› ›

Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1…279280282284285…1235

Comments

  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    bondjames wrote: »
    I don't know anything about Turner, but Bloom is a no go for Bond as far as I'm concerned. His frame is like McGregor's. Too wimpy.
    Precisely.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited May 2017 Posts: 5,131
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I will take Bloom over Turner and I am not kidding

    Totally agree. There both wrong but at least Bloom has movie star quality. Turner has star quality for say Coronation Street.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I will take Bloom over Turner and I am not kidding

    Totally agree. There both wrong but at least Bloom has movie star quality. Turner has star quality for say Coronation Street.
    I have to admit that this is what I noticed when I saw a few clips from that Christie adaptation.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    We aren't seriously rooting for Bloom, now, are we?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Bloom would be fine for some local friend who gets killed miserably. That's about it. Instantly forgettable.

    I was more commenting on Turner exhibiting some characteristics in the Christie adaptation which reminded me of a daily soap star.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    bondjames wrote: »
    Bloom would be fine for some local friend who gets killed miserably. That's about it. Instantly forgettable.
    Plausible remark. :))
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    We aren't seriously rooting for Bloom, now, are we?

    No. Just saying how poor a choice Turner would be.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    suavejmf wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    We aren't seriously rooting for Bloom, now, are we?

    No. Just saying how poor a choice Turner would be.
    I tried to give him a watch, and particularly in that Christie adaptation. Tried to have him fit in the role, but it wasn't to be. So, if you ask me, none of the media-promoted candidates for the role are slightly even fit for the part. Alas, most of them look like wimps and pretty boys, others of different ethnicity and even gender (i.e. a lady Bond, urgh), which automatically disqualifies them from being a proper Bond. I'd rather have Craig be Bond till he becomes 100 than let any of those take on the role.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Never got why Turner gets so much hate when he fits Bond like a glove. I think maybe people think of him in a Craig film, which is unfair. I mean, how would Craig cope in a Peirce Brosnan film for instance? Unless the film is tailored to the particular actor then you aren't really doing them justice. Just remember that once Craig hangs up the tux for good, the films will experience a similar leap like they did between 2002 - 2006.

    They hate him, because you are making such a fool of yourself and sorta of him with throwing him into peoples faces ALL the time. This is why.

  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,232
    bondjames wrote: »
    Bloom would be fine for some local friend who gets killed miserably. That's about it. Instantly forgettable.

    I was more commenting on Turner exhibiting some characteristics in the Christie adaptation which reminded me of a daily soap star.

    If Turner is cast I think it might be Brosnan 2.0.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,454
    Ludovico wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Bloom would be fine for some local friend who gets killed miserably. That's about it. Instantly forgettable.

    I was more commenting on Turner exhibiting some characteristics in the Christie adaptation which reminded me of a daily soap star.

    If Turner is cast I think it might be Brosnan 2.0.

    That's what I think will happen - Another GoldenEye type film. :D
  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    Idris Elba.
  • 00Canada00Canada London, ontario
    Posts: 1
    I think that the natural progression from the Gritty Craig styled character ( which in my opinion is the correct trajectory ) would be Tom Hardy. ( I also believe it should be Jeffery Deaver's Carte Blanche story)[img][/img]search?q=tom+hardy&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwip3dyzt9bTAhUn64MKHXgHB9gQ_AUIBigB&biw=1029&bih=871&dpr=0.75#q=clean+cut+tom+hardy&tbm=isch&tbs=rimg:CR68VU4hGW1QIjies45cl1d_1Bx0BeNbTQ62FDXIJS6zMI8dBF_18_1ITsGLvtx1tqcmI4veksAg-HqK73pfmJvP1M3eSoSCZ6zjlyXV38HEcqEVDMx_1ZRGKhIJHQF41tNDrYURTRw1er7XL1gqEgkNcglLrMwjxxEICTNRkeJ-_1ioSCUEX_1z8hOwYuEbOIxIieNkynKhIJ-3HW2pyYji8RJ-yWIaMQrmwqEgl6SwCD4eorvRFmevwEAkEGcCoSCel-Ym8_1Uzd5EasEFQKJt9HP&imgrc=-3HW2pyYji8-HM:&spf=1349
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    The natural successor, for me, is someone who embodies the traditional aesthetic. In other words, not Hardy. I think in these situations it's best to take things back to source. Once you give an inch... etc. Look at the recent gunbarrel talk, CR deviates and does so very well. In QoS it should've been business as usual, but no Forster wanted to tinker and because Forster tinkered, Mendes wanted to tinker. These thinks have to be reigned in before the parameters shift too far.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,454
    RC7 wrote: »
    The natural successor, for me, is someone who embodies the traditional aesthetic. In other words, not Hardy. I think in these situations it's best to take things back to source. Once you give an inch... etc. Look at the recent gunbarrel talk, CR deviates and does so very well. In QoS it should've been business as usual, but no Forster wanted to tinker and because Forster tinkered, Mendes wanted to tinker. These thinks have to be reigned in before the parameters shift too far.

