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
Just like Brosnan right?
In all honesty, I'm not sold in any of those actors suggesting for the role, I would liked to see an actor who's out of the radar, if that makes sense, not these media pets.
Now that I've posted that, I've just jinxed Bond 26 and we really will get a 35 year gap.
:D
The eyebrow raise. Something RM did and never seemed convincing. Compare RM to SC.
And both of them are far more convincing than ATJ (Aaron Taylor Johnson, for that matter).
Sadly, you are less likely to except anyone in the role, as you long for that perfect incarnation of James Bond, that simply doesn't exist.
Connery will always be the Bond to be compared to, but remember, even Ian Fleming wasn't sold on Connery until he saw him play the role.
Similarly Craig, had many detractors before people had seen Casino Royale, especially the world press, who constantly wrote stories of how the film could fail. Then we all saw the finished film, and for the most part, people were thrilled and amazed, making Craig, one of the most popular actors too take on the role.
To quote Bond in The Living Daylights,
'Don't think, just let it happen.'
Regardless, we can be certain that whoever comes next will not have been chosen on a whim. It'll have been the result of months (or years) of planning, discussions, auditions, tests, and re-tests. Craig has raised the bar so high, there's no way they'll settle for just anyone.
I prefer those out of radar actors, those that we have no idea about, not those noisy making names like Richard Madden or Aaron Taylor Johnson or etc.
Because we're fans. But how many of them, even those we think would do well, do we honestly think have a chance to be cast?
Agreed! It shall all be fine.
Or: 'Don't wait for it to happen. Don't even want it to happen. Just watch what does happen.'
I think it's a little harder for them to spring a surprise on us these days as speculation on social media has become such a massive thing. It didn't really exist back in 2005 when Daniel Craig was cast as Bond. Still, I expect Eon will try their level best to surprise us all with a choice from left field, much as Craig was back then.
I'd like that actor as Bond. But whomever they get will probably work very well for me.
There's definitely that too. Whoever the next James Bond will be, it's likely he'll have been mentioned here at least once.
Cavill Bond (2005-2023)
Though in my opinion it's no great loss.
They're all uniformed, I don't know, it's just they all act the same, and they all looked the same 😅
Do you mean younger actors, when you say modern actors. Or else we're going to have to go the AVTAK way, and have an aging actor play Bond.
Which I think could be an interesting place to take the character. A Bond almost at retirement, and even one that goes into retirement and the adjustment to a more normal life. But of course, Bond could never do that.
That is pretty much what NTTD was though, even though Dan wasn't as old as Roger in AVTAK.
I think The Batman provided a good model for addressing a similarly overfamiliar backstory, they reference the murder of the Wayne’s without having to show the events for the umpteenth time, while also recontextualizing them to provide something fresh to the story.
I like where you're going with this, @battleshipgreygt! And let's not forget that Batman's backstory is so much more intricate, established and explored than Bond's. Whoever kicks off another Batman film series must resist the temptation to return to Crime Alley and the cave of bats. Bond doesn't face such problems. The "formula" is well-established, "everyone" knows who Bond is and what he (usually) does, and that's enough. They can just trap him in a new adventure and get the party started without too much context.
That's the thing. It has to be relevant. The Crag era built narrative layers on who Bond is and where he comes from. I don't think it's necessary to repeat that in the near future. James Bond is one of the very few fictional characters who don't have to be psycho-analyzed or 'developed'. He's "that guy" who beats the villains, has a lot of fun doing it, and enjoys those indulgences of mortal life few of us have any experience with. Bond is one of the few relatively "one-dimensional" main characters in films who can actually get away with it, for whom that may even be a positive thing. Let this guy walk into a mission, don a tux, arm up, bed the girl, thwart the villain's plans, and drive his supercars. The Craigs aside, it's more about what he does than about who he is.
I love what the Craig Bond showed us about the man behind the PPK, but I wouldn't object to returning to a simpler version of Bond.
I also think there’s something compelling that was touched on in some of the Fleming works, Young Bond, and Casino Royale is Bond’s time at Eton and Fettes, being a bit of a misfit and probably an outsider (“My guess is you didn’t come from money and your school friends never let you forget it.”), remember, it was ultimately his athletic prowess that ended up finding him a place/sense of belonging in that environment. Bond often finds himself immersed in high society and pitted against villains who come from that world, and while he understands and has an appreciation for the finer aspects of that lifestyle, it’s not necessarily where he comes from. Not to say that Bond needs to be represented as an everyman, working-class hero, but I think a bit exploration of that aspect of his life gives a little more context/depth to the chip on his shoulder and occasional snobbery. I’ve always felt that M would be an interesting foil in this regard as someone who was brought up in that works, often gleaning bits of intel and tips from his informal chats with his “friends in high places” at The Blades Gentlemen’s Club.
There’s a lot of fresh exploration of the character that would still fit within a more “mission oriented” Bond without going back to the “This time it’s personal” well that has been thoroughly exhausted really since GE or even LTK. Tying it back to the overall point of the thread, though, the more I think about this the more I could see Aaron Taylor Johnson pulling off this take on Bond. The voice/accent may need some work but he is an actor after all.
In all seriousness, I do wish Cavill had got the role in 2005. The reckless Bond with a chip shop on his shoulder would have been more believable with a younger Bond.
"People are always saying to me, 'You must have dreamed of playing James Bond when you were a kid," the 52-year-old explained in a recent interview with Saga magazine. "The answer is no. I never did.
"I dreamed of being all sorts of other things – Superman, Spider-Man, the Invisible Man, even a good old-fashioned cowboy. But Bond so much, which seems ironic now."
He can still play Ken in Barbie: The Motion Picture.