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
Really insightful point about Brando and Dean and how the '50s film trends influenced Bond into the early '60s.
I also think it's very fortunate that they shot DN in color (to showcase Jamaica?), which was not a given in 1962.
Can you imagine a B/W GF? I can't.
I think there are definite similarities between Connery and Gable when considering what they represented in their respective eras. When Gable first appeared he was referred to as "Rudolph Valentino with a knuckleduster". He was seen as more virile and macho than the typical matinee idol leading men of the time. Some of his earliest roles were as brutish heavies in gangster pictures. Even in Gone with the Wind (which I confess, I've not seen in it's entirety) He tells Scarlett to "shut your stupid mouth" and "if you were a man I'd break your neck."
Doris Day said he was "as masculine as any man I've ever known." Likewise, Joan Crawford declared him "the most masculine man that I have ever met in my life. Gable had balls."
I watched CHARADE for the first time in years, and really enjoyed the espionage intrigue. Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn were superb. I actually thought Cary Grant was quite Bondian in this film. Moreso than NORTH BY NORTHWEST (which I also love). Nearing 60 he was as dashing, charming and energetic as ever. Great rooftop fight sequence, which reminded me of that Dalton LARKS commercial from the early 90s. Very Bondian. I loved it.
I'd really love if the next Bond era has a classic Hollywood magic to it. There's a rewatchble factor to old Hollywood for me. For instance, I watch Bogart films easily as often as I watch Bond.
Most modern films, even popular ones like THE DARK KNIGHT I may only watch once........maybe twice.
I agree mate, re Grant in Charade. He's a lot more cool, confident and debonair. His character in North by Northwest, he's an everyman caught up in a bizarre and dangerous situation!
True, that in North By Northwest he was playing an everyday man. It explains some of his mannerisms, posturing and even the way he ran. Great actor Grant was, knowing the script demanded him to act that way.
It's funny, but as there been a video on YT made about the original Bond casting?
You can see what they were aiming for once you look at Richard Johnson.
I certainly hope not. I cannot stand the man's face. He's a good actor, don't get me wrong, but there's something about his mouth that makes watching the Fantastic Beasts films almost impossible for me, regardless of the many other problems those films suffer from.
This.
A lot of people said the same about Daniel Craig when cast. That worked out quite well didn’t it.
The Craig-haters typically included everything: "ugly," "bland," and "bad actor." I've seen Redmayne act quite a bit, and I think he's a terrific actor—certainly not bland or anything.
My only problem is mine and mine alone: I (as in me) find him difficult to look at when he makes those weird faces, like a plastic doll exposed to too much heat. I know this is a purely subjective thing, so please don't lump me in with the idiots who started their anti-Craig campaigns on the Internet back in the day. Their complaints were all over the place.
I certainly don't think Eddie shows a lot of Bond potential overall, though. He lacks a certain masculinity in my opinion, regardless of how I feel about his looks. I'd certainly advocate casting him as Q or even as a villain. In fact, give him a few years of maturing, and I'd welcome him as M. I simply don't see the Bond in him, is all.
Yes...
Although he's in his 40s, he's still got a very boyish, ethereal quality to him, which is ideal for fantasy roles, but not so suitable for masculine action adventure roles.
He also suffers from the same problem as actors like Tom Hiddleston and Benedict Cumberbatch. He's got a very strong whiff of the public school about him. Granted, Bond is a public schoolboy, but he's got more of a rough edge to him. I imagine that's why Eon has always avoided such actors.
Yes, I think despite Bond’s background that public schoolboy whiff can never be there. It’s one of the strange things about casting Bond - none of the actors themselves have had similar backgrounds to the character (the majority of them are from working class backgrounds in fact, which is quite unusual when you compare Bond actors to Sherlock Holmes ones). That’s not to say the actor’s background matters in itself. It’s just how they come across. Even Roger Moore as Bond with his RADA accent had an irony, magnetism, and harder edge to him you don’t quite get with actors like David Niven from the time.
Redmayne just doesn’t have that edge or gravitas to him. I’m sure he’s a nice guy, but there’s nothing Bondian about him, and I don’t think he’s anywhere near a good enough actor to mould himself to the role (in fact he’s done surprisingly little screen work since 2020. I’d thought he’d gone a similar way to Tom Hooper until Jackal as he’s done some terrible work that I think has set his career back slightly - Jupiter Ascending being an example, and even Danish Girl has its pushback rightly or wrongly).
Channing Tatum and Vanessa Kirby are lucky their career still survived after that film. One could say that was the film that ended Mila Kunis' rise.
I remember Redmayne being a relatively big up and coming actor around that mid to late 2010’s period. The guy even won an Oscar. But yeah, his performance in Jupiter Ascending was downright embarrassing. Even Fantastic Beasts hasn’t gone anywhere (not his fault in itself, but I don’t think he quite carried those films as one would suspect with his fame). He likely had a kid or is concentrating on theatre or whatever, but he’s not really done anything as major as one would expect past 2020. Maybe I’m being harsh on him, but it’s always been a bit strange to me that he got as far as he did. Maybe The Jackal will change my opinion of him.
I'm not a huge fan of his, I don't want to see him as Bond, but I think it's just biased to say say that he's having problems. If he was in a big hit I imagine people would be saying he's too successful to be Bond.