What is your breaking point that would make you stop being a Bond fan.

191012141525

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2016 Posts: 23,883
    @bondsum, in answer to your question about accents, I believe he's played Alabaman singer/ songwriter Hank WIlliams in a new biopic. I've not seen it though.

    I agree that Hiddleston does posh Etonian well. I happen to like that aspect of him very much. At least he sounds truly English. However, I can appreciate how that may make him appear less one of us, although I'm quite happy with where I went to school as well incidentally.

    @Shark_Of_Largo, he can still do other films, if they stay with the three year cycle. He's young and very prolific, so I don't think it will be a problem. Brosnan and Moore fit in quite a few films between their Bond tenures even on 2 yr cycles. Only Craig has chosen not to.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    bondsum wrote: »
    @bondsum
    What made the socially snobbish, materialistic, killer likeable was the fact that we knew that he was really one of us and not this Chelsea-set snob that he portrayed. If Hiddleston was to be Bond he would be the first 007 that was actually a silver-spoon Bond, and that would not be something I could identify with, personally.

    Hiddleston sounds perfect then!

    After all Bond's background is upper middle class; After the death of his parents, Bond goes to live with his aunt, Miss Charmian Bond in the small village of Pett Bottom, Canterbury, where he completed his early education. Later, he briefly attends Eton College at "12 or thereabouts", but is removed after two terms because of girl trouble with a maid. After being sent down from Eton, Bond was sent to Fettes College in Scotland, his father's school.[

    Bond lives in a flat off the King's Road in Chelsea. His flat is looked after by an elderly Scottish housekeeper named May.

    If Hiddleston was to be Bond he would be the first 007 that was actually a silver-spoon Bond, and that would be something that is directly in line with Fleming. Great!
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited June 2016 Posts: 9,020
    1979 Luke Evans - 2
    1977 Michael Fassbender - 13
    1982 Jack Huston - 1
    1981 Rupert Friend - 2
    1989 Sonny Robertson - 1
    1972 Idris Elba - 2
    1980 Charlie Hunnam - 1
    1990 Jack O'Connell - 1
    1971 Ewan McGregor - 1
    1983 Aidan Turner - 14
    1981 Tom Hiddleston - 15

    First a big thank you to you all for participating in that poll.
    I find it highly interesting to see that it really has been limited to three actors.

    Also the vote is even between those three.
    Fassbender, Turner and Hiddleston seem to be popular choices.

    Personally I would take any of those three gladly.
  • Posts: 2,483
    Anybody but Elba.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Glad to see Claflin hasn t got a single vote. He would be as bad as Hoult.
  • Jerzy_BondovJerzy_Bondov Undercover - Gibraltar, Morocco
    Posts: 6
    1979 Luke Evans - 2
    1977 Michael Fassbender - 13
    1982 Jack Huston - 1
    1981 Rupert Friend - 2
    1989 Sonny Robertson - 1
    1972 Idris Elba - 2
    1980 Charlie Hunnam - 1
    1990 Jack O'Connell - 1
    1971 Ewan McGregor - 1
    1983 Aidan Turner - 14 +1
    1981 Tom Hiddleston - 15
  • edited June 2016 Posts: 4,622
    I can't support any of them. Of the non-Elbas, they are all too old, but for two and those two guys are only 5'8!!!! May as well audition Peter Dinklage too.
    No one under 6'2 should even be on the list.
    Turner is probably best of a bad lot but he's almost 33. At the snails pace that production seems to be going at we'd be lucky to get two movies out of him before he's 40.
    6'2 ish, 25-30ish is ideal for a fresh new Bond with a future
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,216
    25-30 ish is, in most cases, too young.
  • Posts: 4,622
    A good actor can play older no problem. Anyway 25 years now, is 28 by the time a movie comes out
    Laz was only 29 when he shot OHMSS and he looked great. Even Dalts was considered in his 20's. He would have made a good Bond at that age too.
    I can roll with an older Bond down the line as long as he started young and we're milking some final performances.
    Ideally though hit screen at 28-30 and done by Flemings mandatory retirement age of 45.

  • edited June 2016 Posts: 15,124
    Anybody but Elba.

    Oh come on! People have been clamouring about him as Bond for, like, since he decided to self promote himself publicly! And since Amy Pascal thought he should be, and we know she has always brilliant creative ideas, just look at the Ghostbusters 3 trailers if you are unconvinced. And it would sure please his fans if he was! (For the record, not this former fan, however.)

