› ›

Where does Bond go after Craig?

1…550551553555556…691

Comments

  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited May 29 Posts: 4,273
    sandbagger1 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    sandbagger1 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    If they want to go for a ‘weird looking’ Bond villain I think it’d be more interesting if some of their physical traits are self-inflicted. Think the literary Dr. No wearing contact lenses, stretching his spine out, altering his appearance etc. Or Blofeld with all his plastic surgery. Or Goldfinger tanning himself to literally look golden. That’d at least play into their characters/the reason for altering their appearance would tell us something about them. But definitely agree, colourful villains all the way.

    I think this is a great idea. Perhaps he might have gone the transhumanist route, 'improving' his body with technology and surgery?

    That would be a horrifying spin on a typical Bond villain gimmick. Like, they have metal hands, or a bionic eye or whatever, and instead of them having attained these injuries or being born with some sort physical defect they go, ‘nah, cut off my own hands/tore out my own eye. I’m better and stronger now’.

    It’s probably a bit too gory/dark in concept, and it could easily shift into sci fi/horror territory. But seeing a Bond villain who has consciously altered their appearance could be interesting.

    Dunno how conscious you are of the last statement, @007HallY , but that’s a nice u-turn back to Fleming-Blofeld, so…… 👍🏻 👍🏻 👍🏻

    That’s true! A surprising amount of Fleming’s villains alter their appearances as well.

    One idea that springs to mind/incorporates the transhuman idea could be if they wanted to recycle a villain having differently coloured eyes (as was the original idea for Zorin). Instead of it being a natural physical trait, the villain secretly wears a robotic contact lens in one eye that allows them to do things - I dunno, maybe Bond’s undercover in their presence and the contact lens snaps a picture of Bond. Similar to AVTAK this is run through a system and instantly Bond’s info shows up in front of them. Something like that. A bit too NTTD perhaps but something like that.
    Ah, I like the mythological link to Odin, the Norse god who sacrificed one eye for knowledge.

    Hadn’t thought of that! I like that, and it gives me a further idea…
    peter wrote: »
    So we have a man, or woman, who changes/alters his/her appearance. Very cool idea, but, why? And how would the answer tie into their story, and their “plan”?…

    I’ll spin this a bit further - say this is a Bond villain who wants to appear to be dabbling in the ‘dark arts’ (as @SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ originally said. Think Dr. No or Kananga, someone who wants to scare people around them with tricks/appear all powerful). It’s not just them who has differently coloured eyes/the AI contact lens, but all their goons and henchmen too. The idea is there’s a superstition that when you make a deal with this villain/go into their service these goons gain that physical abnormality and heightened ‘powers’ (ie. Knowing particular people straight away, getting info quickly etc) but in reality it’s just the robot contact lens they’ve had implanted in their retinas.

    It’s kinda silly and sci fi, but in enough of a Bondian way I think. And of course Bond will discover what’s happening eventually. As for what their plan is or what this links into that I dunno… I guess if a villain had the ability to communicate/relay information instantly with masses of henchmen through such technology they could orchestrate some sort of attack/theft, potentially organise simultaneous assassinations. With instant communication/info from somewhere else (perhaps the villain is a bit of a hacker too or has inside knowledge of some sort) they’d be able to pull this off and coordinate these goons effectively. Would have to think a bit more about how such technology could be really frightening/used for something bigger though as I’m sure there’s more there.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 948
    SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ wrote: »
    @sandbagger1 It seems you're a big fan of the different mythologies. For you, which Greek hero resembles Bond? Which Greek god should be picked as a Bond villain? Which Greek goddess should be a Bond girl?, Etc. :)

    It's true, I love mythology and I often look for links to it in places where it perhaps wasn't intended! It's a predictable direction for me to go in I know.

  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,179
    sandbagger1 wrote: »
    SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ wrote: »
    @sandbagger1 It seems you're a big fan of the different mythologies. For you, which Greek hero resembles Bond? Which Greek god should be picked as a Bond villain? Which Greek goddess should be a Bond girl?, Etc. :)

    It's true, I love mythology and I often look for links to it in places where it perhaps wasn't intended! It's a predictable direction for me to go in I know.

