Tom Hardy wants to be next Bond with Nolan directing

123457

Comments

  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    mdo007 wrote:
    JBFan626 wrote:
    I am actually warming up to the idea of Tom Hardy as Bond. He seems like a natural succession from Craig's Bond. He's got the physique, and could look suave in the right suit and stylings. Remember, Ian Fleming thought Sean Connery looked like a cab driver. By the time Bond25 roles around in 2016, he will be 39, which for some may be a bit old, but I like Bond to be a bit older, wiser, and more refined. I'm not so keen on Nolan directing, but Hardy is a good candidate. Having seen Bale in enough films now, I can safely say he is NOT a good choice for Bond. He is too associated with Batman now, it would seem strange to have him cross over to Bond. The same is true of Henry Cavill and Superman. It doesn't work to have the same actor playing a lead role in two major franchises.

    Christian Bale would be an interesting Bond, but I heard rumour that Bale isn't interested in playing Bond even if EON offered him to play Bond, he would turn it down. For Chris Nolan, as I said Skyfall was influenced by The Dark Knight (Sam Mendes said it himself) and Nolan himself said he would be interested in directing a Bond film (and he's a long time Bond fan so he's not going to screw this one up even if he directed Bond 24 or any future Bond film). I'm not sure about Henry Cavill, his look does not fit Bond (Hugh Jackman and Clive Owen looks more like Bond then Cavill). I would prefer either Hugh Jackman (I doubt he could take the role of Bond since he may not have time, but he's more physcially fit and active then Craig even if both Craig and Jackman are the same age), Michael Fassbender (many people who saw him in X-men: First Class said he had a Sean Connery aura coming out of his acting hence why people would consider him to play Bond after Craig), and Tom Hardy (as I mention he does have Bond characteristics in acting and outside of acting).

    Just my thoughts on the names you gave:
    -Christian Bale is too old to become Bond when Craig leaves the role;
    -Henry Cavill - let's see what happens, but I think he'll become too conotated with Superman in the future. A fine actor with, I hope, a bright future ahead of him. I don't agree his look doesn't fit Bond, on the contrary.
    -Hugh Jackman will not become Bond and it isn't because he doesn't have the time. He's too old for that! I don't know where did you get that Jackman is more fit than Craig, is it because of the way he looks in Wolverine? No actor to become Bond in the future should be more fit than Craig, his look in CR was already stepping too far. I could see Jackman being cast in some other role during the Craig era though.
    -Fassbender - if you haven't see First Class do, it's a great film. However I think they went to huge efforts to make him look "Bondian". However I don't see it happening. First and foremost he looks the same age as Craig or even older (which is no mean feat considering Craig doesn't look exactly young)... being 10 years younger than Craig! That's shocking and I can only imagine how old will he look when Craig leaves the role. However, I would be all for him playing Fleming in a biopic.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    In five years they'll no doubt be a new crop of actors we're talking about who could be Bond. Yet Craig could still continue!

    It's so odd, some continue to have this talk when it'll amount to nothing. I don't see the point in it myself.
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    Samuel001 wrote:
    In five years they'll no doubt be a new crop of actors we're talking about who could be Bond. Yet Craig could still continue!

    It's so odd, some continue to have this talk when it'll amount to nothing. I don't see the point in it myself.

    Exactly, the next Bond will probably be somebody nobody is counting on, at least for now. I can bet none of these actors people are talking about now will ever become Bond.
  • mdo007mdo007 Katy, Texas
    Posts: 259
    Samuel001 wrote:
    In five years they'll no doubt be a new crop of actors we're talking about who could be Bond. Yet Craig could still continue!

    It's so odd, some continue to have this talk when it'll amount to nothing. I don't see the point in it myself.

    Well that's why people like to speculate, it makes it interesting, and who knows maybe someone at EON is probably watching this thread right now.
    Sandy wrote:
    mdo007 wrote:
    JBFan626 wrote:
    I am actually warming up to the idea of Tom Hardy as Bond. He seems like a natural succession from Craig's Bond. He's got the physique, and could look suave in the right suit and stylings. Remember, Ian Fleming thought Sean Connery looked like a cab driver. By the time Bond25 roles around in 2016, he will be 39, which for some may be a bit old, but I like Bond to be a bit older, wiser, and more refined. I'm not so keen on Nolan directing, but Hardy is a good candidate. Having seen Bale in enough films now, I can safely say he is NOT a good choice for Bond. He is too associated with Batman now, it would seem strange to have him cross over to Bond. The same is true of Henry Cavill and Superman. It doesn't work to have the same actor playing a lead role in two major franchises.

