Bond films didn't need character development in 1962!"

    Sure, but it's not 1962 anymore.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited January 2022 Posts: 8,217
    Audiences like character development. Who woulda thought?

    "But Bond films didn't need character development in 1962!"

    Sure, but it's not 1962 anymore.

    And it's fair to say (I think it was mentioned above) that actors quite like this sort of thing, too. I don't think they need to have him fall in love every movie or have his world shaken to its core, but if they want a very accomplished leading actor in the part then the material needs to be there. Especially these days where trashier action films in the Dwayne Johnson-mould are a regular thing.

    There will always be an element of "it's James Bond, a dream role!" of course, but it's a lot of people's dream. You have to find the best.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    And at the end of the day - for me at least - this is one of those things where it really depends on whether they do it well or not. A character can develop without cheesy flashbacks to traumatic childhood events. A character can develop without a grand speech at the end of the film painstakingly tying together the previous plot. Bad character development is bad (duh), good character development can make a good film great.
    I would even go so far as to say the most succesful films in the genre are those that have character development but also work on a more basic level and you don't need to do a psychological deep dive to appreciate it. Casino Royale is pretty obivous with it's themes of James becoming Bond, but it is also just a stylish thrill-ride. The scene in the train works as great almost rom-com dialogue to establish the leading female character, but there is also loads of stuff about Bond and Vesper's childhood and upbringing that is there to be analyzed if you want to.

    And specifically for Bond, the character is intrinsically a serialized one. I would go so far as to say he shouldn't undergo shattering character development in every single film, because even for someone with a high octane lifestyle like Bond, how often do these fundamentally re-shaping events really happen? Certainly not every 3 years. I would say simply through aging, none of the Bond actors played the character the same in his first as he did in his last (except Lazenby, the wizard). So there will always be development, but Bond can be a story where that development can burn slowly and the actor can find their way into the different points in time he incorporates him.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited January 2022 Posts: 3,152
    In one review, some wag quipped that NTTD consisted of 'soap and set pieces'. I see it more as character-driven action and I think that's pretty much the way to go - a series of films that give you everything you want from Bond movies, but incrementally adding some depth of character so that it resonates and you're invested in the guy's journey. Best of all worlds.
  • Posts: 9,847
    An Mi6 origin type beginning where Elba has been the best double-0 in town until his predecessor M is assassinated and he is promoted. Enter Bond; his replacement.

    So kind of Michael G wilson's version of the living daylights
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    Risico007 wrote: »
    An Mi6 origin type beginning where Elba has been the best double-0 in town until his predecessor M is assassinated and he is promoted. Enter Bond; his replacement.

    So kind of Michael G wilson's version of the living daylights

    A big problem with the ending for NTTD for me is I'm not sure how much I care for Bond's world and it's characters, without Bond in it.

    That applies to MGW's version of TLD, I don't have much interest in what happened to Bond before he became 007, seeing his first two kills in Casino was perfect.
    I'm not sure how much I'd care to know about M's backstory, an occasional hint at them is more than enough, I wouldn't like the idea of Bond being M's replacement because naturally M would be a mentor to Bond rather than a boss as he should be

    It's a very original idea though
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,413
    And specifically for Bond, the character is intrinsically a serialized one. I would go so far as to say he shouldn't undergo shattering character development in every single film, because even for someone with a high octane lifestyle like Bond, how often do these fundamentally re-shaping events really happen?

    I don't know about life-changing events every time, but I think there should be something which personally drives him beyond just his duty, because that's just more interesting.
  • slide_99slide_99 USA
    edited January 2022 Posts: 693
    The problem with the recent Bonds isn't that they have a narrative arc or even personal missions, it's how the movies have been written. You can have missions with personal stakes for Bond (LTK, GE, TWINE, CR) without having the entire plot be contrived in such a way that everything that happens somehow personally involves Bond or someone close to him (SF, SP, NTTD). They did the "dark figure from M's/Bond's/Madeline's past comes back for revenge" three times in a row, each time with a disfigured, creepy, mumbling villain with parental issues.