    That's really cool. Mythology is always fun.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,574
    007HallY wrote: »
    My issue with a blind villain is that it’s not really a proper character trait, and you basically know what you’re going to get. They either have heightened super senses (which is very cliched) or they’re just blind. It may feed into their backstory but after NTTD and SF I think the villain being injured/wanting to get revenge is a bit played out really.

    If they want to go for a ‘weird looking’ Bond villain I think it’d be more interesting if some of their physical traits are self-inflicted. Think the literary Dr. No wearing contact lenses, stretching his spine out, altering his appearance etc. Or Blofeld with all his plastic surgery. Or Goldfinger tanning himself to literally look golden. That’d at least play into their characters/the reason for altering their appearance would tell us something about them. But definitely agree, colourful villains all the way.

    Yeah, I don't hate that at all- like that nuts billionaire who's having transfusions from his son because he think it keeps him young. I guess there's nothing totally new under the sun - Gustav Graves was kind of this, but I like the idea of someone who's changing themselves perhaps more out of vanity. I liked that Silva, for example, had a pretty obvious facelift. I thought that was perfect Bond villain stuff.
    I don't think they should really go near physical disability or scarring etc. as those just shouldn't really be associated with villany- we've done that enough.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    A cult leader who at one time, before he lost his mind, was a modern day Oppenheimer/Musk who, although a genius, was booted out of his government weaponry division for his “eccentric” ideas….

    He disappeared off the grid, but resurrected as an entirely new “entity”; a person who has transhumanly altered his appearance, weaponizing his body, becoming a cult like figure amongst a group of jaded scientists from around the globe, to build a doomsday machine…

    I dunno fellas. Just spit balling and kicking the can further down the road.

    If it sucks, blow it up and start again, 😂. But this idea of altering the human form, and why, and how it fits into an ultimate plan, is pretty intriguing…
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited May 29 Posts: 2,179
    A modern villain who likes everything about the 17th century and appears like a man from 17th century England. Maybe he's a huge fan of the pirate, Edward Teach. Maybe with all his love for ancient stuffs, Bond's modernity still finds it difficult to defeat this villain. I don't know, just an idea for a colourful villain.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 4,273
    SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ wrote: »
    A modern villain who likes everything about the 17th century and appears like a man from 17th century England. Maybe he's a huge fan of the pirate, Edward Teach. Maybe with all his love for ancient stuffs, Bond's modernity still finds it difficult to defeat this villain. I don't know, just an idea for a colourful villain.

    Not sure if it’s what you were going for but it reminds me in theory of Steampunk. It’d be cool to see that type of thing in Bond.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,179
    007HallY wrote: »
    SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ wrote: »
    A modern villain who likes everything about the 17th century and appears like a man from 17th century England. Maybe he's a huge fan of the pirate, Edward Teach. Maybe with all his love for ancient stuffs, Bond's modernity still finds it difficult to defeat this villain. I don't know, just an idea for a colourful villain.

    Not sure if it’s what you were going for but it reminds me in theory of Steampunk. It’d be cool to see that type of thing in Bond.

    Yeah, modernity that hides under the veil of the ancient.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 948
    peter wrote: »
    A cult leader who at one time, before he lost his mind, was a modern day Oppenheimer/Musk who, although a genius, was booted out of his government weaponry division for his “eccentric” ideas….

    He disappeared off the grid, but resurrected as an entirely new “entity”; a person who has transhumanly altered his appearance, weaponizing his body, becoming a cult like figure amongst a group of jaded scientists from around the globe, to build a doomsday machine…

    I dunno fellas. Just spit balling and kicking the can further down the road.

    If it sucks, blow it up and start again, 😂. But this idea of altering the human form, and why, and how it fits into an ultimate plan, is pretty intriguing…
    I do think it's easy in today's society to imagine someone who was very rich and successful being 'cancelled' because of their extreme views and being forced to reinvent themselves. Particularly right-wing extremists are prone to want to turn back the clock.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited May 29 Posts: 4,273
    Also @peter I like the idea of the villain wanting to make this ‘cult’ through technological means. Again, reminds me a bit of Dr. No’s trickery and his need to appear all powerful.