    On a more serious and less sarcastic note, I think the next Bond actor is still a relative, if not a complete unknown.
  • Posts: 1,405
    1979 Luke Evans - 2
    1977 Michael Fassbender - 13
    1982 Jack Huston - 1
    1981 Rupert Friend - 2
    1989 Sonny Robertson - 1
    1972 Idris Elba - 2
    1980 Charlie Hunnam - 1
    1990 Jack O'Connell - 1
    1971 Ewan McGregor - 1
    1983 Aidan Turner - 14
    1981 Tom Hiddleston - 16 +1
  • edited June 2016 Posts: 3,333
    suavejmf wrote:

    Hiddleston sounds perfect then!

    After all Bond's background is upper middle class; After the death of his parents, Bond goes to live with his aunt, Miss Charmian Bond in the small village of Pett Bottom, Canterbury, where he completed his early education. Later, he briefly attends Eton College at "12 or thereabouts", but is removed after two terms because of girl trouble with a maid. After being sent down from Eton, Bond was sent to Fettes College in Scotland, his father's school.[

    Bond lives in a flat off the King's Road in Chelsea. His flat is looked after by an elderly Scottish housekeeper named May.

    If Hiddleston was to be Bond he would be the first 007 that was actually a silver-spoon Bond, and that would be something that is directly in line with Fleming. Great!

    Yes, everything about the character you state is correct, but you've failed to grasp what I meant in my previous post; that is that all the previous actors did not come from privileged backgrounds and it shows in their performances despite the fact that they're "playing" a character that does. Nobody can accuse Connery of having been a toff, wealthy after his success, but not a toff. Same goes for Moore, Lazenby, Brosnan, Dalton and Craig. Each actor was intrinsically representing the everyman on the street and not a member of the elite classes. That is the point I'm trying to make. That is why David Niven would have been a poor choice for Dr No even though he had more of an affinity to the character's background than Connery did. As likeable as Niven is, and I do like Niven immensely, he lacked the earthy, brooding, rough-edged, killer swagger that Connery brought to the role. Let's not forget that Fleming himself got it wrong, especially when he tried to get his own production of Bond (Thunderball) off the ground back in the 50's with Niven as his proposed actor of choice. It was only after FRWL that Fleming realised his error of judgement and went about retailoring Bond to suit Connery's version, hence the Scottish background insert in later books. The only reason Fleming mentioned Hoagy Carmichael as a reference at the very start was because Fleming himself looked a lot like Hoagy and saw himself as James Bond.

    OK, let's just imagine that Cubby and Saltzman had in fact cast a toff actor at the very start, beginning with David Niven, then going onto James Fox, followed by Nigel Havers or whoever. Do you seriously think the series would have been as popular and would have lasted as long as it did if they had been chosen, rather than a working-class actor? I doubt very much if they'd have gotten further than Dr No, to be honest, especially as all the working-class, kitchen-sink dramas were all the rage back in the early 60's. That's the reason why Albert Finney, Peter O'Toole, Richard Harris, Stanley Baker, Roger Moore, Sean Connery and Michael Caine (and many, many more) became stars of the 60's, because they came from the very same streets and working men's clubs as the audience paying to go-see the movies. It's not rocket science to understand why they became popular in their chosen roles. And Like Connery, each of these actors could play someone from the upper-classes without having come from them. That's what acting is.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2016 Posts: 23,883
    @bondsum, isn't that what acting is all about though? If Connery could represent Fleming's vision, why can't Hiddleston, or any other good actor for that matter. That's what the job entails after all. Suspension of disbelief.

    I get your point about Hiddle being a bit refined (especially after Craig), but I'm sure he can act the part if needed.
  • edited June 2016 Posts: 3,333
    Well, I thought I made myself clear, @bondjames, but I'll say it again just in case you missed it. I'm not saying Hiddleston can't play the role, what I'm saying is will audiences root for a posh actor in the same way as they did and currently still do a working-class actor as he clearly doesn't represent them in anyway, shape or form. Just like David Cameron isn't one of the people, even though he claims that he is.