    Much of this stuff started in the Brosnan era but it always took a back seat to the actual plots. With Craig it totally replaced the whole concept of story, so that the movies all became about Bond and his loved ones, like a soap opera, and the concept of Bond as a BRITISH SPY was lost. Once in SF was okay, but they doubled and then tripled-down on this style of storytelling, the obsession with world-building and continuity and the complete disinterest in portraying Bond as he's supposed to be- not as a tortured superhero but as an operator who goes out and gets the job done.
  • One idea I've thought for Elba is to go with a 007 story in the same vein as Batman Beyond and The Mask of Zorro with Anthony Hopkins and Antonio Banderas where the elder main character trains/mentors the younger character. I think you could instill Elba as a aging 007 who moves up to be the new M....while a new 007 doesn't have to be named James Bond gets groomed
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 2022 Posts: 16,413
    slide_99 wrote: »
    The problem with the recent Bonds isn't that they have a narrative arc or even personal missions, it's how the movies have been written. You can have missions with personal stakes for Bond (LTK, GE, TWINE, CR) without having the entire plot be contrived in such a way that everything that happens somehow personally involves Bond or someone close to him (SF, SP, NTTD). They did the "dark figure from M's/Bond's/Madeline's past comes back for revenge" three times in a row, each time with a disfigured, creepy, mumbling villain with parental issues.

    Yeah, I guess that's a fair point. I suppose it's quite funny in a way that Safin was actually a figure from Blofeld's past come for revenge, Blofeld himself being a figure from Bond's past who came for revenge in the previous movie; and who himself, it turned out, was somehow responsible for helping Silva, a figure from M's past, come for revenge on her in the film before that.

    I don't mind it being contrived about having happened to Bond or someone close to him though, that's just how these things work and it's how Fleming wrote 'em too. In Fleming's 'Octopussy' Bond goes after the man who killed his childhood skiing instructor and mentor Oberhauser.
  • Risico007 wrote: »
    An Mi6 origin type beginning where Elba has been the best double-0 in town until his predecessor M is assassinated and he is promoted. Enter Bond; his replacement.

    So kind of Michael G wilson's version of the living daylights

    I'm not aware of this other treatment for TLD, where is it at? I only thought the first fifteen minutes could be M becoming M and then Bond arrives for a new mission plus mentoring.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited January 2022 Posts: 3,152
    I'm not aware of this other treatment for TLD, where is it at?
    According to Some Kind of Hero (pp.448-449), the early MGW/Maibaum script had a young Bond who was just out of the navy, directionless and getting into trouble until he got sent to prison. Upon release, Bond went to see his granddad in his Scottish castle and got a lecture on the family's history at Trafalgar and Jutland and how Bond was now carrying that legacy. Grandpa Bond then sent him to see his Auntie Charmian's old boyfriend, who turned out to be (wait for it...) M. Bond joins MI6 and gets sent on a mission with 007, an older agent who acts as his mentor. 007's killed during the mission and Bond assumes the number at the end. Cubby vetoed it, saying that no one wanted to see a rookie Bond learning on the job. I can see similar discussions being had in relation to Bond 26 - origin story, no origin story, extent of personal background, extent of personal events driving the plot, etc.
  • Posts: 342
    Would just be nice to see Bond go through a whole film without resigning, being suspended or being dismissed
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,216
    No rogue!
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,551
    Time for a Russian Bond?

    272787024_275837461307905_4715911182465734523_n.jpg?_nc_cat=104&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=0debeb&_nc_ohc=ZarCKNADRpEAX9lbhpA&_nc_oc=AQmaKgIIQvPEvYttjjqYyd8b0Hh2OVQiX75y0ssL8WL-zC1CP1Ixc0PkU7LWMOQVYtQhvyGJFSjXk0kkCmJjkPp2&_nc_ht=scontent.fcxh3-1.fna&oh=00_AT8uOiAUe_PO9qyu0pVqUQErabhJYS_AfDcgejoW5xWriA&oe=61F6C27B
  • Venutius wrote: »
    I'm not aware of this other treatment for TLD, where is it at?
    According to Some Kind of Hero (pp.448-449), the early MGW/Maibaum script had a young Bond who was just out of the navy, directionless and getting into trouble until he got sent to prison. Upon release, Bond went to see his granddad in his Scottish castle and got a lecture on the family's history at Trafalgar and Jutland and how Bond was now carrying that legacy. Grandpa Bond then sent him to see his Auntie Charmian's old boyfriend, who turned out to be (wait for it...) M. Bond joins MI6 and gets sent on a mission with 007, an older agent who acts as his mentor. 007's killed during the mission and Bond assumes the number at the end. Cubby vetoed it, saying that no one wanted to see a rookie Bond learning on the job. I can see similar discussions being had in relation to Bond 26 - origin story, no origin story, extent of personal background, extent of personal events driving the plot, etc.

