Who should/could be a Bond actor?

16056066086106111231

Comments

  • Posts: 4,409
    Got to hit back against the 'Jamie Dornan can't act crowd'. I mean, he's not exactly Lawrence Oliver, but he can certainly act. He was terrific in A Private War; his role is fairly insubstantial but he often does his best work when silently conveying emotion. Especially during the film's final emotional beat in Homs, Syria......It's not a flashy part but it certainly a promising bit of career rehabilitation following the 50 Shades films (which I'm so intrigued to see quite how bad they are).

    Also, Rosamund Pike is a bloody great actress (even when given pretty mundane scripts). Officially starting the campaign to reboot Miranda Frost in Bond 26.

    maxresdefault.jpg

    Also, Dakota Johnson is hot......Imagine if they cast Dornan as 007 and then Johnson as a Bond girl. That would either be terrific or the worst idea ever. There will be no inbetween.

    tumblr_ni513dtlCj1u3xpspo6_r1_1280.jpg
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    @Pierce2Daniel Dakota would be a great Bond girl, although as much as I do think Dornan is a good actor, I just don't know if he'd be able to pull off 007. But never say never... again.
  • Posts: 15,125
    Count me in the "Jamie Dornan is a plank of wood" camp. Beside, 50 Shades of Beige was truly dreadful, the script has the quality of a porn, except without the actual interesting stuff in a porn.

    I'm all for Rosamund Pike to come back as a Bond girl. But NOT as Miranda Frost.
  • Without making him my favorite for the role, Dornan still seems to me to have all the qualities to be a serious candidate. Physically of course, he has something classic, but also in terms of acting abilities. Without being excellent in itself, the Anthropoid movie shows how far he is not a bad actor, far from it, and is capable of playing, in my opinion, the Bond part. Regarding Dakota Johnson... She's a pretty good actress and I would see her as a Bond Girl, but not alongside Dornan as Bond.

    tumblr_inline_o7u60iWIBV1sgm97w_1280.jpg

    image.jpg
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited May 2020 Posts: 5,970
    tumblr_inline_o7u60iWIBV1sgm97w_1280.jpg
    This is the most Bondian I've ever seen him. He has an air of Roger about him here.

    I think I'd actually be more interested to see him as a villain. Give him a Henry Cavill moustache, and a character like Alec Trevelyan, and I'd say he could pull that off more than he could James Bond.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,266
    50 shades was torture from start to finish, and not in a masochistic way if you're into that. Jamie's acting was horriffic, he was utterly miscast and Dakota was as bland and boring as all the 50+y/o women who made the bleedin' books a succes in the first place.

    Now maybe the guy can act, but what has been done cannot be undone and it'll be difficult to see him as Bond. He needs the abilities of DC for that and I don't think he's ever going to be THAT good of an actor.

    As for Dakota, I love the Goonie Bird but the girl can't even warm up my little toe. She's good looking in the lives-in-the-neighbourhood-but-you-never-see-her kind of way. No, Bond needs sex-appeal, glamour. If she's got to folluw up on Ana, how will she compare?

    rexfeatures_9449107me.jpg?w=605


  • Posts: 15,125
    Neither are right for a Bond movie imo.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Got to hit back against the 'Jamie Dornan can't act crowd'. I mean, he's not exactly Lawrence Oliver, but he can certainly act. He was terrific in A Private War; his role is fairly insubstantial but he often does his best work when silently conveying emotion. Especially during the film's final emotional beat in Homs, Syria......It's not a flashy part but it certainly a promising bit of career rehabilitation following the 50 Shades films (which I'm so intrigued to see quite how bad they are).

    Also, Rosamund Pike is a bloody great actress (even when given pretty mundane scripts). Officially starting the campaign to reboot Miranda Frost in Bond 26.

    maxresdefault.jpg

    Also, Dakota Johnson is hot......Imagine if they cast Dornan as 007 and then Johnson as a Bond girl. That would either be terrific or the worst idea ever. There will be no inbetween.

    tumblr_ni513dtlCj1u3xpspo6_r1_1280.jpg

    It’s a matter of opinion. You like him and others like myself think that he looks the part but has limited, wooden and limited acting prowess.

