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
Your presumptions of who enjoys the Craig era are staggering. Do you have data on this “fact”? I wish I was 35 again.”, by the way…
And to state that you NEVER disrespect any posters, I’d say, too late on that one.
And rewriting a Fleming character? These are adaptations. But your point was BB is rewriting in her “mold”. So how is the interpretation of Blofeld, born from the mind of MGW, rewriting a Fleming character in Barbara Broccoli’s “mold”? I’m quite fascinated by your presumptions as facts, and I ask with great interest, @bjmdds .
;))
I am 37 and i loved Craig and the previous 20
Connery (no matter the tailoring (literally and figuratively), EoN saw and unleashed the undeniable charisma, charm and rugged masculinity of a superstar. In the 80s, I grew up watching his Bond films over and over and over on VHS. He, and the films, just appealed to me: Connery-Bond was the coolest hero and I adored him. I loved the way he moved. I loved his suits and his perfect shoes. I loved the lines and creases on his face and how cold it could turn, or, as he raised eyebrows (casually chatting with Osato), how he was letting us in on his jokes (he fell into a pulverizer at the works….)).
(Even) Lazenby had “something”…. (at least with what little I know about the competition at that time. To me, he seems the “slowest” Bond as sometimes he had nothing going on behind those eyes, but I do appreciate his tender moments with Tracy…).
Moore (I appreciate the path he took more and more (and Moore); certainly the opposite of a Connery clone, he was still nimble enough to pepper his character with Bond-like traits (snobbery and class).
Dalton (to me, he’s the Energizer-Bunny, especially in LTK. He depicted the jaded wariness of Fleming’s Bond, and although I wished he was able to relax a little and enjoy the hedonistic side of Bond, I did relish his intensity and physicality (especially when he was cast). IMO Dalton was the most handsome of the actors, and those eyes could flash so much (rage when Saunders was assassinated, and then seconds later shock when he mistakenly points a gun at a child and mother). His scene with Pushkin was one of the absolute best of the series….)
Brosnan: quite simply the right man at the right time. Although I greatly missed Dalton, it was clear that Pierce had effortless charm and humour, and he reached a far wider audience than Dalton ever could. I don’t think audiences were ready to see Bond as a bit of a “bastard” (which I believe Timothy described him as, and certainly played him as), and therefore Pierce came off as more likeable. Audiences responded and Brosnan was a big reason why 007 became a big-time player again).
Craig (my favourite now… I believe that Craig always played Bond as an orphan; an orphan who trusted no one, but needed the pats on the head of his superiors (especially Dench’s M; and was in near-constant friction with Mallory’s father figure; he enjoyed the alcohol to quiet his demons, and he certainly pursued women with a broken wing. Quick to distrust (going back to the orphan angle), but brought the physicality that’s cat nip to me, but he was also very likeable, charismatic, and charming… I do believe that NTTD hit me hard as it somewhat reflects who I am as a father, and I adore the film, warts and all)…
I am convinced that the next 007 will be the perfect man for the job and will reflect the things we love about the character, while bringing his own, fresh approach. Whether I personally love him, or not, is a moot point. It’s about this actor, playing a character, that appeals to the majority of a worldwide audience. It’s a lot to ask an actor. But whoever they choose, I’m sure he will be the right one.
(End of monologue).
If you feel very upset with the franchise (2006 to now) you can give it up. I know it's sad to give up something that's brought you joy in life but the reality is the Craig era and the next actor era wasn't/will not be like the old Bond films. For better or worse things have to move with the times. You'll probably dislike Bond 26 because it won't feel like the old Cubby Broccoli/Harry Saltzman Bond films. The old Bond is never returning and gen z and gen alpha don't want to see the old Bond return.
Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny didn't appeal to enough older and younger fans. There's an example of trying to make an old action hero franchise (with its original star) appeal to the modern generation and it didn't work. Bond has to adapt to the times or it will end up like Dial of Destiny.
Personally I feel killing off Bond was far more egregious than Blofield being some pseudo brother of Bond. The killing of the most enduring action hero in film history was the metaphorical knife in the back of many fans by Eon and Craig but we cannot change the past. Time to move on.
That's true, but for me it's more about the pool of candidates than the last Bond actor. When Brosnan left, there was no heir apparent and I felt like at least some names brought forwards were interesting. (Whether or not they were even seriously considered notwithstanding). I can understand that, after Lazenby's short tenure and Connery's return in DAF, Connery appeared irreplaceable.