    Christian Bale would be an interesting Bond, but I heard rumour that Bale isn't interested in playing Bond even if EON offered him to play Bond, he would turn it down. For Chris Nolan, as I said Skyfall was influenced by The Dark Knight (Sam Mendes said it himself) and Nolan himself said he would be interested in directing a Bond film (and he's a long time Bond fan so he's not going to screw this one up even if he directed Bond 24 or any future Bond film). I'm not sure about Henry Cavill, his look does not fit Bond (Hugh Jackman and Clive Owen looks more like Bond then Cavill). I would prefer either Hugh Jackman (I doubt he could take the role of Bond since he may not have time, but he's more physcially fit and active then Craig even if both Craig and Jackman are the same age), Michael Fassbender (many people who saw him in X-men: First Class said he had a Sean Connery aura coming out of his acting hence why people would consider him to play Bond after Craig), and Tom Hardy (as I mention he does have Bond characteristics in acting and outside of acting).

    Just my thoughts on the names you gave:
    -Christian Bale is too old to become Bond when Craig leaves the role;
    -Henry Cavill - let's see what happens, but I think he'll become too conotated with Superman in the future. A fine actor with, I hope, a bright future ahead of him. I don't agree his look doesn't fit Bond, on the contrary.
    -Hugh Jackman will not become Bond and it isn't because he doesn't have the time. He's too old for that! I don't know where did you get that Jackman is more fit than Craig, is it because of the way he looks in Wolverine? No actor to become Bond in the future should be more fit than Craig, his look in CR was already stepping too far. I could see Jackman being cast in some other role during the Craig era though.
    -Fassbender - if you haven't see First Class do, it's a great film. However I think they went to huge efforts to make him look "Bondian". However I don't see it happening. First and foremost he looks the same age as Craig or even older (which is no mean feat considering Craig doesn't look exactly young)... being 10 years younger than Craig! That's shocking and I can only imagine how old will he look when Craig leaves the role. However, I would be all for him playing Fleming in a biopic.

    I've seen X-men: First Class and I do see a Connery aura coming out of Fassbender (even other people noted this) and this lead to speculation from fans he succeed DC after he step down (again this is up to Barb and Mike Wilson), BTW Michael Fassbender is 35 years old and Craig is 44 so that's a bit of a major different. Also for Hugh Jackman, yeah beside Wolverine, I've seen his other film for a guy same age as Craig, he still is physically fit and he can do a lot of stunt with no problem, I did read something behind the scene DC said that "he feels he is already getting too old to cope with the extreme physical demands of playing James Bond"

    http://www.kinobody.com/2181/daniel-craig-skyfall-workout/

    Jackman kept his body in shape (no wonder why magazine said Jackman is the sexiest man), and he looks like if he had play Bond for Skyfall instead of Craig, Jackman wouldn't have found the stunt too hard and he can handle the physical demands for James Bond if he had that opportunity. When Daniel Craig played Bond in CR and QOS he was very physically active and could handle the physical demand for playing as Bond, but for Skyfall he did look a bit weaker. Jackman and Craig are the same age yet Craig admitted that he couldn't handle the physical demand of playing Bond, Jackman from looking at his other movies involving good fitness looks like he doesn't have any problem.

    For Henry Cavill, I look at his face and he just doesn't fit Bond for me (that's why on my previous statement, I said Clive Owen and Hugh Jackman look more like Bond then Cavill), even though Cavill has black hair and is 6 feet, his look does not convince me that he's Bond. I prefer he doesn't take the role of Bond.



