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
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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
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.
I get your point about Hiddle being a bit refined (especially after Craig), but I'm sure he can act the part if needed.
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.
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.
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.
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. ;))
That almost seems a prerequisite for Hotel Manager duties in any part of the world.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.