    PS. In answer to @BondJasonBond006's comment, it's not much of a stretch for a posh Etonian to play an Etonian. What will be a stretch is if he can be gritty, brooding and win over the public enmass. Little polls like this are fine, but it's not the big picture.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2016 Posts: 23,883
    @bondsum, I think they will root for a posh actor, as long as he plays the role convincingly.

    I don't see Bond primarily as being someone like me. I relate to Bond because there are certain aspirational attributes in his character (yes, I must be nuts to aspire to be a trained killer, I know). Not because he's an every man. The refinement, knowledge, snobbishness - I miss some of that these days. It's been gone since Moore.

    Tom Hiddleston is not David Niven, and he doesn't come across like that to me on film. There is far more of a common man to Hiddle than Niven.
  • edited June 2016 Posts: 3,333
    Well, I have to disagree with you there, @bondjames, though please don't take it the wrong way. Hiddleston is certainly not the "common man", not in the slightest. The one major criticism I had with him in the Night Manager was I just didn't believe anyone would've stopped and asked him what a well-heeled toff was doing working as a night manager in one of the hotels he worked at. My understanding was that he was meant to be portraying some ex-soldier. Surely not, he would have been fast-tracked as officer material at Sandhurst, not just a mere soldier. Though that is beside the point, I know, I just wasn't convinced that his character wouldn't have brought unwanted attention to himself, especially with his airs and graces and plummy voice. I'd have spotted he was a fake the second I saw and spoke to him.
  • Posts: 15,124
    @bondsum-Interesting post. There is a hard edge in Bond that someone in the mold of David Niven would not bring, I think. That said, I agree with @bondjames, a good actor can and should be convincing as a character from a different background than his own. Let us not forget that Humphrey Bogart had an upper class background.

    Okay, so the lesser known and youngest on that list, Jack O'Connell for instance, what works should I look for? I am starting to doubt we will have a new Bond that is close to 40 when cast or when the next movie is released. I used to think late 30s was the ideal age, giving him enough experience to be able to play the role and enough time for a long tenure, but not with a 3-4 years gap between each film. So I think the next Bond actor might need to be in his early 30s when cast, if not late 20s. Which makes it a bit more challenging.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    For what it's worth, I've met Night Managers and Day Managers in my day who seem more 'toff' than Hiddle @bondsum.
  • edited June 2016 Posts: 3,333
    Thanks, @Ludovico. I didn't realise Bogart was from some Gilded Age background. Interesting. Though, Bogart was a great character actor who disguised his background firstly as a working man and as far as I know, never played a member of the upper classes. Though I think the American class system is a bit different to our own here.

    You sound as well-travelled as myself, @bondjames. I promise to keep an eye out for some of those down-on-their-luck Etonians working as night managers on my next trip. Promise. ;))
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2016 Posts: 23,883
    @bondsum, just to clarify, I said 'who seem more toff'.

    That almost seems a prerequisite for Hotel Manager duties in any part of the world.
  • Posts: 3,333
    Then maybe they're very good actors themselves who know how to put on the required airs and graces to fulfil their roles as a night manager, @bondjames? Though, you make Hiddleston sound like he's Ray Winstone compared to the real thing, when there's no mistaking Hiddy comes from a privileged background. I honestly can't see how anyone can be more posh than Hiddleston, unless they happen to be positioned 2nd to 100th in line of succession to the British Throne.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2016 Posts: 23,883
    You'll forgive me @bondsum, but I think you may have a little something against dear Hiddles.

    I said that he is more of a common man than Niven, not that he actually is one. He's not royalty though, as far as I'm aware at least. I don't believe I made any comparisons to Winstone at all.

    I also said that I've met Night Managers and Day Managers who seem more 'toff' than Hiddle in the Le Carre adaptation, and I have. They do indeed put on required 'airs and graces' in that role, especially in the better hotels. It's par for the course I think. That's why he was a good fit for that role imho.

    For all we know he won't be the next Bond, but rather may be cast in an adaptation of the life of The Duke of Edinburgh, for which you may possibly find him more suited.
  • Posts: 3,333
    I'm not so sure about that, @bondjames. David Niven's family lost their huge wealth when he was a young boy and found life very difficult, especially as their own kind turned their backs on their unfortunate plight. This was why Niven had to abandon any thoughts of reaching the same lofty heights as his wealthy ancestors and find another career. In fact, the timing of the war was very good for the future fortunes of the young Mr Niven. But Niven was a product of good-breeding and so his hardships were well disguised from public view.

