› ›

Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1…904905907909910…1234

Comments

  • ByRoyalDecreeByRoyalDecree
    Posts: 784
    007HallY wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    Might I say Elrod is too tall and not rugged enough. It's hard to find a convincing henchman who's shorter than him.

    He could def play superman in a new smallville or perhaps batman in the future.

    I don't know whether he's rugged or not, but I'd tend to say that he might indeed be too tall, at 6'5, for the reason you mentioned.

    I've only seen him in Euphoria and perhaps that's not enough to really gauge his potential. Still, he doesn't strike me as a potential candidate, or at least I've seen nothing from him as an actor that would suggest he is. Also I suspect it's the case that if an actor is being touted for the role at this early stage by the press it's unlikely they'll ultimately get it... and yes, I suspect Aidan Turner too might fall into that category. Most likely these 'rumours' are being put out by their agents or are just news outlets trying to get more clicks on their websites.

    Still, I actually don't think his height is a problem.

    It's not a bad publicity stunt to attract new fans.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,218
    007HallY wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    Might I say Elrod is too tall and not rugged enough. It's hard to find a convincing henchman who's shorter than him.

    He could def play superman in a new smallville or perhaps batman in the future.

    I don't know whether he's rugged or not, but I'd tend to say that he might indeed be too tall, at 6'5, for the reason you mentioned.

    I've only seen him in Euphoria and perhaps that's not enough to really gauge his potential. Still, he doesn't strike me as a potential candidate, or at least I've seen nothing from him as an actor that would suggest he is. Also I suspect it's the case that if an actor is being touted for the role at this early stage by the press it's unlikely they'll ultimately get it... and yes, I suspect Aidan Turner too might fall into that category. Most likely these 'rumours' are being put out by their agents or are just news outlets trying to get more clicks on their websites.

    Still, I actually don't think his height is a problem.

    That would be a pretty good topic: what us too tall for Bond? We often hear about some actors being too short.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 948
    Ludovico wrote: »
    That would be a pretty good topic: what us too tall for Bond? We often hear about some actors being too short.
    I think 6'3'' or 6'4'' would probably be the ceiling for me. Being tall is great for the romantic lead and to suggest a formidable physical opponent, but towering over everybody in shot just isn't Fleming's Bond (as far as I can remember) - he's not Jack Reacher, he shouldn't have a massive physical advantage over everyone, he should simply be above average height by a few inches.

    I think by around 6'5'' you're going to struggle to disguise just how much bigger he is compared to everyone else. Unlike being short, though, being very tall would sell the alpha-male image on chat-shows and red carpet events, whilst being short just breaks the illusion a little. I don't know how important that is, but it has been brought up.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 4,273
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    Might I say Elrod is too tall and not rugged enough. It's hard to find a convincing henchman who's shorter than him.

    He could def play superman in a new smallville or perhaps batman in the future.

    I don't know whether he's rugged or not, but I'd tend to say that he might indeed be too tall, at 6'5, for the reason you mentioned.

    I've only seen him in Euphoria and perhaps that's not enough to really gauge his potential. Still, he doesn't strike me as a potential candidate, or at least I've seen nothing from him as an actor that would suggest he is. Also I suspect it's the case that if an actor is being touted for the role at this early stage by the press it's unlikely they'll ultimately get it... and yes, I suspect Aidan Turner too might fall into that category. Most likely these 'rumours' are being put out by their agents or are just news outlets trying to get more clicks on their websites.

    Still, I actually don't think his height is a problem.

    It's not a bad publicity stunt to attract new fans.

    Not just fans. Casting agents and directors who have seen those headlines now have those actors on their minds. It's a great tactic.
  • ByRoyalDecreeByRoyalDecree
    edited May 2022 Posts: 784
    007HallY wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    Might I say Elrod is too tall and not rugged enough. It's hard to find a convincing henchman who's shorter than him.

    He could def play superman in a new smallville or perhaps batman in the future.

    I don't know whether he's rugged or not, but I'd tend to say that he might indeed be too tall, at 6'5, for the reason you mentioned.