  • Posts: 6,601
    LOL I have yet to read this coming from a real source. He never said that, all he did was, he would like to do it for as long as he feels fit enough, which is not the same. So careful with this. He certainly didn't give any vibes of not being up to par in SF. Like Mendes said - he did way more then they actually waned him to do and that he actually did TOO much at times. Going to the gym for 2 hours after a 14 hour day is hardly the task of a man, wo isn't in great shape.
  • For starters, regarding the discussion above about Bale, Cavil and Jackman possible taking over the Bond role after Daniel, none of them will get the chance. Nor should they frankly because they are all too closely associated with another major film character. Let's not forget that After CR, Daniel was given a serious offer to be Thor as Marvel studios was gearing up to expand their Avengers universe, and Craig turned it down saying that as an actor you either get to be James Bond, or Thor, not both because he understood how jarring that would be on him not just physically but financially as well as two major studios would be continuously fighting over him to be in there next project.

    As for the discussion at hand about Hardy playing Bond, I just don't see it. He is talented as an actor but for Bond I just don't want to see him in the role because I feel like that would continue an unfortunate derivation from the classic Bond character which was started by Craig. Although Craig does not look like the Fleming's Bond, he does have the un-handsome face and stark brutal feeling about his presence which Fleming did characterize Bond as having. I personally did not like this decision because I enjoy the film Bond more than I do the novel Bond, and I feel that there is and should be a clear division between them. Hardy would only continue this pattern, as he does not look like Bond because he is short and muscly as well, and while more handsome, his face somehow doesn't fit the character, just like Craig.

    Bond to me is meant to be thin yet trim, tall yet not gangly, dark brown-black hair, handsome but not unable to be menacing, and above all sexy. This for me is where Michael Fassbender comes in because I feel that he would be the ideal candidate to inherit the Bond role after Daniel retires because he fills all of my requirements, and he is 10 years younger than Craig so he won't be too old by the time Dan does finally retire.

    As for Nolan directing a Bond film, frankly I have mixed feelings about it because while I have no doubt that he could direct an excellent Bond film, my worry is that as a writer he present some unique problems for the franchise going forward. He would more than likely want to do a fixed number of films with a degree of continuity between them, if not a flat-out trilogy like he did with Batman, and will be producing with Superman. He may also want to end the series with his film ark, which is something that I'm sure none of us want. I also think it would be a waste if he did only one film as well because I know I would want to see more of his work after he did one. Ideally, if he could be signed in for 2-3 films initially and then roped into doing 1-2 more, he could direct an entire actors tenure as Bond and it would fit together nicely. I would love it if he directed Fassbeder in 4-5 films after Craig is done, but I don't see that happening. I think the most feasible way for him to do multiple films would be to take on the rest of Dan's films, but he probably wouldn't want to use Craig. More than likely Nolan will be flattered but turn a directing job down either because he'd feel constrained, or because he'll want to continue his own original projects. Ultimately though, we'll have to wait and see.
  • mdo007mdo007 Katy, Texas
    Posts: 259
    Germanlady wrote:
    LOL I have yet to read this coming from a real source. He never said that, all he did was, he would like to do it for as long as he feels fit enough, which is not the same. So careful with this. He certainly didn't give any vibes of not being up to par in SF. Like Mendes said - he did way more then they actually waned him to do and that he actually did TOO much at times. Going to the gym for 2 hours after a 14 hour day is hardly the task of a man, wo isn't in great shape.

    Well this one is also a good source too: http://www.themoviebit.com/2012/10/ultimate-james-bond-trivia50-facts-for.html

    7.Daniel Craig has said that he was worried by the delay in production, and was eager to get back into the role because, at the age of 43, he feels he is already getting too old to cope with the extreme physical demands of playing James Bond.

    May I ask do you have any other favorite Bond actor beside Daniel Craig because you seem to be too much of a DC fangirl then not being open-minded, so what's wrong with other actors taking role of 007 beside DC.


    For starters, regarding the discussion above about Bale, Cavil and Jackman possible taking over the Bond role after Daniel, none of them will get the chance. Nor should they frankly because they are all too closely associated with another major film character. Let's not forget that After CR, Daniel was given a serious offer to be Thor as Marvel studios was gearing up to expand their Avengers universe, and Craig turned it down saying that as an actor you either get to be James Bond, or Thor, not both because he understood how jarring that would be on him not just physically but financially as well as two major studios would be continuously fighting over him to be in there next project.