    The backstory and motivation would have to be ironed out. Same for their knowledge or acquirement of the technology integrated, but that general idea could be adapted into many different Bond villains. They could, for instance, be a Scaramanga-esque assassin who wants to orchestrate a series of simultaneous assassinations using the AI lens technology I talked about. They’ve set up this cult of loyal followers, dressed their goons up in the same costume or mask they don to commit their assassinations, and in turn controls them/gives them info about how to commit the killings with the lens tech, thereby making it appear that they themselves have murdered a series of important figures in a short time and in different places (the reason for them assassinating these particular people - perhaps British Government officials or whatever - could be part of their backstory/more personal, and it’d play into the idea of such a character wanting to be known as this mythical, all powerful figure/killer, the worlds greatest assassin… I suppose they’d have to go into this plan with the intention of killing the goons after to avoid the deception coming out, but oh well). It could be a more Stromberg/Drax type villain who wants to create his own little race of transhuman soldiers and destroy the world as we know it. Love your idea about a scientist gone mad. The general technology angle with a cult-like leader is very adaptable overall though. I can see it being applied to many different stories/characters.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited May 29 Posts: 9,511
    007HallY wrote: »
    Also @peter I like the idea of the villain wanting to make this ‘cult’ through technological means. Again, reminds me a bit of Dr. No’s trickery and his need to appear all powerful.

    The backstory and motivation would have to be ironed out. Same for their knowledge or acquirement of the technology integrated, but that general idea could be adapted into many different Bond villains. They could, for instance, be a Scaramanga-esque assassin who wants to orchestrate a series of simultaneous assassinations using the AI lens technology I talked about. They’ve set up this cult of loyal followers, dressed their goons up in the same costume or mask they don to commit their assassinations, and in turn controls them/gives them info about how to commit the killings with the lens tech, thereby making it appear that they themselves have murdered a series of important figures in a short time and in different places (the reason for them assassinating these particular people - perhaps British Government officials or whatever - could be part of their backstory/more personal, and it’d play into the idea of such a character wanting to be known as this mythical, all powerful figure/killer, the worlds greatest assassin… I suppose they’d have to go into this plan with the intention of killing the goons after to avoid the deception coming out, but oh well). It could be a more Stromberg/Drax type villain who wants to create his own little race of transhuman soldiers and destroy the world as we know it. Love your idea about a scientist gone mad. The general technology angle with a cult-like leader is very adaptable overall though. I can see it being applied to many different stories/characters.

    Yeah, dunno if any of these could fit into a Bond film as they stand, and further development would answer that question, but you guys really hit on some nice ideas... And I do think with a few more passes around the table, we would have a reasonable $150-200 million 007 adventure.

    Every time I popped in to see what you were chatting about, ideas were already grinding forward.

    That was good fun today! All interesting ideas with unique little spins, and even unconscious u-turns back to Fleming.

    You're a smart bunch.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,359
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    My issue with a blind villain is that it’s not really a proper character trait, and you basically know what you’re going to get. They either have heightened super senses (which is very cliched) or they’re just blind. It may feed into their backstory but after NTTD and SF I think the villain being injured/wanting to get revenge is a bit played out really.

    If they want to go for a ‘weird looking’ Bond villain I think it’d be more interesting if some of their physical traits are self-inflicted. Think the literary Dr. No wearing contact lenses, stretching his spine out, altering his appearance etc. Or Blofeld with all his plastic surgery. Or Goldfinger tanning himself to literally look golden. That’d at least play into their characters/the reason for altering their appearance would tell us something about them. But definitely agree, colourful villains all the way.

    Yeah, I don't hate that at all- like that nuts billionaire who's having transfusions from his son because he think it keeps him young. I guess there's nothing totally new under the sun - Gustav Graves was kind of this, but I like the idea of someone who's changing themselves perhaps more out of vanity. I liked that Silva, for example, had a pretty obvious facelift. I thought that was perfect Bond villain stuff.
    I don't think they should really go near physical disability or scarring etc. as those just shouldn't really be associated with villany- we've done that enough.