I agree the overwhelming opinion must’ve been in favor of Connery back then, but I’m not so sure if that’s a view people hold now. I don’t really think there is a “definitive” James Bond other than the literary character. For one Bond is such a huge part of pop-culture now, lasting multiple generations. Plus @peter laid it out eloquently above that each actor brought something unique to the character that after so many interpretations, none of them really invalidate the others. Kind of like Batman in a way; Robert Pattinson’s take doesn’t really invalidate Christian Bale or Michael Keaton’s versions. Craig’s Bond doesn’t invalidate any of the Bond’s who’ve come before him either, and Bond #7 won’t invalidate Craig.
Awesome, @talos7 !!!! 😂 😂
One of my favourite flicks! And you used it well, 😂!!!
I don't think there's now a "definitive " Bond either, nor do I think the idea of Connery being irreplaceable is now widely held. Obviously it's been debunked.
Yep, I think that’s 100% correct. The fact is there is no definitive screen Bond - not Connery, Craig, Moore etc. Everyone has ‘their’ Bond and we all have our favourites. We’re actually quite lucky to be fans of a series that has that variety (and indeed longevity).
Absolutely! No portrayal invalidates the other either, and I’m looking forward to Bond #7 continuing this tradition. Even on the off chance it’s ATJ!
With that, for a number of reasons, Leo Suter remains my to choice.
Much has been made about the proclamations that Bond needs a reinvention; well that may mean something different than what was done during Craig’s tenure. A reinvention may mean a return to a more traditional iteration of Bond. I am all for that. I want a fresh, energetic, fun, sexy, stylish, somewhat stylized incarnation of Bond , a new incarnation that embraces the early years while adapting to the modern world.
While I can appreciate thinking outside of the box, I want a traditional, classic Bond; Leo Suter or Theo James are perfect for that . I hope both are given serious consideration.
Eon , if you’re peaking in , don’t ignore the obvious; often it’s the right choice. ;)
He would be perfect for the role of Bond's long lost Sicilian cousin, Giacomo Biondo!
I’m sure Kristatos and Katie Dalton are eager to know what triumphs you have made here.
I find you and your buddies unfairly critical of an actor for no reason than just not liking them in a role that at the end of the day you luckily have no say about.
Even if it wasn’t true, your post about ATJ and the age difference of he and his wife is just sad.
Who are you to comment on such things.
Whilst you think it’s your right to an opinion, you’re mostly all very toxic.
You have a chip on your shoulder about something you can’t control.
Especially KDalton, she’s a real nut job clearly.
Glad she’s on your side of the fan forums.
As to Aidan Turner. He’s too old and hasn’t got enough exposure for any studio to risk him. Especially in a major role like James Bond.
Move on with your life old pal, or dwell on it pointlessly for the next 15 years.
With that logic.... Meet his dads:
Sorry not sorry, old boy
Aid-him Turner is about as boring as a slab of wood. He looks like a tired gigolo. But hey, if that's your sort of thing, then by all means enjoy, @bjmdds. Apparently, it is, because there's not much else going on in your posts than professing your love for Turner.
Thou shalt not sinketh as low... Oh well, shots fired!
Well yes, @bjmdds has an interesting way of phrasing things: very polite, nuanced and not at all looking for conflicts with other members. Either that, or he doesn't know how to correctly spell Craig. (We can’t all be that smart.) Still, I thought I'd learn from the master and adopt this wonderfully innovative style of posting. Because how else will I convince the world of the objective truth that my opinion is fact, and that the best way to make my point is by doing the childish thing of deliberately miss-spelling an actor's name and calling everything I disagree with "woke"?
Haha, point taken. I do like your /s(arcasm) posts.
Craig rhymes with orange. It's the only word in the English language that sounds identical to orange so it's easy to spell.
;))
As for Suter, you know I have doubts about his experience and still just think he looks like a generic action star and should be playing the Transporter or a character in F&F, not Bond. I'm also still confused that so many are putting their faith in him, when most of the people supporting him haven't even seen the guy act. Anyway, I'm just struggling to get past these qualms, especially James, who I thought might change my mind after The Gentlemen but they're still very much there.
I'm not sure if Suter's the guy for that.
I personally I think he's more in line with more modern action heroes. If we were to compare to the Bond actors, I feel like he's probably more in line with Craig than he is with someone like Dalton or Connery? but again I think due to his career so far and his physique, I still see him more in those F&F kinda roles. Though I'm open to having my mind changed on all these things.
Speaking of The Gentlemen, he kinda reminds me of Susie Glass' brother.
Well , Bond or not, as his career progresses we’ll see; I think he has the potential to be similar to Hugh Jackman in his range. Outside of his Viking persona he is extremely charming, refined and capable of more nuanced performances. He was excellent in “I’ll Find You “