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
Just watch The Take. It'll cure you of favoring Madden.
Name *any* actor, previous Bond or otherwise, and I'll find you an extremenly un-Bond role they've played (for Lazenby, I'll just go with used car salesman).
Maybe instead of shooting down other people's ideas and suggestions, just present your own. This sort of stuff is what made the "who should be a Bond actor" thread the dumpster fire that it is.
I'd actually prefer Idris Elba, though many think he's too old. With that in mind - and this could work with other actors suitable but for their age and the expectations of getting a few films out of them - I've suggested before filming a couple pictures close together, as was done for a couple H Potter and Lord of the Rings films. Elba in LALD, DN - personally, I'd like to see those done in period. If a third, TB.
I very much doubt any of that, though, so I'd suggest Tom H.
Another person that I can see having a character in Bond (M, Tanner, Ronnie Vallance, Sir James Molony). He narrated the Octopussy and the Living Daylights book.
True, but Fleming liked the physicality of Connery, despite the Scottish accent; @Revelator made a great post in his invaluable thread, which I'll link once I find it.
EDIT: I can't find it in the thread (Fleming Interviews), I think he must have posted it elsewhere. Fascinating info regarding Fleming's preferences for Bond.
You're right about that, @mtm... Plus Lazenby's from the Skin Cancer Capital of the World (presently I believe almost 12000 are diagnosed with the disease every year!)..
But then there are men like Sir Rog who, although he was a contemporary of Connery, had a baby face, but, he had charisma and charm that made him more man than some of the baby faced leads we have today.
I do think there's something to be said for those harsher days that built the man. One can compare Francis Ngannou or Mike Tyson in the modern era (when Tyson was 13, he looked like a young man, weighing 200lbs; no one Believed he was barely a teen and so fought as an "18" year old and knocked out a heavyweight who was three years older than him).
The new Bond, whoever he is, no matter his age, needs that feeling that he's "lived"....
Precisely. I know several 45- 50 year old men today who don't even know how to change a tire or check their oil let alone properly order a vodka martini.
Realistically if we wanted someone as mature was Connery was at 31 we'd need to be looking for someone around 55 today just to begin his era. Tom Cruise is in his 60s now and stronger than ever, so the physical appearance shouldn't be a problem.
The only issue with using the TMWTGG storyline is that it doesn't have the same impact when a new Bond actor is introduced in this manner. It's a shocking twist in the Fleming novel because Bond acts so different to how we've seen him before, so the impact of him trying to kill his boss and sprouting his brainwashed allegiance to the Soviets hits harder. If we have a new actor introduced like this, this will be the first time we see them as Bond. For something like that to work emotionally I think we need at least a couple of films to get to know the new Bond as it were.
I think the best thing to do for Bond 26 is to start afresh, and preferably at a point where Bond is established as 007. I can easily imagine them doing something similar to The Batman and showing Bond in his first few years as 007 - perhaps a bit more on the youthful side, not quite at his peak abilities just yet, but very close. Perhaps to add a bit of 'universe building' to the new one they'll incorporate the 00 section into the plot a bit more (I dunno, there's many things they could do - a villain's scheme where 00 agents are being assassinated, or perhaps the 00 section is much more shady and covert/looked down upon by the rest of the British Government. Perhaps Bond, being M's best agent, is usually sent on rather 'off the book' assignments usually involving assassinations/cold blooded killings which causes problems or at least some sort of character conflict). What they actually decide to do with the character and story is anyone's guess.
My instinct, however, is that they're going to have to reintroduce audiences to James Bond. I think it's preferable to wipe the slate clean. New M, new MI6, and of course a new Bond.
Then again, if 6 year gaps become the norm Pattinson's BATMAN trilogy could have run it's course by the time B26 begins filming.
To be fair, The Bourne Identity supposedly had an impact on the producers in 2002, and its influence on CR and QOS are certainly there in 2006 and 2008 respectively. So it's certainly possible. Honestly, I think it's more likely Bond 26 will be influenced more by The Batman than something like Top Gun: Maverick.
