Who should/could be a Bond actor?

Comments

• Risico007

  October 2019 Posts: 9,939

  barryt007 wrote: »

  show previous quotes

  mattjoes wrote: »

  Shardlake wrote: »

  I also don't believe an actor like Aidan Turner would want to play a lighter Bond, most actors looking to play this role have been turned onto it because Daniel Craig showed the potential the character has to be much more than suave, spy with little depth.
  
  It will be sometime before Bond takes a step backwards, expect the character to evolve not digress.

  I couldn't disagree more with that last sentence. I don't think that's a step backwards at all. It's a step sideways. The character of Bond can be compelling and fulfilling to watch purely on account of his confidence, intelligence, resourcefulness and charm, without the necessity of profound psychological depth. His deeper thoughts and emotions --about himself, his profession and others-- can be kept as an exquisitely unsolvable mystery, only to be alluded to with the subtlest of touches on certain occasions, such as when a character like Kerim Bey or Aki dies.
  
  We've had the Connery, Moore and Brosnan eras mostly featuring that type of characterization, and the Lazenby, Dalton and Craig eras generally leaning toward the other type, with the Craig era being no doubt more interested than any other in understanding what drives Bond as a person. (Even if, as you say, the Dalton era was not that far removed from the Moore era in some respects, the character still exhibited much greater depth than in the Roger era, by virtue of both Dalton's acting and certain aspects of the scripts.) My point is that both takes on the role are equally valid, and one isn't inherently superior to the other. Personally, I find both to be enjoyable.
  
  Also, I don't think the potential of Bond as a character, in the sense you're referring to, is as much as you think. There is a limitation. We can come to understand something about who he is and why he is the way he is --both through learning about his past and, more importantly, witnessing his reactions to new situations--, but we shouldn't ever feel like we've "cracked the code" on him. If that happens, the appeal of the character will dissipate, and the fantasy aspect of the films, and Bond himself, will turn into banality. He should always be a mystery to some extent, a dull man to whom exciting things happen. And the general approach to a deeper characterization of Bond shouldn't be about visiting his childhood home or learning about his foster brother, but about seeing him react to the death of a loved one he met in a mission, or considering the possibility of having a life outside the secret service. Things that arise naturally and organically out of his job, and the formula of the films.

  
  +1
  I think we have our 'post of the day' right there.
  Totally agree with EVERYTHING.

  
  This is honestly why Hardy is my main guy I feel he would be lighter then Craig but not too light
• barryt007

  October 2019 Posts: 19,339

  Risico007 wrote: »

  show previous quotes

  barryt007 wrote: »

  mattjoes wrote: »

  Shardlake wrote: »

  I also don't believe an actor like Aidan Turner would want to play a lighter Bond, most actors looking to play this role have been turned onto it because Daniel Craig showed the potential the character has to be much more than suave, spy with little depth.
  
  It will be sometime before Bond takes a step backwards, expect the character to evolve not digress.

  I couldn't disagree more with that last sentence. I don't think that's a step backwards at all. It's a step sideways. The character of Bond can be compelling and fulfilling to watch purely on account of his confidence, intelligence, resourcefulness and charm, without the necessity of profound psychological depth. His deeper thoughts and emotions --about himself, his profession and others-- can be kept as an exquisitely unsolvable mystery, only to be alluded to with the subtlest of touches on certain occasions, such as when a character like Kerim Bey or Aki dies.
  
  We've had the Connery, Moore and Brosnan eras mostly featuring that type of characterization, and the Lazenby, Dalton and Craig eras generally leaning toward the other type, with the Craig era being no doubt more interested than any other in understanding what drives Bond as a person. (Even if, as you say, the Dalton era was not that far removed from the Moore era in some respects, the character still exhibited much greater depth than in the Roger era, by virtue of both Dalton's acting and certain aspects of the scripts.) My point is that both takes on the role are equally valid, and one isn't inherently superior to the other. Personally, I find both to be enjoyable.
  
  Also, I don't think the potential of Bond as a character, in the sense you're referring to, is as much as you think. There is a limitation. We can come to understand something about who he is and why he is the way he is --both through learning about his past and, more importantly, witnessing his reactions to new situations--, but we shouldn't ever feel like we've "cracked the code" on him. If that happens, the appeal of the character will dissipate, and the fantasy aspect of the films, and Bond himself, will turn into banality. He should always be a mystery to some extent, a dull man to whom exciting things happen. And the general approach to a deeper characterization of Bond shouldn't be about visiting his childhood home or learning about his foster brother, but about seeing him react to the death of a loved one he met in a mission, or considering the possibility of having a life outside the secret service. Things that arise naturally and organically out of his job, and the formula of the films.

  
  +1
  I think we have our 'post of the day' right there.
  Totally agree with EVERYTHING.

  
  This is honestly why Hardy is my main guy I feel he would be lighter then Craig but not too light

  
  I wouldn't mind Hardy,after seeing him as a Bond-like character in Inception.
• talos7 New Orleans

  October 2019 Posts: 8,504

  Getafix wrote: »

  Cillian Murphy is a good actor but too odd looking.

