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
One that I mentioned a few months ago is Jack Bannon, who is 29 (though he turns 30 later this month). I think he's someone that could age into the role:
Leo Suter, who is 27, is another that I've mentioned before. He doesn't have much of a resume though, he's probably too low profile to be considered at this point.
Edit: Oh yeah, Jamie Blackley, who is 29, is also a name that has been mentioned.
Yes, of course. I'd forgotten that only Labour Chancellors had any economic or political credibility. Now that really is satire and Pythonesque to boot. In any event, I think Mr Sunak will be much more interested in the race to be the next UK prime minister after Boris Johnson than in the race to be the next James Bond. All modern British politicians since at least the age of Wilson have to be actors on the political stage to a greater or lesser extent but you have to draw the line somewhere.
https://www.esquire.com/uk/culture/a35760811/sam-heughan-interview-james-bond/
"We didn’t bring up James Bond. Sam Heughan did. For the record: he’s flattered, interested, coy and sceptical, in roughly that order. His new film does feel like a none-too-subtle hint that he could be comfortable behind the wheel of an Aston though."
Oh look, here he is mentioning it again :)
https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/1407556/James-Bond-auditions-Outlander-Sam-Heughan-Casino-Royale-Daniel-Craig
Turns out he auditioned for Casino Royale; I don't think I knew that before.
Kidding aside, I probably wouldn't mind Heughan as Bond just based on his style.
I can see the potential. I still hope we're not looking at another half decade before the next film, though.
I guess it shows that, as well as Cavill, they were looking at actors in their 20s as that probably suited the script a little better.
At the moment I'd say Nicholas Hoult is the guy to beat because of his youth, extensive background in film and TV, and simply the fact that a studio thought he might be the guy to lead the next Batman franchise;
Henry Cavill, if they decide they want a high-profile name, are willing to compromise on acting performance (he's okay, but not someone who going to get nominated for awards), and are ready to shoot within two years;
Regé-Jean Page, if they decide that Bond being played by an actor of colour is a priority, which might compensate for not having the CV of the above two guys.
https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/1406752/Rege-Jean-Page-Bond-hopes-Bridgerton-star-netflix-movie-Ryan-Reynolds-Dungeons-Dragons
Of course, coming out of lockdown, who knows how different their approach might be to the franchise? Would they pay a bigger name for a one-off if they needed a sure-fire hit to get the money flowing again? Or go for a much smaller movie with a low-profile lead? Two films shot back-to-back? I'd hate to be making the decisions regarding the next film in the current climate.
With that said, Hoult is a strong choice.
I think they will need to have shown they can take the lead in a movie. Moore had done a couple of films by then, as well as just coming off The Persuaders where he held the screen easily alongside Tony Curtis.
I see Jack O'Connell is playing Paddy Mayne in the new BBC series about the birth of the SAS. Should be a great show, and I could imagine a few suggestions for him after that as Mayne was a bit of a hardman (quite a live wire too!).
This will certainly boost O'Connell, although I still can't get past his physical disadvantages. I know we've discussed this up and down and it absolutely shouldn't be the only criterion, but he is just a tad too short (and blond) for Bond for me. I would love to see him in a Bond film though, even if he threatens to over-power whomever they choose for Bond.
Yeah, did you see the Ben MacIntyre documentary series on this subject? The drama is based on his book, and Mayne was clearly quite the character, to put it mildly. I reckon Richard Harris would have been the perfect Paddy Mayne.
It's full of fascinating stories though, it should be quite a show when it comes on.
Yeah I don't want to get into that.
RIght now, I'm struggling to do that with many of the names mentioned.
Yeah, that's a good point. I'm not all that bothered by a couple of inches higher or shorter - but if you do cast someone shorter than the norm, it could possibly have a knock-on effect in terms of who else they cast (certainly for the leading ladies), as they will want to make their leading man look as good as possible.
That's nothing new in Hollywood, of course. But I doubt they'd want to restrict themselves too much, regardless. That said, who knows what EON are thinking going forward.
No offence to Hoult fans here but he doesn't seem tough enough to me (if he was cast anytime soon) he looks like a baby and he's early 30's. I think it will be jarring for the audience to go from Daniel to Hoult because it's like one extreme to the other. Unless they were going for quite dramatic shift in tone.
He is a great suggestion though, maybe in a few years he'll grow into the leading man role
While I don't disagree, I am wondering if people felt that way about Craig circa 2002. This is an honest question, as I was too young and generally not aware of the discussion at that time.
What I am trying to get at is that there is a certain something the role gives the actor. The actor of course has to bring a lot, but actually stepping into the role does something that is impossible to see beforehand.
After all, I am of the opinion that Eon hasn't had a bad Bond yet. Did they just make 6 good decisions or does the role elevate the actor? Probably a little bit of both. Lazenby to me comes the closest to it, but he is saved by everything around him in OHMSS being absolutely fantastic.
Very good points here. Also helps that the first films for nearly all Bonds are some of the biggest critical successes in the series.
With respect to Craig, in 2002 he was holding his own against Tom Hanks and Paul Newman in Road to Perdition, but otherwise had his "Bondian" roles in Layer Cake and Munich a few years ahead of him.
5ft 8in is way shy for Bond, it’s short.
I was being tactful ; 5’10” is the minimum .
If you think about it, that’s not a big difference but it’s actually huge. Lol.
I guess it doesn't help the film is so poor, but Andy Serkis is the only one giving a decent performance in it.
That said, Tom Wilkinson and Anne Reid both have cameos, and I've no idea why.
Hmmm.
What are you suggesting?
Not a Bond at all IMO. Hasn’t got the looks or screen presence IMO.