    I've only seen him in Euphoria and perhaps that's not enough to really gauge his potential. Still, he doesn't strike me as a potential candidate, or at least I've seen nothing from him as an actor that would suggest he is. Also I suspect it's the case that if an actor is being touted for the role at this early stage by the press it's unlikely they'll ultimately get it... and yes, I suspect Aidan Turner too might fall into that category. Most likely these 'rumours' are being put out by their agents or are just news outlets trying to get more clicks on their websites.

    Still, I actually don't think his height is a problem.

    It's not a bad publicity stunt to attract new fans.

    Not just fans. Casting agents and directors who have seen those headlines now have those actors on their minds. It's a great tactic.

    I don’t get why more actors with larger fanbases don’t produce their own films. It’s cheap as hell and the bar for quality content is the lowest it has ever been.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 4,273
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    Might I say Elrod is too tall and not rugged enough. It's hard to find a convincing henchman who's shorter than him.

    He could def play superman in a new smallville or perhaps batman in the future.

    I don't know whether he's rugged or not, but I'd tend to say that he might indeed be too tall, at 6'5, for the reason you mentioned.

    I've only seen him in Euphoria and perhaps that's not enough to really gauge his potential. Still, he doesn't strike me as a potential candidate, or at least I've seen nothing from him as an actor that would suggest he is. Also I suspect it's the case that if an actor is being touted for the role at this early stage by the press it's unlikely they'll ultimately get it... and yes, I suspect Aidan Turner too might fall into that category. Most likely these 'rumours' are being put out by their agents or are just news outlets trying to get more clicks on their websites.

    Still, I actually don't think his height is a problem.

    It's not a bad publicity stunt to attract new fans.

    Not just fans. Casting agents and directors who have seen those headlines now have those actors on their minds. It's a great tactic.

    I don’t get why more actors with larger fanbases don’t produce their own films. It’s cheap as hell and the bar for quality content is the lowest it has ever been.

    Because most of them don't know how to produce/pick the right projects I suppose. To be fair a lot of actors with larger fan bases do produce, albeit often with other producers and with larger scale films.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,218
    sandbagger1 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    That would be a pretty good topic: what us too tall for Bond? We often hear about some actors being too short.
    I think 6'3'' or 6'4'' would probably be the ceiling for me. Being tall is great for the romantic lead and to suggest a formidable physical opponent, but towering over everybody in shot just isn't Fleming's Bond (as far as I can remember) - he's not Jack Reacher, he shouldn't have a massive physical advantage over everyone, he should simply be above average height by a few inches.

    I think by around 6'5'' you're going to struggle to disguise just how much bigger he is compared to everyone else. Unlike being short, though, being very tall would sell the alpha-male image on chat-shows and red carpet events, whilst being short just breaks the illusion a little. I don't know how important that is, but it has been brought up.

    I guess it also gets difficult to find believable a very tall man do be inconspicuous as a spy needs to be.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,574
    Ludovico wrote: »
    sandbagger1 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    That would be a pretty good topic: what us too tall for Bond? We often hear about some actors being too short.
    I think 6'3'' or 6'4'' would probably be the ceiling for me. Being tall is great for the romantic lead and to suggest a formidable physical opponent, but towering over everybody in shot just isn't Fleming's Bond (as far as I can remember) - he's not Jack Reacher, he shouldn't have a massive physical advantage over everyone, he should simply be above average height by a few inches.

    I think by around 6'5'' you're going to struggle to disguise just how much bigger he is compared to everyone else. Unlike being short, though, being very tall would sell the alpha-male image on chat-shows and red carpet events, whilst being short just breaks the illusion a little. I don't know how important that is, but it has been brought up.

    I guess it also gets difficult to find believable a very tall man do be inconspicuous as a spy needs to be.

    I think we know that James Bond is anything but inconspicuous though :D
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    sandbagger1 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    That would be a pretty good topic: what us too tall for Bond? We often hear about some actors being too short.
    I think 6'3'' or 6'4'' would probably be the ceiling for me. Being tall is great for the romantic lead and to suggest a formidable physical opponent, but towering over everybody in shot just isn't Fleming's Bond (as far as I can remember) - he's not Jack Reacher, he shouldn't have a massive physical advantage over everyone, he should simply be above average height by a few inches.

