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
I don't know about his acting training and all of that, but he is quite uncharismatic & doesn't appear to have any gravitas at all. Affleck walks all over him in the trailers for BvS, which I'll be seeing in an hour or so.
Cavill is a wooden plank. A very handsome one, but a plank nonetheless.
I see this as a huge possibility.
That we will get someone who is almost unknown and has never been mentioned before. but they could also go for one of the people's tv favorite guys of the list like they did with Roger Moore or Pierce Brosnan
I was specifically talking about arts (and said so to make it clear), not all professions. There's a huge difference between being a doctor and an actor and the need for formal training in those professions, that's obvious, an by making that kind of comparison you're mocking the idea that an artist could become great without formal education, yet I'm sure countless different kinds of artists have, and I don't think the idea is laughable at all like you suggest.
You disagree with me, that's clear, but nevertheless my opinion is that actors, painters, singers, writers, etc. don't need formal training to be good at their work, and taught techniques can be both helpful and a hindrance. Of course people aren't just born with skills, but that's where observing and doing that I mentioned come in. Actors need to observe people and be interested in them, and doing is practice (just like doing is practice with painting, writing, etc.) I have respect for formal education in arts, too, but I just don't think it's all that important in for instance acting.
Exactly.
Some people don't even have a real choice to go study acting, they need to work to earn money, and getting education is more simple for those with money, as has been noted by people like Judi Dench, Julie Walters and James McAvoy.
(for instance:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/james-mcavoy-dominance-rich-kid-772139 )
Some start acting at a young age, and then just keep doing it - makes sense to me; it seems a better way to learn about their trade than being at school.
Some consider drama schools, but get advised against going - Russell Crowe was told he was already doing the work, so why waste time:
Since actors either formally study acting or they don't it's impossible to know in what ways those who didn't would be different if they had, and in what ways those who did would be different if they hadn't. But most likely different in some ways. I suspect people also respond to formal training in arts in different ways, and what might be good for some might not be for some others. Would drama school have made Humphrey Bogart, James Stewart, Cary Grant, Ian McKellen, Ben Kingsley, Russell Crowe, Christian Bale, Liam Neeson, etc. proper actors?
Was Sean Connery a bad Bond because he didn't have such training that, say, Pierce Brosnan did?
I just happen to think that the value and importance of formal training in acting is overrated. Of course, opinions will vary.
Probably. (And I've never liked Affleck in any movie ever. Casey yes, but Ben no.)
I agree with everything you said.
With art is much more about talent than being fomally trained and i admire many of the actors who have formal training but its not a life snd death situation.
Pierce may have gone to a drama school but seems like took another path from the one he learned. He ended up being more like Neeson, Brad Pitt and many guys who are more leading man than a true character actor.
Sean Connery is the greaest example that acting schools are not needed that much. He is a legend without it, he made a great career by learning the craft by himself.
And you also mentioned the money, that some guys can't pay the money and try lesrning on their own and with acting jobs which gives the same merit of bring formally trained.
And your story with Crowe is a big deal, i wished more acting teachers were that honest and to,d their students that if they find their own way wouldn't stop just for graduating from acting school.
Yes the ones who have technique have become some of the best actors but outside of Meryl Streep or Leonardo Dicaprio the biggest stars are the ones who didn't have the formal training.
But im getting into another debate of what's better being a gretvstsr ir a great actor?
And its a very intersting discussion as well.
Timothy Dalton is a better actor than Connery but Connery made a better Bond because of his great charisma, charm and on screen presence.
Sean Connery in anything is more charismatic than anyone.
Henry Cavill was lucky to be spotted at boarding school and George Lazenby just chanced his luck, his casting was the stuff of fantasy coming true, but 99 percent of the time you need to have some acting experience to get work but you need acting work to get experience. Catch 22! Lazenby's zero acting background didn't stop him but he was extremely lucky, I guess.
First thing you need to do if you want the role of James Bond: shut up about it.
Sounds like Fight Club lol..
Second rule ..never talk about playing Bond
=)) yes Fight Club
:P ...hello my friend ...I had a 90's flashback. My favorite decade.
I haven't seen Fight Club but I think it goes without saying: you don't talk about it, unless you're asked and then you remain vague.
:-$
Dont take it seriously
Its a video of making fun of all of us who give our endless lists on the next Bond
http://youtu.be/X1BjsmLqSnY
...so? I didn't say I'd never see it.
I'd like to see this thread become a fight club, that'd be fun. hee hee
http://www.torontosun.com/2016/03/25/james-norton-on-james-bond-rumours-i-would-think-long-and-hard-about-it
If Aiden Turner isn't cast, then they have to go with the cardboard box with a smiley face. Not only did it ooze charisma, but it would be an absolute beast in the fight scenes.
Right age I guess. And he's wearing a smoking.
Please no.
Just one guy's opinion but I think there is a question mark over Cavill's ability to be suitably charismatic on screen. On the other hand, Daniel Craig is more of a blunt Bond than a charismatic one and the audience accept that approach. I don't think future Bond actors have to be overtly charismatic.