    Absolutely.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    The natural successor, for me, is someone who embodies the traditional aesthetic. In other words, not Hardy. I think in these situations it's best to take things back to source. Once you give an inch... etc. Look at the recent gunbarrel talk, CR deviates and does so very well. In QoS it should've been business as usual, but no Forster wanted to tinker and because Forster tinkered, Mendes wanted to tinker. These thinks have to be reigned in before the parameters shift too far.

    Absolutely.
    Thirded.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,232
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Bloom would be fine for some local friend who gets killed miserably. That's about it. Instantly forgettable.

    I was more commenting on Turner exhibiting some characteristics in the Christie adaptation which reminded me of a daily soap star.

    If Turner is cast I think it might be Brosnan 2.0.

    That's what I think will happen - Another GoldenEye type film. :D

    And an overall lacklustre tenure with an average Bond unable to give a creative influx to the series.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Bloom would be fine for some local friend who gets killed miserably. That's about it. Instantly forgettable.

    I was more commenting on Turner exhibiting some characteristics in the Christie adaptation which reminded me of a daily soap star.

    If Turner is cast I think it might be Brosnan 2.0.

    That's what I think will happen - Another GoldenEye type film. :D

    And an overall lacklustre tenure with an average Bond unable to give a creative influx to the series.
    You're perhaps being too kind.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,232
    About Brosnan or Turner?

    Anyway I do think Turner can bring something to the franchise: girls who would find him cute. Commercially he might even be the right choice. But like I say, it would be Brosnan 2.0.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Ludovico wrote: »
    About Brosnan or Turner?

    Anyway I do think Turner can bring something to the franchise: girls who would find him cute. Commercially he might even be the right choice. But like I say, it would be Brosnan 2.0.
    I was referring to Brosnan's tenure. Turner is still an unknown to me, and with the production house firmly knowledgeable about Bond films now (unlike the 90's when they were floundering about post-Cubby imho), they could make a critical success of it with him, or someone like him.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,454
    The Brosnan tenure gave us Goldeneye. That cancels out every negative, in my book. If Turner gave us a START like GoldenEye was, well, brilliant!
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    Lets stick with either Hardy,Fassbender or Hiddleston...
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 14,001
    Hardy is too thugish, Hiddleston is too soft, it would have to be Fassbender.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    Hardy is too thugish, Hiddleston is too soft, it would have to be Fassbender.
    The best choice. Hands down.
    QG0wmvL.jpg

  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    I wont argue with that,but he is very similar to Craig...very choosy with his films (rightfully so),so they need to get another 4 film deal arranged,not just the one.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Won't be Fassbender (sadly).
  • cwl007cwl007 England
    Posts: 611
    1st choice: Fassbender
    2nd choice: Dan Stephens
    3rd choice: Hiddleston
    4th choice: Alex Scarsgard
    5th voice: Hardy
    6th choice: Scott Eastwood (an American, yikes)
    All 6 would be great IMO and would all bring a different version.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    cwl007 wrote: »
    6th choice: Scott Eastwood (an American, yikes)
    Although I don't advocate for gents from across the pond, if Scott Eastwood can be considered by some, then Ryan Gosling would be a better bet. He has a natural laid back cool which I think Bond should have. Having said that, Bond should remain a Brit imho.
    fYvD49g.jpg
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I love Gosling, but... his voice being high pitched will be an awful turnout for Bond.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    bondjames wrote: »
    cwl007 wrote: »
    6th choice: Scott Eastwood (an American, yikes)
    Although I don't advocate for gents from across the pond, if Scott Eastwood can be considered by some, then Ryan Gosling would be a better bet. He has a natural laid back cool which I think Bond should have. Having said that, Bond should remain a Brit imho.
    fYvD49g.jpg

    I've always found Gosling one-note with a fake deep voice. He was horrible in GANGSTER SQUAD when he had to play a man's man--

    In DRIVE it was the stylized directing that elevated the material.

    I truly find Gosling a pussy-- and I'm Canadian... BUT, he would be a better choice than Hiddles and Turner...
Sign In or Register to comment.