    I think by around 6'5'' you're going to struggle to disguise just how much bigger he is compared to everyone else. Unlike being short, though, being very tall would sell the alpha-male image on chat-shows and red carpet events, whilst being short just breaks the illusion a little. I don't know how important that is, but it has been brought up.

    I guess it also gets difficult to find believable a very tall man do be inconspicuous as a spy needs to be.

    I think we know that James Bond is anything but inconspicuous though :D

    yExn08.gif

    No idea what you mean mate
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    I am convinced 75% of Bond casting rumours is either an agent having a patsy give a journalist a „scoop“ that their client is on Eons list or straight up telling interviewers prior to press junket style interviews in promotion for a different project to ask the actor whether they would want to play Bond and then the quote travels from there. Another 15% is bookmakers slashing the odds of some wannabe to generate articles about their betting lines and the rest is speculation by „journalists“.
  • ByRoyalDecreeByRoyalDecree
    edited May 2022 Posts: 784
    The saddest part is that this thread is so thorough, none of us will really be surprised when the announcement finally arrives.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 4,273
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    The saddest part is that this thread is so thorough, none of us will really be surprised when the announcement finally arrives.

    Rubbish. When Steve Buschemi is announced as the next Bond we'll all have to pick ourselves off the floor it'll be that surprising... unless of course this particular post I'm making now is still on people's minds...
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,009
    007HallY wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    The saddest part is that this thread is so thorough, none of us will really be surprised when the announcement finally arrives.

    Rubbish. When Steve Buschemi is announced as the next Bond we'll all have to pick ourselves off the floor it'll be that surprising... unless of course this particular post I'm making now is still on people's minds...

    Well now you've done it.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,243
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    sandbagger1 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    That would be a pretty good topic: what us too tall for Bond? We often hear about some actors being too short.
    I think 6'3'' or 6'4'' would probably be the ceiling for me. Being tall is great for the romantic lead and to suggest a formidable physical opponent, but towering over everybody in shot just isn't Fleming's Bond (as far as I can remember) - he's not Jack Reacher, he shouldn't have a massive physical advantage over everyone, he should simply be above average height by a few inches.

    I think by around 6'5'' you're going to struggle to disguise just how much bigger he is compared to everyone else. Unlike being short, though, being very tall would sell the alpha-male image on chat-shows and red carpet events, whilst being short just breaks the illusion a little. I don't know how important that is, but it has been brought up.

    I guess it also gets difficult to find believable a very tall man do be inconspicuous as a spy needs to be.

    I think we know that James Bond is anything but inconspicuous though :D

    yExn08.gif

    No idea what you mean mate

    But he does know not to touch his ear.

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,574
    ImpertinentGoon wrote: »
    I am convinced 75% of Bond casting rumours is either an agent having a patsy give a journalist a „scoop“ that their client is on Eons list or straight up telling interviewers prior to press junket style interviews in promotion for a different project to ask the actor whether they would want to play Bond and then the quote travels from there.

    Yes it is completely that some of the time: the biggest one was that guy from Outlander promoting his SAS film last year- some of the journalists even said they were a bit puzzled when he pretty much brought up Bond in their interviews. Basically Bond is guaranteed PR, so if you want to push your film then if you can hang off some Bond speculation then you stand a chance of a decent headline.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 4,273
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    The saddest part is that this thread is so thorough, none of us will really be surprised when the announcement finally arrives.

    Rubbish. When Steve Buschemi is announced as the next Bond we'll all have to pick ourselves off the floor it'll be that surprising... unless of course this particular post I'm making now is still on people's minds...

    Well now you've done it.

    Mark my words: The Busch will be Bond... perhaps in an alternative universe or in a future fever dream of mine, but still...
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,218
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    sandbagger1 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    That would be a pretty good topic: what us too tall for Bond? We often hear about some actors being too short.
    I think 6'3'' or 6'4'' would probably be the ceiling for me. Being tall is great for the romantic lead and to suggest a formidable physical opponent, but towering over everybody in shot just isn't Fleming's Bond (as far as I can remember) - he's not Jack Reacher, he shouldn't have a massive physical advantage over everyone, he should simply be above average height by a few inches.

