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
Yes indeed. They should try to make a character first, then if a gimmick or an element naturally stems from the character, becomes his trademark, great.
Agreed... we have an artful director that nay appreciate the old but has a certain expectation for his film...one shared by Craig too.
Completely agreed here. I think Sam Mendes & Co. are looking for a memorable henchman, absolutely, but within the boundaries of the realistic "Craig-verse". It could be very well a more smarter henchman that is looking for a way too humiliate Bond, like Silva did with "M" in "Skyfall".
I was thinking more of a Rosa Klebb/Donald Grant-esque henchman, this time with a grotesque athletic posture. Perhaps Jaws-esque size, but certainly not turning such a big giant into a Roahld Dahl-like kids friendly giant.
No, I was thinking about that one scene that actually made Jaws look scary for a short moment. It was Jaws only assasination that was not made comic: Aziz Fekkesh death. The way Jaws slammed that little guy against that pilar, with the sounds of a spine being destroyed, that....that scene kinda worked.
What we need is a very smart henchman combined with the posture of Jaws. But that henchman need to kill in a horrific way. Let there be some humiliating death scenes and torture scenes. Seeing an arm actually break, smashing a jaw in such a way that the poor person is still alive, or what about really cutting a finger off? I mean, Tee-Hee once threatened to do this with 007 in "LALD". Well, I think in the "Craig-verse" it's time to actually DO it.
Cinema audiences need to have a similar disgusted experience as when Silva was destroying M's shot wound even more or when Silva showed his mutilated jaw...or when Silva shot Severine in such a way that you actually thought "My God....he IS mad. This is so wrong. Ughhh!".
THAT is what we need from "Hinx" or wjatever he may be called ;-). And perhaps, we see this Hinx leaving a trail of death and destruction without Hinx actually meeting 007 at all during the film. It leaves some wunderful space for.....the return of Blofeld ;-).
Having made the above comparison.....I can see many comparisons between the villains from Skyfall/Casino Royale and those from the early Connery Bond films FRWL/TB. They are....are way more compelling.
Here are some examples of tall actors who COULD play this "Hinx" or any other compelling henchman:
--> Dolf Lundgren, 6'5" ("The Expendables", "A View To A Kill")
--> David "Sinbad" Adkins, 6'5" ("Jingle All The Way", "Planes")
--> Joe Manganiello, 6'5" ("Magic Mike", "True Blood", "Spiderman")
--> Alexander Skarsgård, 6'4" ("True Blood", "Melancholia", "Tarzan") serious actor, Scandi
--> Kevin Durand, 6'6" ("Noah", "X-Men Origins: Wolverine") great looks, good actor ;-)
--> Carel Struycken, 7'.." ("Star Trek: TNG", "Men In Black")
--> Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, 7'2" ("21 Jump Street", "Forget Paris")
--> Ian Whyte, 7'1" ("Prometheus", as Last Engineer, "Clash Of The Titans") popular for his height
--> Robert Maillet, 6'10" ("Sherlock Holmes") casted for role as henchman
--> David Mattey, 6'10" (rebooted "Get Smart feature film, "Hancock") played henchman
--> Keil Oakley Zepernick, 6'10" ("The Amazing Spiderman 2")
One would hope so, but I'm not sure whether Mendes knows how to do postmodernism. His nostalgic nods in SF were more than little heavy handed. It's pretty obvious they won't be resurrecting the caricatures of old, but count me as dubious until we've seen images/footage. It's going to take a lot of skill to pull off a 'classic' henchman without it seeming like parody.
Ian Whyte could most definitely play a terrifying henchman:
But seriously, I never found Oddjob to be threatening in the slightest.
Or they simply wanted to mention as a vague reference one of the most iconic henchmen of the series.
Yeah, it Stinx. Just like Jinx. But not as much as Jar Jar Binx.
Agreed here. Let's not forget that Guy Hamilton's debut as director did go one step further. Clichés worked in 'Goldfinger', but it are still clichés. Compare Oddjob with Grant and you know what I mean. Grant was really the cold-blooded Daniel Craig-esque assassin, whereas Oddjob flew a hat, smiled and simply......was entertaining for audiences, but not threathening.
That's why I prefer Terence Young's Bond films over those of Guy Hamilton. 'Goldfinger' is a cult-film yes, hence the raving reviews it still gets, but as a film I find it interchangeable with, let's say, 'Live And Let Die'.
For me, Martin Campbell ('Casino Royale') and Sam Mendes ('Skyfall') also had this "Terence Young vibe".