    As for the discussion at hand about Hardy playing Bond, I just don't see it. He is talented as an actor but for Bond I just don't want to see him in the role because I feel like that would continue an unfortunate derivation from the classic Bond character which was started by Craig. Although Craig does not look like the Fleming's Bond, he does have the un-handsome face and stark brutal feeling about his presence which Fleming did characterize Bond as having. I personally did not like this decision because I enjoy the film Bond more than I do the novel Bond, and I feel that there is and should be a clear division between them. Hardy would only continue this pattern, as he does not look like Bond because he is short and muscly as well, and while more handsome, his face somehow doesn't fit the character, just like Craig.

    Bond to me is meant to be thin yet trim, tall yet not gangly, dark brown-black hair, handsome but not unable to be menacing, and above all sexy. This for me is where Michael Fassbender comes in because I feel that he would be the ideal candidate to inherit the Bond role after Daniel retires because he fills all of my requirements, and he is 10 years younger than Craig so he won't be too old by the time Dan does finally retire.

    As for Nolan directing a Bond film, frankly I have mixed feelings about it because while I have no doubt that he could direct an excellent Bond film, my worry is that as a writer he present some unique problems for the franchise going forward. He would more than likely want to do a fixed number of films with a degree of continuity between them, if not a flat-out trilogy like he did with Batman, and will be producing with Superman. He may also want to end the series with his film ark, which is something that I'm sure none of us want. I also think it would be a waste if he did only one film as well because I know I would want to see more of his work after he did one. Ideally, if he could be signed in for 2-3 films initially and then roped into doing 1-2 more, he could direct an entire actors tenure as Bond and it would fit together nicely. I would love it if he directed Fassbeder in 4-5 films after Craig is done, but I don't see that happening. I think the most feasible way for him to do multiple films would be to take on the rest of Dan's films, but he probably wouldn't want to use Craig. More than likely Nolan will be flattered but turn a directing job down either because he'd feel constrained, or because he'll want to continue his own original projects. Ultimately though, we'll have to wait and see.

    I was not aware Daniel Craig was offered to play Thor, that would've been interesting to see. Also I know Jackman may not have the chance to play Bond I'll agree, but he could've if DC wasn't chosen (he was eyed by EON as Jackman said in the interview and he was getting famous so his role as Wolverine wouldn't have stop EON from considering him as Bond). But I can dream, can I? Well I can understand why you would like the Bond film over the novel (well I tend to like the film better then the novel, although there were Bond novels then the movie like Diamonds are Forever), but beside Daniel Craig, Roger Moore didn't look close to Bond but yet he did a good job as Bond, so if Craig and Moore can play Bond even if they don't look close to the novel it's the actor's intrepretation and how close can they get to the characters in the novel. I know Tom Hardy could do a good Job as Bond if he was given that opportunity, he's handsome, tough, active, and he does Bond characteristic in and out of acting. I'm not going to make a big deal out of his height because Daniel Craig prove that a 5 ft Bond can be a badass.

    For MIchael Fassbender, as I said, he's my other candidate to take over Bond after DC, but he may get too famous. He could or could not be select to play Bond. But If I was the people at EON, I would not cross off Hardy and Fassbender.

    For Chris Nolan, I don't think he would be the writer for a future Bond film, his brother, Jonathan could do that since his brother is a screenwriter. I would love it if EON approve of having Jonathan Nolan and maybe David Goyer to write a story and screenplay for future Bond films if Nolan direct them, if both of them can prove they're just as good as Richard Maibaum, Paul Haggis, and Neal Purvis & Robert Wade then you may have yourself a good Bond film.

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Nolan is already going to be working on a new project, so good luck with him being the next direction, as it is even less plausible now than ever. It is apparently a Sci-Fi film.
  • mdo007 wrote:

    <snip>

    I did read something behind the scene DC said that "he feels he is already getting too old to cope with the extreme physical demands of playing James Bond"

    http://www.kinobody.com/2181/daniel-craig-skyfall-workout/

    When Daniel Craig played Bond in CR and QOS he was very physically active and could handle the physical demand for playing as Bond, but for Skyfall he did look a bit weaker.

    First of all, poking around that guy's site I have to call BS on a lot of the stuff he says. He contradicts himself between posts and says things about training that are factually wrong. I'm Craig's age and a part-time trainer; the gym I'm at is fairly high end and the other trainers (not myself) that I get to work with and learn from have very high level science backgrounds. This guy talks much more in generalities (some of which are wrong) and sounds like a really young guy repeating stuff he's read on other sites.