That's not to say the next Bond film will have startlingly dark lighting, or be about serial killers, or even be quite as long, slow paced and noir-esque as The Batman is. But I can see some things bleeding through. Pattinson's casting and the different approach he took to the role could be one thing. In a sense, Christian Bale's take on Wayne/Batman mirrors that of Craig's in certain ways - both emphasised the physicality of their characters (the films certainly seemed to show both actors without shirts in their first films, presumably to showcase their beefed up torsos that they'd worked out for specifically for these films), certain traits of their characters were emphasised in their performances etc. Pattinson's take on the role was more subtle, and the script's depiction of Batman was different. His version of Wayne was more isolated, his Batman much more flawed, but multi-layered. I can definitely see them going with an actor willing to do something different - perhaps a quieter, more flawed Bond - but one who still resembles the cinematic character we know.
That and the Bond producers seem to love the idea of the hero and the villain being these parallels of each other. This is a big idea in The Batman with Riddler and Wayne, and in all honesty it does it better than NTTD does with Safin and Bond. So yeah, I can definitely see them trying to evoke that.
Make Bond 26 with a younger 007 absolutely, but let's not have him in his early days again
Considering early scripts involved very young versions of Bond and scenes such as him admitting he'd never worn a tuxedo etc. CR just feels more like a reboot than an origin story. Honestly, I don't think there's reason to show Bond any earlier in his career. I mean, there's not exactly much drama there - if a film revolves around Bond going on a mission to get his 00 status, we know he's going to do it by the end of the film. It's pointless.
https://variety.com/2022/film/global/james-bond-007-barbara-broccoli-michael-g-wilson-1235378239/
The folks at EON will really have to cook up something that will prove that Craig's storyline was self-isolated from the rest of them. I cringe at the thought of a Tom Holland (although I enjoy him as Spiderman) or a Harry Styles, of course just going off tabloid rumors. Brosnan was let go sometime in 2004 if I'm not mistaken and of course most of the front runners were Clive Owen, Hugh Jackman, Jeremy Northam etc. I was only in high school at the time and never heard anything about Craig in the running.
Again, I think it'll be easy to separate Craig's era from the new one. Just start afresh. New MI6 regulars, a new context, different story ideas, and moreover a different type of Bond. This is why I was saying that we might potentially get an actor who gives us a take on the role we might not be expect, and the script will highlight this. We tend to get this anyway from actor to actor, but it's probably needed now more than ever to hammer it home.
With respect to the guy, they must be sick to death of having to say how much they love him, in connection with the role. It's like pandering to the public, before the inevitable Idris Elba isn't Bond #7.
The man is 50 years old, he was probably too old for it ten years ago
"Commit to 10-12 years for the role." I'm looking forward to the next actors two film run then.😁
I mean, did they forget all about the business of filmmaking, and making a profit on investment to give into their lead's demands?
Is that really a realistic scanario?
No matter what is said to the media, this is a multi-million dollar project... I think a lot more thought went into Craig's conclusion then you're wanting to give credit for.
This is what they will do. As they had done for decades before Craig, they may hint at important things from Bond's past (Tracy, orphan, maybe military experience), but largely be their own stories.
This is kind of just a made-up situation. It's your opinion that it's a gigantic mess. I think it's pretty well documented they didn't just give into the wishes of an actor who wants his character to be killed off. Craig didn't force anyone to do anything.
You took a bunch of stuff you didn't like about the Craig era, and made all that the reason we ended up with a "gigantic mess" (we didn't).
I really hate this slightly pathetic whine that Craig was the only one who wanted to kill 007 and forced everyone to go along with him because of his diva-ish demands. It's so clearly and self-evidently not true, but people get it into their minds and there's nothing that can make them realise it's wrong.
And that doesn’t bother me at all. When I watch past Bond films like FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, nothing about it is “ruined” by the knowledge that a later actor play’s a Bond that died. Just as I don’t ever get into thinking that the Bond I’m watching in DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER is the same person we see in OCTOPUSSY.