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
So what many are saying is...
They prefer Stringer Bell over Jaimie Bell?
^^ This...
... and what we've seen before. Rumoured actors are seldom chosen, no matter how hard we scream.
Mmmm cookies... :-bd
Yep. Bond is white.
Yep.
By the way... 'They' as in 'Those who have never seen a Bond film before but endorse their noses to be involved in its market'.
If Tom gets picked, I'm totally fine with it!
Hit the gym a bit, and he's in.
Connery is tall, lean and had some muscle to him, but is not and never was body builder fit nor was he 'cut', which is the impression Craig gives me, particularly in CR.
EDIT: Perhaps he was body builder fit when he won that contest pre-DN, but not for most of his Bond tenure.
I'll admit when I'm wrong! Sure enough you're right!
I assumed he was scrawny but then I googled 'Tom Hiddleston shirtless' (not something I normally do, lol) and he is ripped as hell.
Yeah I guess there's a difference between physiques then and now. Craig in Tomb Raider seemed jacked as hell to me, but he went even further with it for Bond. Compare to TB where Connery was in shape and was clearly a man who could do some damage, but wasn't walking around with ripped abs either. He had more of a natural bulk/mass to him. Nowadays every leading man has a six pack, regardless of how tough they are. Piddleston is "fit" but still looks weirdly fragile. And here's another guy who's "ripped" and still looks like a stray gust of wind might blow him over. You can't gym your way to tough!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2931594/Eddie-Redmayne-displays-impressive-abs-new-Jupiter-Ascending-stills.html
Hiddleston is quite a bit taller than Craig, and lean. He could bulk up, but I wouldn't mind if he didn't, assuming he gets the role (big assumption).
I find most actors tend to bulk up a little when they land a major action franchise role (Damon for Bourne, Bale for Bat, Willis for Die Hard etc.).
1977 Michael Fassbender - 13
1982 Jack Huston - 1
1981 Rupert Friend - 2
1989 Sonny Robertson - 1
1972 Idris Elba - 2
1980 Charlie Hunnam - 1
1990 Jack O'Connell - 1
1971 Ewan McGregor - 1
1983 Aidan Turner - 14(+1)
1981 Tom Hiddleston - 15
I have been looking over this poll and I must say, I at first thought that the best choice for talked about candidates for the role was Michael Fassbender but my god does Aidan Turner have some presence to him. He reminds me of Connery at the start of it all. I think he is a great choice to take up the role.
That's pure dedication there lol.
=D>
The one area Hiddleston can't gain muscle is in his long face. The more I think and see of Hiddleston, the more I think he doesn't have much range as an actor. He essentially plays the same well-mannered, tightly-spoken character in everything he does. If anyone can point me to something where Hiddleston has changed his accent and his approach I'll be interested to check it out, but for now I'm going to chalk him up as the Nigel Havers for the new millennium, muscles or not.
Maybe you ask for too much.
I don't see where Craig has more range than Hiddleston. From what I've seen Hiddleston seems to be the better actor, but that's not even the point.
Bond is not Shakespeare. Hiddy, Aiden and certainly Fassbender would all be very good as Bond acting wise.
1977 Michael Fassbender - 13
1982 Jack Huston - 1
1981 Rupert Friend - 2
1989 Sonny Robertson - 1
1972 Idris Elba - 2
1980 Charlie Hunnam - 1
1990 Jack O'Connell - 1
1971 Ewan McGregor - 1
1983 Aidan Turner - 14
1981 Tom Hiddleston - 15 < Such a boring choice, granted I haven't seen Night Manager or High Rise yet.
I think Richard Armitage was discussed previously, making 3 actors from The Hobbit in the 'next Bond' discussion.
Of course, you're right when you say Bond's not Shakespeare, nor is it Ibsen, Chekhov, Brecht, or Tolstoy - all a moot point when we're discussing the actor's range and not the author. Otherwise, if you devalue the character by saying it's not so-and-so, then you can cast anyone in the role as it doesn't matter. What I've been saying in my past posts is that Bond has worked in the past due to the fact that they always cast an actor from working-class roots that could pretend he came from nobility; it gave the audience something that they could easily identify themselves with and the character up on the screen. Getting Hiddleston to portray Bond would be like casting someone from Made In Chelsea in the role, it would suck any empathy we have for him in the part. What made the socially snobbish, materialistic, killer likeable was the fact that we knew that he was really one of us and not this Chelsea-set snob that he portrayed. Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan and Craig all made this palatable because we knew that all these actors playing the role came from humble backgrounds. If Hiddleston was to be Bond he would be the first 007 that was actually a silver-spoon Bond, and that would not be something I could identify with, personally. As for Turner and Fassbender, they're exactly the right type of actors that I can see playing the role as they fit the previous and successful criterion.
*I usually am
I think what JasonBond means is that Bond doesn't require great acting and being like
Robert De Niro but more of charisma and great screen prescence.
Actually Sean Connery never changes his accent the same goes for Pierce Brosnan and Roger Moore.
Definitely not everyone can be Bond but I don't think an actor has to be the greatest thespian to play this character, like I said This requires more charisma, screen prescence and good looks.
Now i see your point on Hidleston not getting the feeling of being relatable to audiences and maybe too posh to play Bond but on the other hand Bond is a male fantasy who dresses up well, gets great stuff for working on Mi6 and sleeps with the most beautiful woman.
So more than the need to identity with him audiences want to be like him and girls want to be with him.
Im not advocating completely for Hidleston but im just saying is more like a male fantasy. He is someone like Thomas Crown and Danny Ocean but more on the good guys side since he works for the good guys.
He is a Thomas Crown and Danny Ocean like who can fight and works for good guys and those parts don't require oscar level acting.
This is a good point about the actor's background. I did not know about Hiddy being born with a silver spoon.
But I also don't see how this would translate on the screen.
Personally, I want the actor chosen to look the part. For me that's the most important, then comes acting ability.
Honestly I rather have Henry Cavill in the role than Jamie Bell or worse someone like Jack O'Connell, no matter how good they might be at acting.
Part reason why I was such a fan of Brosnan was because the moment they presented him as Bond he oozed Bond galore even before the first shot of GE was taken. Everything else really was falling into place afterwards.
If they cast another one that doesn't look anything like described in the books, it will be hard on me.