    Peter Thiel.

    https://www.ft.com/content/681fa287-f9ff-47f3-9f44-c0736ee0ab53
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,154
    A lot of this fits EON's proverbial 'five minutes into the future'. Gaddafi had operating theatres in his palaces, flew in Brazilian plastic surgeons to work on him, always had the procedures done in the early hours of the morning and was actually operated on without anaesthetic because he feared assassination if he was sedated. Nutjob!
  • SeanoSeano Minnesota. No, it's not always cold.
    Posts: 44
    007HallY wrote: »
    That would be a horrifying spin on a typical Bond villain gimmick. Like, they have metal hands, or a bionic eye or whatever, and instead of them having attained these injuries or being born with some sort physical defect they go, ‘nah, cut off my own hands/tore out my own eye. I’m better and stronger now’.

    It’s probably a bit too gory/dark in concept, and it could easily shift into sci fi/horror territory. But seeing a Bond villain who has consciously altered their appearance could be interesting.

    I originally thought they might go this route in Bond 25 with Blofeld using his brain torture device to 'kill' portions of his own brain (inhibitions and impulse control, say) to enhance his own criminality.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,359
    Seano wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    That would be a horrifying spin on a typical Bond villain gimmick. Like, they have metal hands, or a bionic eye or whatever, and instead of them having attained these injuries or being born with some sort physical defect they go, ‘nah, cut off my own hands/tore out my own eye. I’m better and stronger now’.

    It’s probably a bit too gory/dark in concept, and it could easily shift into sci fi/horror territory. But seeing a Bond villain who has consciously altered their appearance could be interesting.

    I originally thought they might go this route in Bond 25 with Blofeld using his brain torture device to 'kill' portions of his own brain (inhibitions and impulse control, say) to enhance his own criminality.

    I wouldn't mind at all if they leaned into more of the horror elements in B26 like they did in NTTD. It's Flemingesque and macabre.

    Also in NTTD, the bodies falling into the nanobot stew were a nice updating of the piranha pond...which would have induced eyerolls if used again.

    Enjoying this discussion.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    I just caught up on the industry news over the last couple of days and came across this casting/

    https://variety.com/2024/film/news/theo-james-fuze-aaron-taylor-johnson-david-mackenzie-1236016700/amp/

    My god, just go to the link and look at the two side-by-side pics. Although both are photos of actors, one clearly has the look to be James Bond, the other looks in desperate need of a shower. Combined with that voice, I just can’t believe anyone thought this guy was 007 material (IMO). Just a stunning contrast between these two.

    (The film sounds awesome though, and the casting is good for the story; a wonderful director/writer… I’m already looking forward to this)…
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 2,023
    Reflsin2bourbons wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    In what way did GF take the absurdity up a notch? A notch from what and to? Bond's childishness? Specifics, please.
    Bond's one-liners, a bizarre henchman with a gimmick, a plan that involves becoming filthy rich and involves nuclear bombs, a pre-title sequence with action, girls and plot. There's the ridiculous name Pussy Galore as well, the first real gadget, the first Bond car, the biggest villain confrontation at that point (a fight in the air) and a general ridiculousness of the whole plot: despite the changes made from the novel, there's almost no way that one could get into Fort Knox by gassing all of the guards, and the mass killing of the gangsters also has a sense of heightened reality as well.

    Do you like GF?
  • Reflsin2bourbonsReflsin2bourbons
    Posts: 262
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Reflsin2bourbons wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    In what way did GF take the absurdity up a notch? A notch from what and to? Bond's childishness? Specifics, please.
    Bond's one-liners, a bizarre henchman with a gimmick, a plan that involves becoming filthy rich and involves nuclear bombs, a pre-title sequence with action, girls and plot. There's the ridiculous name Pussy Galore as well, the first real gadget, the first Bond car, the biggest villain confrontation at that point (a fight in the air) and a general ridiculousness of the whole plot: despite the changes made from the novel, there's almost no way that one could get into Fort Knox by gassing all of the guards, and the mass killing of the gangsters also has a sense of heightened reality as well.

    Do you like GF?

    The novel, no, not much in comparison to the rest of the Fleming books. The film's alright, a relatively infallible entry that's at the bottom of the top 10 like Skyfall or TSWLM
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Reflsin2bourbons wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    In what way did GF take the absurdity up a notch? A notch from what and to? Bond's childishness? Specifics, please.
    Bond's one-liners, a bizarre henchman with a gimmick, a plan that involves becoming filthy rich and involves nuclear bombs, a pre-title sequence with action, girls and plot. There's the ridiculous name Pussy Galore as well, the first real gadget, the first Bond car, the biggest villain confrontation at that point (a fight in the air) and a general ridiculousness of the whole plot: despite the changes made from the novel, there's almost no way that one could get into Fort Knox by gassing all of the guards, and the mass killing of the gangsters also has a sense of heightened reality as well.