  
  I agree, he's got an interesting but odd look, definitely not Bond.
• Shardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England

  October 2019 Posts: 4,043

  We'll just have to see what Barbara Broccoli has in store for the character but I don't think it will be going back to the Moore/Brosnan type just yet.
• Benny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator

  October 2019 Posts: 15,377

  An out of left field choice, who at first I thought would be all wrong. But has grown on me as a potential Bond is Benedict Cumberbatch. I realise it's highly unlikely due to his star status, along with probably not wanting to attach himself to another franchise.
  However I think he's a terrific actor, who would possibly bring a Dalton style interpretation to the character.
• Univex

  October 2019 Posts: 6,839

  Benny wrote: »

  An out of left field choice, who at first I thought would be all wrong. But has grown on me as a potential Bond is Benedict Cumberbatch. I realise it's highly unlikely due to his star status, along with probably not wanting to attach himself to another franchise.
  However I think he's a terrific actor, who would possibly bring a Dalton style interpretation to the character.

  I believe Cumberbatch is capable of portraying anything and anyone. He really is a brilliant thespian.
• barryt007

  October 2019 Posts: 19,339

  Benny wrote: »

  An out of left field choice, who at first I thought would be all wrong. But has grown on me as a potential Bond is Benedict Cumberbatch. I realise it's highly unlikely due to his star status, along with probably not wanting to attach himself to another franchise.
  However I think he's a terrific actor, who would possibly bring a Dalton style interpretation to the character.

  
  He proved he could do a Bond type character when he was Khan in Star Trek Into Darkness,imo.
  
  Excellent actor.
• Torgeirtrap

  October 2019 Posts: 17,924

  Don't think I see Benedict Cumberbatch as Bond. Then again, Craig was a left field choice too, so…
  
  The one thing working in Cumberbatch's favour besides the fact that he's an excellent actor, is that he has the right kind of voice for the part.
• Thunderball playing Chemin de Fer in a casino, downing Vespers

  October 2019 Posts: 875

  Cumberbatch is fantastic, but I don't quite see him as Bond. He'd play an OUTSTANDING super villain though.
  
• Denbigh UK

  October 2019 edited October 2019 Posts: 5,997

  Not now. He's only 22, but Jack Rowan looks like he could be a good future Bond :)
  
  There's an essence of young Connery about him.
  
  
  
  
  
  
• peter Toronto

  October 2019 Posts: 9,577

  https://deadline.com/2019/10/poldark-aidan-turner-leonardo-davinci-series-frank-spotnitz-1202762599/
• JeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier

  October 2019 Posts: 1,318

  peter wrote: »

  https://deadline.com/2019/10/poldark-aidan-turner-leonardo-davinci-series-frank-spotnitz-1202762599/

  
  Another score indeed for Turner, after the news he snagged a part in Malick's new film. Turner doesn't need Bond ;)
• mattjoes Dakato Johnson

  October 2019 Posts: 7,119

  barryt007 wrote: »

  show previous quotes

  mattjoes wrote: »

  Shardlake wrote: »

  I also don't believe an actor like Aidan Turner would want to play a lighter Bond, most actors looking to play this role have been turned onto it because Daniel Craig showed the potential the character has to be much more than suave, spy with little depth.
  
  It will be sometime before Bond takes a step backwards, expect the character to evolve not digress.

  I couldn't disagree more with that last sentence. I don't think that's a step backwards at all. It's a step sideways. The character of Bond can be compelling and fulfilling to watch purely on account of his confidence, intelligence, resourcefulness and charm, without the necessity of profound psychological depth. His deeper thoughts and emotions --about himself, his profession and others-- can be kept as an exquisitely unsolvable mystery, only to be alluded to with the subtlest of touches on certain occasions, such as when a character like Kerim Bey or Aki dies.
  
  We've had the Connery, Moore and Brosnan eras mostly featuring that type of characterization, and the Lazenby, Dalton and Craig eras generally leaning toward the other type, with the Craig era being no doubt more interested than any other in understanding what drives Bond as a person. (Even if, as you say, the Dalton era was not that far removed from the Moore era in some respects, the character still exhibited much greater depth than in the Roger era, by virtue of both Dalton's acting and certain aspects of the scripts.) My point is that both takes on the role are equally valid, and one isn't inherently superior to the other. Personally, I find both to be enjoyable.
  
  Also, I don't think the potential of Bond as a character, in the sense you're referring to, is as much as you think. There is a limitation. We can come to understand something about who he is and why he is the way he is --both through learning about his past and, more importantly, witnessing his reactions to new situations--, but we shouldn't ever feel like we've "cracked the code" on him. If that happens, the appeal of the character will dissipate, and the fantasy aspect of the films, and Bond himself, will turn into banality. He should always be a mystery to some extent, a dull man to whom exciting things happen. And the general approach to a deeper characterization of Bond shouldn't be about visiting his childhood home or learning about his foster brother, but about seeing him react to the death of a loved one he met in a mission, or considering the possibility of having a life outside the secret service. Things that arise naturally and organically out of his job, and the formula of the films.