    I think by around 6'5'' you're going to struggle to disguise just how much bigger he is compared to everyone else. Unlike being short, though, being very tall would sell the alpha-male image on chat-shows and red carpet events, whilst being short just breaks the illusion a little. I don't know how important that is, but it has been brought up.

    I guess it also gets difficult to find believable a very tall man do be inconspicuous as a spy needs to be.

    I think we know that James Bond is anything but inconspicuous though :D

    Yeah but imagine the Hong-Kong scene in SF with a very tall man.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,574
    Not seen YOLT then? :)
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,218
    mtm wrote: »
    Not seen YOLT then? :)

    Well, Connery was tall, bit not VERY tall.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 2022 Posts: 16,574
    Conspicuously tall is the phrase I'd use though :D
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,243
    Ludovico wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Not seen YOLT then? :)

    Well, Connery was tall, bit not VERY tall.

    Well, the incredibly convincing makeup allowed him to pull off the disguise. 😉

  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,154
    :D
  • Since62Since62
    Posts: 1,650
    Steve Buscemi already portrayed Mr. Pink. Why would he want to portray Bond after having done that, you know ?
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    Definitely not sold on Page as the next Bond. His voice is extremely weak and he doesn't look manly without a beard. Really hope it's not him if I'm honest
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited May 2022 Posts: 3,154
    I keep falling back on the three criteria posted on here by General Gogol:
    1. Could the new guy hold his own in a dramatic scene with Mads Mikkelson?
    2. Could he seduce Monicca Belucci?
    3. Could he put up a convincing screenfight against Dave Bautista?
    Aidan Turner could maybe manage 1. and 2. (although I'm not 100% sure on 1.).
    Cavill could probably manage 2. and 3. Kevin McKidd could've got the hat trick if it was 2008 and he could probably still get 1. and 3., but he's already the age Craig was in SP, so he's not even in the running.
    The rest of the suggested candidates? I'm not seeing it, tbh. Hope I'm wrong, but I genuinely can't see us getting someone of Craig's calibre - I really don't think there is anybody.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    edited May 2022 Posts: 4,247
    I think one thing we always picture, is the new Bond being like the previous one, which is not a bad thing though. But the direction of the new Bond isn't going to be like the previous one. I think the main reason why people didn't give Craig a chance was, they couldn't picture him in GE, TND, TWINE & DAD, because people thought Craig's era would be the same as Brosnan's. That's why when EON eventually picks the new Bond, he might not be seen immediately as Bond, because people might not be able to picture him in CR, QoS, SF, SP & NTTD.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,574
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I think one thing we always picture, is the new Bond being like the previous one, which is not a bad thing though. But the direction of the new Bond isn't going to be like the previous one. I think the main reason why people didn't give Craig a chance was, they couldn't picture him in GE, TND, TWINE & DAD, because people thought Craig's era would be the same as Brosnan's. That's why when EON eventually picks the new Bond, he might not be seen immediately as Bond, because people might not be able to picture him in CR, QoS, SF, SP & NTTD.

    Very good point. And more people grew up with Craig as Bond than did with Brosnan as Bond, you may see an even bigger kickback!
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    mtm wrote: »
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I think one thing we always picture, is the new Bond being like the previous one, which is not a bad thing though. But the direction of the new Bond isn't going to be like the previous one. I think the main reason why people didn't give Craig a chance was, they couldn't picture him in GE, TND, TWINE & DAD, because people thought Craig's era would be the same as Brosnan's. That's why when EON eventually picks the new Bond, he might not be seen immediately as Bond, because people might not be able to picture him in CR, QoS, SF, SP & NTTD.

    Very good point. And more people grew up with Craig as Bond than did with Brosnan as Bond, you may see an even bigger kickback!

    Exactly.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,154
    Said it before, but it's going to be so ironic when the new guy gets slammed for not being as good as Daniel Craig! How times change...
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    edited May 2022 Posts: 4,247
    "I know it when I see it"...according to Connery's Bond in GoldFinger. Same way we will never know which actor is suitable for Bond, until we see him as Bond.
Sign In or Register to comment.