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
They Will for sure.
Oh good, then we'll get our gay *and* Black Bond!
I get so exhausted with BB doing this project and that, while Bond could be ramping up. They sure never seem to be in a hurry to get these movies out. Probably be 4 or 5 years before we get another one. I wish Amazon would push them to get the films out faster.
Or it doesn't matter ?
Did the other Bonds have long hair cuts? Both Sean and Roger had short hair cuts, didn't they? Brozza and Tim had slightly longer, but I would still not describe them as long hair cuts.
Anyway, I suppose my answer to the question is that it entirely depends on the actor and his looks.
I laughed at this a bit too much
I hope they don't pick Henry Cavill, especially coming after Craig, it'll feel like a step down.
Cavill may look like Bond, but that's not enough anymore
It's because acting isn't just about looks: if it were then we could have a cardboard cutout being waved around in front of the camera :)
You are really setting the barr low aren't you, if having the right looks is the only requirement?
It's funny though, I don't understand why anyone that looks like or seems like a Brosnan-type Bond candidate is always bashed....they could still cast someone of that ilk and give him a strong script and director. It's the same Brosnan that was Bond in GoldenEye.
It's the movies, it's okay to say aesthetics are important I think.
and that film would of been top 5 for me if it was with Dalton... but with Brosnan...
that being said my top choise Hardy and my second choice Fassbender wont be bond...
I want a classic Bond look for the next actor, tall and dark with a Jon Hamm Madmen hairstyle to match. Someone who looks tough and has the acting chops and charisma to match. Oh yes, and they must be a MASSIVE fan of the Fleming novels. If they aren't, then for me it would be a deal breaker.
Those two things don't go together.
No fooling. I can’t even watch the guy without noticing how uncomfortable he seems on screen.
He has admitted he not only acts for "the art", but for the money... He finds money very important in his life.
Saying that, and it may be something @Birdleson has picked up on: he very often does appear uncomfortable in front of the camera, almost like it's the last place he wants to be, so I wonder: does he take on roles he's unfit or incapable of doing for the paycheck?
It's not unheard of that an actor turns down roles because s/he felt they weren't right for the part being offered (hell, Daniel Craig almost didn't accept Bond until he read the script), but is Cavill's approach the opposite? Does he weigh the financial gains first, and then worry about playing the character, second (or at all)?
If and when we get a new James Bond movie or product, I’ll be a happy camper.
That's not goood...
He's simply a very good looking man, with no charisma. Since he's been an A-lister, I don't think his screen presence has improved one iota.
I say this knowing he's a super nice guy in real life (a good friend of mine was his co-star in Immortal and The Tudors, and they've kept in contact over the years), but his acting leaves much to be desired.
But because Craig is an exceptional talent, he filled HIS characterization of strong and stoic with all kinds of nuance and dimension so what we got instead was a secret agent who was considered a blunt instrument…. But that was just on the surface; underneath the stoicism was something deeper and far greater.
If Cavill had more talent, he could turn his “typecasting” into a deeper characterization. But he can’t. He plays his roles to the best of his abilities, and it always ends up kinda flat. And outside of Superman, he has no film career; he’s doing TV series for Netflix (which is fine since he can make oodles of $$$ in residuals); Gerard Butler has more of a film career than Cavill at this time. That’s saying something…
Cavill is a great Superman, I agree, but that's a part where the character is new to Planet Earth, and sometimes it feels like Cavill is new to Planet Earth.
Bond is the opposite.
EDIT: I should clarify, I really do enjoy him as Superman, and those films.
You’re not going to get any disagreements from me about Craig, I think what he did was absolutely superb, but I’m going to disagree with you on Cavil. Your observations about Cavil’s “lack of abilities” are merely just opinion based. I’ve talked to many people who think Cavil is a great actor, and to dismiss his film career to just Superman is a bit of a disservice to him. He’s been in plenty of other memorable appearances outside the Superman films, his role in one of the MI films being one of them. That Netflix show, is one of the biggest shows on that platform, and he’s proved to be a big reason as to why that is. What I think is saying something is all the people who seem to be pile driving on the guy because they don’t really want him for Bond, which I get, it’s a boring choice that’s been said over and over to where it’s no longer interesting in the slightest, but for everyone here to act like Cavil isn’t a great screen presence is just something I don’t agree with in the slightest, and while most of us seem to be on the same page, it’s kind of hard to deny that to many people outside the hardcore faction of the fandom, he is, in a way, perfect for Bond.