    Alas, the same cannot be said of Hiddy, who didn't have a clue what he was going to do whilst he was at Eton until some talent agency happened to spot him at some glitzy do and signed him up as a male model. At least Niven had actually been involved in the very first regiment and experiment of the SAS and was indeed a highly trained killer. Though Niven refused to talk about his exploits after the war, he did mention his involvement with Colonel Sir Archibald David Stirling.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2016 Posts: 23,883
    @bondsum, I don't know anything about Hiddleston's or Niven's personal background. Nor do I of Craig's. I know a little about Moore's and Connery's. It's really not all that relevant to me and I'm not sure it's all that relevant to most people. Thanks for letting me in on it though, because it was educational.

    I thought you were referring to their screen persona's, because I would think that is what is relevant here imho.

    In that respect, Hiddleston comes across more of a 'common man' on film than David Niven, who always had a more upper class English crustiness to him (which I also liked mind you).

    So, if your point was that a person's actual background and upbringing could influence how the public view them as James Bond, then I misunderstood, but I still disagree with you. How they portray the character is what counts, and that may of course be influenced by their personal wealth, educational status & life experiences etc. The trick is to get the balance right, and not let their own situation influence things too much. That is all down to the acting. I won't hold their background against them either way.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    Updated totals. A troll takes this way too seriously, and felt that duplicate accounts (and duplicate votes) were a good idea.

    1979 Luke Evans - 2
    1977 Michael Fassbender - 13
    1982 Jack Huston - 1
    1981 Rupert Friend - 2
    1989 Sonny Robertson - 1
    1972 Idris Elba - 2
    1980 Charlie Hunnam - 1
    1990 Jack O'Connell - 1
    1971 Ewan McGregor - 1
    1983 Aidan Turner - 13
    1981 Tom Hiddleston - 16
  • Posts: 15,124
    I don't know why I just don't see it with Hiddle. I don't think I've ever seen anything with him in it or if I did I never noticed him. Maybe because he's now the most talked about choice? Obviously for some he is the obvious choice but I fail to see it. There's just something about his face that I don't find Bondian. Nothing about his skills. John Hurt is an amazing actor but I couldn't picture him as Bond in his prime.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2016 Posts: 23,883
    I'd prefer not to judge on faces consciously, although I'm sure there's always a subliminal effect. I find Hiddleston unconventional for Bond, facially, but he is interesting to look at as an actor. Captivating in the way he moves, talks and expresses himself. That's key to me, and I'm open to any other actor who can do that in an interesting way as well.

    As I've said before, I think the trick with 'acting Bond' is to 'not act Bond'. It has to be subtle. It has to flow naturally. Like an extension of oneself. It is the infinite confidence and natural cool that defines filmic Bond, for me. A demeanour. That's why I prefer the actor to find their own interpretation, more than try to follow the book or a prior actor. Whatever space they feel comfortable in is what they must occupy imho.
  • Posts: 15,124
    Among the favourite contenders I wonder if there's not a lot of projection and assumptions regarding them. Like we want them to fit the bill and thus we think they do. It happened with Brosnan, but also many rumored ones in the past.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Among the favourite contenders I wonder if there's not a lot of projection and assumptions regarding them. Like we want them to fit the bill and thus we think they do. It happened with Brosnan, but also many rumored ones in the past.
    Inevitably I think that is the case. Hopefully we have learned from past mistakes. I for one was a huge Brosnan proponent (in preference to Dalton) but in retrospect, I realize where I went wrong.

    I don't think any of the current hopefuls are ideal, but then again I don't think Craig is ideal either.

    There is no ideal really. All we can hope for is someone who can 'be Bond' up there on the screen. Someone charismatic & confident, and who is hopefully helped by a great supporting cast and a superior script.
  • Posts: 15,124
    Brosnan was the one and only Bond that was plebiscited. I don't even think Roger Moore had it that easy when he was cast. And Moore didn't have to audition! I think Craig truly changed our perspective regarding the casting of Bond. He was off the radar, at least to the general public, the announcement of him winning the role was met with scepticism if not hostility, yet he proved the sceptics wrong with the first teaser trailer. My bet is that they'll take someone unknown and right mow off the radar. His casting may not be as controversial as Craig's but I doubt he'll be as welcomed as Brosnan was when announced.
Sign In or Register to comment.