    As for Craig looking weaker in SF I just don't see it. Physically, he's even more dense and bigger than in QoS. As for him appearing weaker - well, that's in the script. It's the character, not the actor. I'm guessing that he's joked about the physical demands of playing Bond, but it certainly doesn't show on screen.
  • edited January 2013 Posts: 6,601
    mdo007 wrote:

    <snip>

    I did read something behind the scene DC said that "he feels he is already getting too old to cope with the extreme physical demands of playing James Bond"

    http://www.kinobody.com/2181/daniel-craig-skyfall-workout/

    When Daniel Craig played Bond in CR and QOS he was very physically active and could handle the physical demand for playing as Bond, but for Skyfall he did look a bit weaker.

    First of all, poking around that guy's site I have to call BS on a lot of the stuff he says. He contradicts himself between posts and says things about training that are factually wrong. I'm Craig's age and a part-time trainer; the gym I'm at is fairly high end and the other trainers (not myself) that I get to work with and learn from have very high level science backgrounds. This guy talks much more in generalities (some of which are wrong) and sounds like a really young guy repeating stuff he's read on other sites.

    As for Craig looking weaker in SF I just don't see it. Physically, he's even more dense and bigger than in QoS. As for him appearing weaker - well, that's in the script. It's the character, not the actor. I'm guessing that he's joked about the physical demands of playing Bond, but it certainly doesn't show on screen.

    Thanks you lord ;)

    @mdo - I have read too much stuff, that I knew was wrong to just believe one quote, when I saw too many inerviews etc, where is was never mentioned, quite the opposite. Plus my post was not directed against another actor but against the notion ...see above. There is a difference, you know. I like Moore and Connery best apart from DC.
  • Regarding the physical appearance and Tom Hardy being short, we had this debate when they picked Craig and look how that has turned out.
  • Regarding the physical appearance and Tom Hardy being short, we had this debate when they picked Craig and look how that has turned out.

    Craig has worked out in spite of the fact that he is short, not because he is. Shortness is a trait that is best avoided in a Bond actor and we all know that, so just because Craig pulled it off doesn't mean Hardy will.
  • edited January 2013 Posts: 5,745
    Regarding the physical appearance and Tom Hardy being short, we had this debate when they picked Craig and look how that has turned out.

    Craig has worked out in spite of the fact that he is short, not because he is. Shortness is a trait that is best avoided in a Bond actor and we all know that, so just because Craig pulled it off doesn't mean Hardy will.

    I laugh at what you all call short. I'm 5'7". I'm short. They're all close to 6' or taller. Quit griping about things that don't matter.
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    JWESTBROOK wrote:
    Regarding the physical appearance and Tom Hardy being short, we had this debate when they picked Craig and look how that has turned out.

    Craig has worked out in spite of the fact that he is short, not because he is. Shortness is a trait that is best avoided in a Bond actor and we all know that, so just because Craig pulled it off doesn't mean Hardy will.

    I laugh at what you all call short. I'm 5'7". I'm short. They're all close to 6' or taller. Quit griping about things that don't matter.

    So do I!
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited January 2013 Posts: 28,694
    This is a load of bollocks. I am called tall all the time, and I am barely 5'11". Dan is 5'10", so I don't see the logic that points to him being a Keebler elf. Any shortcomings he has are canceled out by his sheer talent, intimidation and presence alone.
  • DrNoDrNo North Hollywood, California, USA
    Posts: 81
    Hardy would be excellent. My only hangup was that I'd never see him with hair, but somebody posted a photo. Back when I saw him in Star Trek Nemesis, I remembered thinking he was the only great thing about it. Warrior, DKR, the new Mad Max, yeah, he's a talented guy.
  • Posts: 1,098
    Well Hardy could be good in a Bond film...but i hope he doesnt wear a bloody face mask like he did in the Bat flick.................coz i couldnt understand a bleedin word he said!
  • Posts: 59
    after watching Dark Knight Rises and being awestruck at how Hardy portrayed Bane - I'd prefer Hardy to go bald again and play Blofeld instead, he wouldnt need a henchman to do his dirty work,

    and as with Bardem's Silva, Bond might have a worthy adversary, certainly an improvement on QoS's Greene, who is so weed he slams a fire axe into his OWN foot!!??
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Hardy as Blofeld, as long as he doesn't sound like Yoda crossed with Ben Kingsley's Ghandi with a touch of mola ram. For all those complaints about Bale's growling in TDK it"s nowhere as jarring as Hardy's vocal choice for Bane.
  • Posts: 7,653
    Nolan is already going to be working on a new project, so good luck with him being the next direction, as it is even less plausible now than ever. It is apparently a Sci-Fi film.

