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
Indiana Jones is a "retired" franchise though. Most franchise nowadays have a higher level of continuity and it has been the case since the early 2000. Anyway that's off topic.
Have only seen him in Hill House. Good actor, but can't picture him as Bond.
It's weird but I do think there is a thing of Bond being too tall. I've always said I think Henry Cavill is too big. If Bond is too much off a force, then it would be hard to believe anyone could get the better of him.
I always think the end fight in TWINE suffers a bit because Bond towers over Renard, and I don't believe Renard would be a physical match for Bond. That's how I imagine almost anyone up against an actor the size of Cavill.
It’s a similar logic to how I view Aaron Pierre as a potential Bond. He’s obviously a big guy and looks it, but I think it’d take away that slight underdog quality Bond needs. If he were put up against Hinx, much less a Red Grant, I think there’d be less tension because they’re on a more equal footing in terms of physicality (sure, Craig was very bulky as Bond, but compared to Bautista it’s a different ball park. Even with Connery in FRWL, athletic as he was, you know he’s going to get a run for his money fighting Grant).
Not to say Bond isn’t a physically demanding role and the actor shouldn’t get in shape for it (although not all the actors were overly athletic or even physical actors - Moore admitted he couldn’t run convincingly on screen! Heck in terms of physique Dalton and Brosnan also had a tendency to look a bit skinny when shirtless in their films and on the other end Connery had to suck in his stomach by FRWL). It’s more their natural build/physicality and the impression they give I guess.
I think the next Bond will be in pretty great shape, it's just where we are now and, to be honest, when I see Brosnan in those films I do slightly struggle with the idea of him being an ex special forces guy. Lazenby on the other hand does look as fit as a whippet.
Aaron Pierre; I dunno, I'm still interested in him. I thought he did a great job in that Netflix film, he's got presence and feels like a real man's man. Plus he seems very smooth and stylish in various photoshoots etc. I tend to be more interested in the ones I can't perhaps fully see in the role, I want to be kind of excited by a new take on it. Someone mentioned elsewhere Chris Hemsworth, and I can't deny he'd be a good solid choice. A good movie star, albeit a bit old and with a terrible Brit accent; but I just wouldn't be excited by the idea. I know exactly what I'd get, and I kind of want something fresh from the new Bond.
Yeah I think that's a real problem in that bit too. Bond almost looks monstrously large, it looks too easy for him.
Ah but he does have a fine chest hair growth very reminiscent of Connery! :)
Hair chest is important. But eyebrows are the real deal. Eyebrows and a deep voice. Can't go wrong with that ;)
One of the many issues I developed with TWINE. As much as I love Robert Carlyle as an actor, he's not very believable as a physical menace against Brosnan. Or anyone with a bit of size and muscle.
Bond's villains should not be equal to him, but superior to him: the henchmen should be stronger and the main villains smarter.
I agree at least in the broad sense that something about the villain and/or henchman has to be superior to Bond and these assets have to be used (you get an unfortunate situation like Green in QOS otherwise who isn't a physical threat to Bond, and his greatest quality - namely his sadism - isn't used against Bond, whereas instead they engage in an odd and rather pointless fight where Bond gets rid of him rather easily even when he has an axe).
I suppose a villain who's not stronger than Bond could be superior and a threat (I feel TMWTGG would have been better had Nick Nack used his stature against Bond by being able to hide/move into in certain places or perhaps conceal certain weapons etc). Someone like Patrice in SF is a threat to Bond but not necessarily superior inherently speaking - of course this is due to the circumstances/physical injuries Bond finds himself in at the beginning of the film. I suppose in that sense he's superior to Bond... So I guess it depends.
Or to use part of a snow vehicle, together with its braking parachute, to windsurf an Icelandic tsunami ? (DAD, for those who might have suppressed the memory of this scene)
Agreed...N o t Bond
All of the Bond actors apart from Craig have been taller than Burt Lancaster.