  
  +1
  I think we have our 'post of the day' right there.
  Totally agree with EVERYTHING.

  
  Thank you!
• CommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea

  October 2019 Posts: 8,672

  Thunderball wrote: »

  Cumberbatch is fantastic, but I don't quite see him as Bond. He'd play an OUTSTANDING super villain though.

  
  Agree.
• Univex

  October 2019 edited October 2019 Posts: 6,839

  Jonah Hauer-King, if they go for even younger. Guy's 24.
  
  
  
• talos7 New Orleans

  October 2019 Posts: 8,504

  I don’t know anything about him, and it not only be this one photo, but like so many of today’s young actors, he appears to have a very effete air about him.,
• Denbigh UK

  October 2019 edited October 2019 Posts: 5,997

  I know a lot of you don't agree but I personally believe he's got huge potential :)
  
  
  
  
• Pierce2Daniel

  November 2019 Posts: 4,436

  Taylor-Johnson is a little boring and bland. However, he looks the part and if he can find a great breakout role in the next few years, I can't see why not.
  
  Though, Martin Campbell seems to think that a black actor should be the next Bond...
  
  

  https://twitter.com/DGCapitol/status/1192772111485620225

  
  
  It's a shame that Michael B. Jordan is American. He'd make a terrific Bond...I mean we have had an English actor play Batman and Superman. So anything is possible.
  
  
  
  
• talos7 New Orleans

  November 2019 Posts: 8,504

  Johnson is a one note, dull actor and Bond has not been, is not, and never will be black.
  If someone wants a black super spy, then create an original character.
• Univex

  November 2019 Posts: 6,839

  Not this again...
• talos7 New Orleans

  November 2019 Posts: 8,504

  🙄
• 00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.

  November 2019 edited November 2019 Posts: 5,186

  Pierce2Daniel wrote: »

  Taylor-Johnson is a little boring and bland. However, he looks the part and if he can find a great breakout role in the next few years, I can't see why not.
  
  Though, Martin Campbell seems to think that a black actor should be the next Bond...

  
  He said a black Bond is "legitimate" and might offer something interesting.
  Nowhere in his statement was a should.
• NicNac Administrator, Moderator

  November 2019 Posts: 7,591

  Univex wrote: »

  Not this again...

  
  No, I agree, this discussion will not happen...just yet.
• Thunderball playing Chemin de Fer in a casino, downing Vespers

  November 2019 Posts: 875

  Please, not this again. Could there be a black Bond? Yes. Will there be? Not likely, at least not any time soon. Elba was right, he knew that of he became Bond he'd ne forever known colloquially as the 'Black Bond' for all time and he understandably didn't want that.
  Let's move on.
• Thunderfinger Das Boot Hill

  November 2019 edited November 2019 Posts: 45,489

  talos7 wrote: »

  Johnson is a one note, dull actor and Bond has not been, is not, and never will be black.
  If someone wants a black super spy, then create an original character.

  
  Jordan was the weakest link in both FF and BP.
• Thunderball playing Chemin de Fer in a casino, downing Vespers

  November 2019 edited November 2019 Posts: 875

  Michael B. Jordan was great as Killmonger in Black Panther. Great in both Creeds too.
  
  Off topic, sorry.
• talos7 New Orleans

  November 2019 Posts: 8,504

  Thunderball wrote: »

  Michael B. Jordan was great as Killmonger in Black Panther. Great in both Creeds too.
  
  Off topic, sorry.

  Even in Creed I was not impressed; Carl Weathers was so great as Apollo. One of his strengths as an actor is his strong, deep voice; Jordan is plagued by a quality that hampers so many young actors today, a thin voice that undermines their performances.
  To tie this into the topic, the next Bond needs a strong, commanding voice.
  
  
• DrClatterhand United Kingdom

  November 2019 Posts: 349

  I'm currently watching The Game with Tom Hughes. Very impressed by his acting chops and commanding authority. Got a good look too.
• Benny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator

  November 2019 Posts: 15,377

  DrClatterhand wrote: »

  I'm currently watching The Game with Tom Hughes. Very impressed by his acting chops and commanding authority. Got a good look too.

  
  I like Tom Hughes. I think he could play the role of Bond.
  Also his profile is about right for the part as well. Not too famous, but known. He's a very good actor as well, which is a bonus. I'd be happy if he became Bond #7
  And at 33/34 he'd be a great age to debut as OO7.
• Shardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England

  November 2019 Posts: 4,043

  Benny wrote: »

  show previous quotes

  DrClatterhand wrote: »

  I'm currently watching The Game with Tom Hughes. Very impressed by his acting chops and commanding authority. Got a good look too.

  
  I like Tom Hughes. I think he could play the role of Bond.
  Also his profile is about right for the part as well. Not too famous, but known. He's a very good actor as well, which is a bonus. I'd be happy if he became Bond #7
  And at 33/34 he'd be a great age to debut as OO7.

  
  Watch the Turner fanboys jump on this one.
  
  I agree Hughes is a great actor and I've been suggesting him for few years now.
  
  Nice to see other see it and this just isn't the Aidan Turner fan club thread anymore.