    Which is perhaps his forte, and might be a much better choice for him than getting involved in a franchise that currently does very well and does not need his hand.

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I'm amazed at the number of people who struggled to understand Hardy's dialogue as Bane. He sounded crystal clear to me.
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    doubleoego wrote:
    I'm amazed at the number of people who struggled to understand Hardy's dialogue as Bane. He sounded crystal clear to me.

    I also had no problems in the film (the trailers were something else). However, I personally think the choice of voice was not very inspired.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    doubleoego wrote:
    I'm amazed at the number of people who struggled to understand Hardy's dialogue as Bane. He sounded crystal clear to me.

    To be honest, I preferred it in the preview. The dub sticks out like a sore thumb to me, it was pretty seamless in the preview, albeit muffled. I felt more authentic. I also preferred his delivery, the intonation in the final was too defined. If you don't know what I'm on about, see this...



  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    I had no problem with hearing it that is not what my post says it's the choice of voice is my issue.

    Incidentally his dialogue appears that much louder than everyone else on the blu ray which makes it worse
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Shardlake wrote:
    I had no problem with hearing it that is not what my post says it's the choice of voice is my issue.

    Incidentally his dialogue appears that much louder than everyone else on the blu ray which makes it worse

    Yes exactly, the blu ray accentuates the dub. The original dialogue was recorded on set. I think the voice was also accentuated in the dub (as evident in the clip above). It's not dissimilar but the intonation feels real in the original audio, with the dub almost sounding like a parody of the original performance.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    It's not just the audio it's Hardy's vocal choice it's just jarring and I can't help sniggering at times, TDKR was easily the worst of the trilogy and this issue doesn't help matters.
  • OK THIS IS SO SAD, ITS GETTING QUITE HEATED IN THIS THREAD ABOUT WHOS THE NEXT BOND a few names have been said, bale, hardy, craig (to continue) and even CLIVE OWN ( NO WAY) tom hardy is going to take over as bond, the make up department can cover the tattoos if need be, but what means to say bond can't have tattoos? you have to change with the times now days! and his height isn't an issue, hes the same height as craig, hardy has a certain, attitude & karisma that would make a new bond, he has a great voice and real nice tone to it, hes good looking, a good body and an impressive actor, he would respond well to the minor comic one liners in bond, and he can handle the dramatic dialogue, aswell as the action scenes, if you havn't seen any of his films, watch him in "this means war". AS for bale, he wouldn't make a good bond, simple. other than hardy I cannot think of anyone else I
  • hardy all the way!
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Please let it be an unknown when Craig finishes which I hope is not for another 2 (almost definite) or 3 (possibly). No names, why does people think they are going to start casting stars in the role never have and hopefully never will.

    Let me state this for umpteenth bloody time, Hardy, Fassbender, Cavill etc will be far too big when Craig leaves, it's likely this guy is on hardly anyone's radar, who can truthfully say they thought of Craig 4-5 years before he was cast? and that is the way it should be. The next 007 will be made a star being Bond not vice a versa, sometimes I wonder if some of you actually have any knowledge of this series history
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    Shardlake wrote:
    Please let it be an unknown when Craig finishes which I hope is not for another 2 (almost definite) or 3 (possibly). No names, why does people think they are going to start casting stars in the role never have and hopefully never will.

    Let me state this for umpteenth bloody time, Hardy, Fassbender, Cavill etc will be far too big when Craig leaves, it's likely this guy is on hardly anyone's radar, who can truthfully say they thought of Craig 4-5 years before he was cast? and that is the way it should be. The next 007 will be made a star being Bond not vice a versa, sometimes I wonder if some of you actually have any knowledge of this series history

    I said the same kind of thing a couple of weeks away but people still don't get it. Oh well, just give up.

    Time will tell all.
This discussion has been closed.