Yeah...
Imagine if Oddjob was a woman!
But the entire character is somewhat cartoonish. I don't know how one can say this about Jaws in TSWLM but not Oddjob. Don't get me wrong, I love Oddjob, but "threatening" is something I don't associate with the character. He's entertaining for sure, but he's not in the same vain as say, Grant or Dario. Heck, I even find Mayday more threatening than Oddjob.
Agreed here. Let's not forget that Guy Hamilton's debut as director did go one step further. Clichés worked in 'Goldfinger', but it are still clichés. Compare Oddjob with Grant and you know what I mean. Grant was really the cold-blooded Daniel Craig-esque assassin, whereas Oddjob flew a hat, smiled and simply......was entertaining for audiences, but not threathening.
That's why I prefer Terence Young's Bond films over those of Guy Hamilton. 'Goldfinger' is a cult-film yes, hence the raving reviews it still gets, but as a film I find it interchangeable with, let's say, 'Live And Let Die'.
For me, Martin Campbell ('Casino Royale') and Sam Mendes ('Skyfall') also had this "Terence Young vibe".
If it's literally a given character's first appearance then you can't have clichés specific to that character but you can still have clichés that apply to the film's genre or type of character..
In the case of a reboot, although Casino Royale is a story that is set at the beginning of Bond's career, it is still a film that was preceded by 4 decades of other Bond films; any elements that appeared in those films could be seen as a cliché, even in the context of a introduction film.
--> David "Sinbad" Adkins, 6'5" ("Jingle All The Way", "Planes")
--> Joe Manganiello, 6'5" ("Magic Mike", "True Blood", "Spiderman")
--> Dalip Singh. 7'1" ("Get Smart", WWF Wrestling)
--> Alexander Skarsgård, 6'4" ("True Blood", "Melancholia", "Tarzan") serious actor, Scandi
--> Kevin Durand, 6'6" ("Noah", "X-Men Origins: Wolverine", "Smokin' Aces"
--> Carel Struycken, 7'.." ("Star Trek: TNG", "Men In Black")
--> Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, 7'2" ("21 Jump Street", "Forget Paris")
--> Ian Whyte, 7'1" ("Prometheus", as Last Engineer, "Clash Of The Titans") popular for his height
--> Robert Maillet, 6'10" ("Sherlock Holmes", "Pacific Rim") casted for role as henchman
--> David Mattey, 6'10" (rebooted "Get Smart feature film, "Hancock") played henchman
--> Keil Oakley Zepernick, 6'10" ("The Amazing Spiderman 2")
Let's do some casting by ourselves. Based on both the looks (facial looks) and, very important, acting skills, one should go for Kevin Durand or Robert Maillet. Robert Maillet already kicked some ass as henchman in Downey Jr's first outing as "Sherlock Holmes".
Kevin Durand is also a marvellous actor with the real looks of a serial killer. In "X-Men Origins: Wolverine" he owned his henchman role opposite Hugh Jackman (Actually, Jackman himself as a henchman?).
If you wants to bring in a large audience, one could have a look at Dolf Lundgren's come-back as an actor in "The Expendables 1 & 2".
I consider Alexander Skarsgård the best actor of the above list, but I'm not convinced by his looks. Even as a vampire in "True Blood" he still looks a bit too friendly. Joe Manganiello is the opposite: Fantastic looks, but no real acting experience. BUT he is an experienced stuntman.
To a lesser extend, EON Productions could send both actors David Mattey and Keil Oakley Zepernick an invitation for a screen test.
Still, my ultimate favourite on the list would be Kevin Durand. Great actor, slightly type-casted for psychotic roles, but that's what we need for a credible henchman no? Just have a look at his Wikipedia-profile. Pretty damn amazing CV he has: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Durand
How black and white of you. I think acting skills are very important.
Hmmm, good idea too. Though I think I've mentioned him for the role of lead villain. For that I think he is perfect. Also, EON needs to cast a henchman ánd a lead villain. This time around EON specifically opens a search for a henchman. This means that they really press for a more memorable henchman, compared to the past three Bond films.
For me...height should not be seen as a black-and-white item to play with. One the actor is good....very good...the height can add some impressive looks. Just like Javier Bardem's wish to dye his hair blond. It's not cheesy. It's an element of the total package of a villain or henchman.
Having said that: Kevin Durand for henchman and Michael Shannon or Christoph Waltz for leading Bond villain?