    Do you like GF?

    @CrabKey As this discussion is about where Bond goes after Craig, perhaps you could start a separate discussion about Goldfinger, if there’s not one already open, 😂…

    (I am being facetious, 😂).
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,250
    If we're talking about the books, I can mostly agree. GF is dense and it's got excellent passages in it, but it's one of Fleming’s lesser entries for me. That doesn't mean it's a bad book, though. I still enjoy reading it. Nevertheless, it's one of the rare cases where the film adaptation is stronger than the Fleming book, if you ask me.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    If we're talking about the books, I can mostly agree. GF is dense and it's got excellent passages in it, but it's one of Fleming’s lesser entries for me. That doesn't mean it's a bad book, though. I still enjoy reading it. Nevertheless, it's one of the rare cases where the film adaptation is stronger than the Fleming book, if you ask me.

    Very much agree . The book is a breezy and entertaining read and I especially enjoy the opening with Bond sitting, having a few drinks, and going over the murder he committed the night before.

    But too much of the novel feels as if the story wasn’t well thought out in the least. Entertaining, yes. Incredibly implausible, even for Fleming (who mostly was a genius at making the most bizarre and strange come off as grounded and possible), and confusing as to how the big robbery would have been successful, a yes and yes.

    They solved many of the issues and improved upon them in the film (I have no problem with Bond being held captive— but I think I’m in the minority here…).
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,574
    I've nothing against his imprisonment, but as I mentioned not too long, I think Pussy's turning to the angels was better adapted in AVTAK! :D
    (Because it's the best Bond film ;) )
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 4,273
    GF is Fleming at his most brazenly absurd, or at least it is in the third portion. Once Goldfinger agrees to make Bond his personal secretary for some reason there's really no going back! But I do kind of appreciate what he was trying to do. Much like the films did/do he was pushing how far he could take the elements of a Bond story. I don't think it necessarily works all the time (I'm pretty sure even at the time some readers saw the ending as lazy, nowadays we see it as lazy and problematic) but I'd argue it's a step in Fleming's writing. It marks the stage where Bond's character becomes more cynical and reflective of mortality, as per the opening of this novel. Arguably the books themselves become more reflective in terms of their prose too, so Fleming definitely developed this. It marks the stage when we do start to see some bigger, more elaborate villain plots (ie. Spectre's stealing of the bombs in TB and Blofeld's virus in OHMSS). I can't say for sure, but it may have potentially given Fleming the confidence to experiment and be a bit more open to new things in his writing - writing a Bond novel from the perspective of a woman, having Bond get married and then kill off his wife, have him get amnesia and then get brainwashed etc.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 2,023
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Reflsin2bourbons wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    In what way did GF take the absurdity up a notch? A notch from what and to? Bond's childishness? Specifics, please.
    Bond's one-liners, a bizarre henchman with a gimmick, a plan that involves becoming filthy rich and involves nuclear bombs, a pre-title sequence with action, girls and plot. There's the ridiculous name Pussy Galore as well, the first real gadget, the first Bond car, the biggest villain confrontation at that point (a fight in the air) and a general ridiculousness of the whole plot: despite the changes made from the novel, there's almost no way that one could get into Fort Knox by gassing all of the guards, and the mass killing of the gangsters also has a sense of heightened reality as well.

    Do you like GF?

    @CrabKey As this discussion is about where Bond goes after Craig, perhaps you could start a separate discussion about Goldfinger, if there’s not one already open, 😂…

    (I am being facetious, 😂).

    Not quite a touche' moment. But I appreciate the humor.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    CrabKey wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Reflsin2bourbons wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    In what way did GF take the absurdity up a notch? A notch from what and to? Bond's childishness? Specifics, please.
    Bond's one-liners, a bizarre henchman with a gimmick, a plan that involves becoming filthy rich and involves nuclear bombs, a pre-title sequence with action, girls and plot. There's the ridiculous name Pussy Galore as well, the first real gadget, the first Bond car, the biggest villain confrontation at that point (a fight in the air) and a general ridiculousness of the whole plot: despite the changes made from the novel, there's almost no way that one could get into Fort Knox by gassing all of the guards, and the mass killing of the gangsters also has a sense of heightened reality as well.

