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
Which is all great, but you can point it out without being needlessly rude about it. Personal preferences might not have an impact on an actor's success, but the thread here is fundamentally built on people expressing their personal preferences. So I'm not sure why that's a point that even needs to be made. And as I said previously, there doesn't need to be a "matter of fact" approach to what people want from a new Bond. Feeling is enough when it comes to what an individual would like to see. My stance is not to contradict you on everything, no. If that were the case I'd be talking about how important height is, which I've already said it isn't, and you replied "Fine". Remember? My original point was describing fans opinions as "unimportant" on a fan discussion forum isn't really going to lead to any interesting discussion. That you've taken it onboard as me seeking to contradict you on "everything" ironically proves the rhetoric is a bit silly and never leads anywhere good.
Hardly, the context was pretty clear from your original post and the fact that you were responding to someone's own personal preferences. Unless you maybe just chose your words poorly, in which case, fair enough! :)
Huh? This is phrased as if it's a mic-drop moment, but I'm not sure what it is you're saying here. What about that implies I want to debate it now as opposed to two sentences ago? I didn't feel height was important then and I still didn't when I wrote that. The point of the previous comment was that I don't look down on others for their opinions. I'm not looking down on yours, either, just with how you're expressing it. As I said, it's fine that height isn't important to you.
And so the usual process comes full circle.
Not at all but that is easy to hide. Bond needs an actor around six foot. It can't be difficult to find an actor in the UK around 6 feet :)) I'm an actor myself and 6,1- a common find.
I would often wonder this myself - has the process by which they find and then deliberate names changed at all over the years? Obviously, now more than ever, we get new names being put into the hat every month - if not every week.
I think it's more difficult now that Craig's casting has loosened the boundaries on what we consider Bond qualities. The more blurry the identity gets, the more difficult it is to know what qualities are essential. Plus, now any actor without serious acting cred like Daniel Craig had when he signed up will seem like a downgrade. But part of the reason that Craig had that cred was that his less clean-cut looks meant he was often put in character parts rather than being the romantic lead. Many of the younger candidates simply haven't had many 'serious' roles, or at least it looks that way to me.
My personal opinion is that the Craig era has opened the door for more potential candidates to be taken seriously if one doesn't mind thinking outside of the box.
For instance, Jason Alexander from SEINFELD is in his 60s now, and he could be a possibility.
Honestly, most of the names tossed about in the media, at least to me, aren't even remotely suitable for Bond. I really can't picture Tom Hardy as Bond, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't do a decent job if cast.
I think we're looking at an astonishingly long wait for the next film after NTTD.
I loathe that opinion and desperately want that opinion to change, but damn it's my gut instinct.
Good point. But Craig is 5ft 10in...so just above average.
Bond isn’t physically below average in any way, so I’d say 5ft 10in is the minimum.
Richard Madden is too short.
Maybe Daniel Craig has proved that Bond doesn't need an actor who is around 6 feet, at all?
It's more important to cast someone who can carry the film without them disappearing into the wallpaper.
I think his name might have been mentioned...
I think it'll have to be like Casino again, whereby it's a knockout film with a standout performance from the leading man to win everyone over of their casting. I trust EON will make the right choice
I’d agree with all of this.
Craig is the only one shorter than Fleming s Bond. The others are all taller. The variation isn t that huge, though. Unless you count Niven who was very short.
Again.
To, shall we say, a tiresome degree. All the more so considering Daniel Craig is still in the Bond role and NTTD is still awaiting release.
Niven was 5ft 11in and taller than Craig?? He wasn’t very short at all? Craig is 5ft 10in. Fleming’s Bond was 6ft.
He’s on the very limit of acceptable, height wise.
He is, and that’s not Craig bashing, it’s simply being pragmatic
Exactly, he’s been great.
Was he? He struck me as on the short side. OK, perhaps the perspective was confusing.
Definitely mate. He was just slim.
And given how long it will be until release, and until the next Bond movie after, the next Bond actor might not even be on anyone's radar at the moment.
They absolutely could do worse; he’s got a good look and voice and is cut from a traditional Bond mold.