    Cool, thanks. True, no one wants to see Bond getting a pay rise, hah.

    I found that it's in the 'making of TLD' book. Also there's another book about lost stories of JB or unmade scripts. Smart yeah
  • Posts: 15,123
    Venutius wrote: »
    I'm not aware of this other treatment for TLD, where is it at?
    According to Some Kind of Hero (pp.448-449), the early MGW/Maibaum script had a young Bond who was just out of the navy, directionless and getting into trouble until he got sent to prison. Upon release, Bond went to see his granddad in his Scottish castle and got a lecture on the family's history at Trafalgar and Jutland and how Bond was now carrying that legacy. Grandpa Bond then sent him to see his Auntie Charmian's old boyfriend, who turned out to be (wait for it...) M. Bond joins MI6 and gets sent on a mission with 007, an older agent who acts as his mentor. 007's killed during the mission and Bond assumes the number at the end. Cubby vetoed it, saying that no one wanted to see a rookie Bond learning on the job. I can see similar discussions being had in relation to Bond 26 - origin story, no origin story, extent of personal background, extent of personal events driving the plot, etc.

    Sounds like a terrible idea. And like JJ Abrams first Star Trek movie.
  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 575
    Time for a Russian Bond?

    272787024_275837461307905_4715911182465734523_n.jpg?_nc_cat=104&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=0debeb&_nc_ohc=ZarCKNADRpEAX9lbhpA&_nc_oc=AQmaKgIIQvPEvYttjjqYyd8b0Hh2OVQiX75y0ssL8WL-zC1CP1Ixc0PkU7LWMOQVYtQhvyGJFSjXk0kkCmJjkPp2&_nc_ht=scontent.fcxh3-1.fna&oh=00_AT8uOiAUe_PO9qyu0pVqUQErabhJYS_AfDcgejoW5xWriA&oe=61F6C27B

    The borgir is not enough.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,152
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Sounds like a terrible idea.
    Agreed. Here's hoping MGW doesn't dredge it up and start mining the old script for Bond 26 ideas.

  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited January 2022 Posts: 6,304
    Denbigh wrote: »
    I think it would be a smart idea for them to go with a James Bond about two or three years into being a 00, and have him face a villain connected to his origin. This way they can have a classic mission with 007 but also examine this particular Bond's origin without making the story an origin story.

    If it's about Bond's origin, or experiences, as a 00 I am all for it. Kind of how the GE PTS gives us the Bond backstory that plays out in the film.

    But Eon needs to leave the family drama behind for now. The past three films were a lot!

    Let the new Bond do his own thing.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,152
    I'd rather have parts of his backstory being revealed gradually as they become relevant to the plot, rather than a linear origin story, tbh.
  • Posts: 2,165
    I wouldnt mind a little bit of time spent on Bond's naval career and recruitment into MI6, but not a whole film built around it. Maybe feature it during the PTS, him on a mission seconded into the SAS, and then the film opens with him in London meeting M for the first time, gaining 00 status and being sent on a mission.

    Alternatively, I am up for a Bond film where he is on the mission immediately, and M, Q, Moneypenny and the London briefing dont feature in the film. He is already on assignment when it starts.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited January 2022 Posts: 5,970
    To further on my idea above regarding having a James Bond early in his career rather than having an origin story, but having the story explore the origin through the villain and their scheme, I was thinking of something connected to the Royal Navy, whether it be someone who mentored him, or someone who joined the same time as him, or maybe even just someone his life and position within the Royal Navy affected hugely.

    I just think not only would it create an interesting angle for the new James Bond, and something substantial for the new actor, it allows the writers to still try and create a classic James Bond adventure with all our favourite tropes, but wrapped around a story that while not an origin, gives us a deeper understanding of who this particular Bond is and where he's come from. I don't think you even need to have flashbacks or even something akin to the opening of Goldeneye. If it's done well enough, along with all those classic Bond elements, the whole thing will just feel natural, and be an exciting action film and story.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,304
    That's basically GE but with the navy instead of a 00.
Sign In or Register to comment.