    Do you like GF?

    @CrabKey As this discussion is about where Bond goes after Craig, perhaps you could start a separate discussion about Goldfinger, if there’s not one already open, 😂…

    (I am being facetious, 😂).

    Not quite a touche' moment. But I appreciate the humor.

    I take a bow, tip my hat, and now exit stage left.

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,438
    I honestly thought GF was the worst of the fleming books, besides TMWTGG. I much prefer the novels he wrote as a younger man, before he became too melancholic with age.
  • Colonel_VenusColonel_Venus
    edited May 29 Posts: 580
    peter wrote: »
    I just caught up on the industry news over the last couple of days and came across this casting/

    https://variety.com/2024/film/news/theo-james-fuze-aaron-taylor-johnson-david-mackenzie-1236016700/amp/

    My god, just go to the link and look at the two side-by-side pics. Although both are photos of actors, one clearly has the look to be James Bond, the other looks in desperate need of a shower. Combined with that voice, I just can’t believe anyone thought this guy was 007 material (IMO). Just a stunning contrast between these two.

    (The film sounds awesome though, and the casting is good for the story; a wonderful director/writer… I’m already looking forward to this)…

    I have never seen Theo James in anything so can't comment on his acting abilities or voice, but he does not look like Bond... at all. Theo James looks like a puppy.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited May 30 Posts: 8,243
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I just caught up on the industry news over the last couple of days and came across this casting/

    https://variety.com/2024/film/news/theo-james-fuze-aaron-taylor-johnson-david-mackenzie-1236016700/amp/

    My god, just go to the link and look at the two side-by-side pics. Although both are photos of actors, one clearly has the look to be James Bond, the other looks in desperate need of a shower. Combined with that voice, I just can’t believe anyone thought this guy was 007 material (IMO). Just a stunning contrast between these two.

    (The film sounds awesome though, and the casting is good for the story; a wonderful director/writer… I’m already looking forward to this)…

    I have never seen Theo James in anything so can't comment on his acting abilities or voice, but he does not look like Bond... at all. Theo James looks like a puppy.

    Watch "The Gentlemen" It has convinced me that he could be an outstanding Bond. Throughout the series there were countless moments where I said to myself " that is Bond" .

    He has got the "it" factor a Bond actor must have. take a look at the top comments and notice the number of likes.

  • meshypushymeshypushy Ireland
    Posts: 146
    talos7 wrote: »
    Colonel_Venus wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I just caught up on the industry news over the last couple of days and came across this casting/

    https://variety.com/2024/film/news/theo-james-fuze-aaron-taylor-johnson-david-mackenzie-1236016700/amp/

    My god, just go to the link and look at the two side-by-side pics. Although both are photos of actors, one clearly has the look to be James Bond, the other looks in desperate need of a shower. Combined with that voice, I just can’t believe anyone thought this guy was 007 material (IMO). Just a stunning contrast between these two.

    (The film sounds awesome though, and the casting is good for the story; a wonderful director/writer… I’m already looking forward to this)…

    I have never seen Theo James in anything so can't comment on his acting abilities or voice, but he does not look like Bond... at all. Theo James looks like a puppy.

    Watch "The Gentlemen" It has convinced me that he could be an outstanding Bond. Throughout the series there were countless moments where I said to myself " that is Bond" .

    He has got the "it" factor a Bond actor must have. take a look at the top comments and notice the number of likes.

    Personally, I had given up on this after one episode, due to it feeling like generic Ritchie output (of which I am not a fan, to say the least) but I appreciate the recommendation and I will circle back to watch the remaining episodes - certainly based on your previous comments regarding James V Turner. I remember thinking after ‘The White Lotus’, ‘if this guy can do action’…
    Binge watching, coming up.

  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,243
    There is a shot in one of the episodes, which one I can't recall, of him exiting a helicopter that is as classic Bond as anything done by the previous actors.
Sign In or Register to comment.