    He is an actor because of his looks, not acting talent. IMO.
  • edited May 2020 Posts: 9,847
    I asked a female friend of mine if she would watch Bond 26 if Jamie Dorian was the new 007 now this is a woman who has never seen a bond movie nor had any interest in seeing one... she told me she would consider it.

    so in theory Jamie could bring one new fan to the franchise..

    how about Jeremy Irvine?
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,553
    Risico007 wrote: »
    I asked a female friend of mine if she would watch Bond 26 if Jamie Dorian was the new 007 now this is a woman who has never seen a bond movie nor had any interest in seeing one... she told me she would consider it.

    so in theory Jamie could bring one new fan to the franchise..

    how about Jeremy Irvine?

    Dornan would likely bring some new fans into the franchise... and see some old fans out.

    Irvine seems like any of the other suggestions presented; attractive British actor, looks way too young to be Bond now but given the next Bond probably won't be for another decade... who knows.

    What have you liked him in?
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    I still think this guy has great potential, especially given how long he has to grow into the part even further.

    aaron-tj01.jpg?w=1024
    aaron-taylor-johnson-1967872.jpg
    150514_Godzilla_Twentieth-Century-Fox.jpg
  • edited May 2020 Posts: 6,709
    High.Pitch.Voice

    so...nop

    Right now, to tell you the truth, I wouldn't want any of the so called candidates.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,553
    Univex wrote: »
    High.Pitch.Voice

    so...nop

    Right now, to tell you the truth, I wouldn't want any of the so called candidates.

    +1. Also I haven't liked his acting in anything I've seen him in.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Univex wrote: »
    High.Pitch.Voice

    so...nop

    Right now, to tell you the truth, I wouldn't want any of the so called candidates.

    +1. Also I haven't liked his acting in anything I've seen him in.

    +2 plus he looks too boyish. I don't buy him as a seasoned agent.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited May 2020 Posts: 5,970
    Murdock wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    High.Pitch.Voice

    so...nop

    Right now, to tell you the truth, I wouldn't want any of the so called candidates.

    +1. Also I haven't liked his acting in anything I've seen him in.

    +2 plus he looks too boyish. I don't buy him as a seasoned agent.
    Well again I think that depends on what route EON want to take the character. I'd personally like to see a Bond in his 30s for his first adventure. I've also mentioned how much I'd like to see this younger Bond interact with a Felix Leiter whose the more seasoned agent.

    ...and @Univex if only he had Callum Turner's voice haha :D

    I also think the issue is that it's truly hard to see anyone actually being Bond until they are actually Bond.
  • Agent_OneAgent_One Ireland
    Posts: 280
    Please, not another reboot.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited May 2020 Posts: 5,970
    Agent_One wrote: »
    Please, not another reboot.
    It doesn't have to be a reboot - it's like what they're doing with the new Batman with Robert Pattinson. They're reintroducing the character with a "younger" actor but they're not rebooting it in the sense of showing you how he became Batman. The same could work here, a younger actor but we're showing his first mission as a 00.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited May 2020 Posts: 7,553
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Agent_One wrote: »
    Please, not another reboot.
    It doesn't have to be a reboot - it's like what they're doing with the new Batman with Robert Pattinson. They're reintroducing the character with a "younger" actor but they're not rebooting it in the sense of showing you how he became Batman. The same could work here, a younger actor but we're showing his first mission as a 00.

    I wouldn't mind them doing it with a younger actor, but I also wouldn't want to see a reboot, and to me, if they're showing his first mission as a 00, that's a reboot.

    In both the novels and the films, Bond's first mission is Casino Royale, and should be left that way.

    If they go with a younger actor, fine, just make his first film a mission like any other.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited May 2020 Posts: 5,970
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Agent_One wrote: »
    Please, not another reboot.
    It doesn't have to be a reboot - it's like what they're doing with the new Batman with Robert Pattinson. They're reintroducing the character with a "younger" actor but they're not rebooting it in the sense of showing you how he became Batman. The same could work here, a younger actor but we're showing his first mission as a 00.

    I wouldn't mind them doing it with a younger actor, but I also wouldn't want to see a reboot, and to me, if they're showing his first mission as a 00, that's a reboot.

    In both the novels and the films, Bond's first mission is Casino Royale, and should be left that way.

    If they go with a younger actor, fine, just make his first film a mission like any other.
    Exactly my point; they can easily approach a younger actor while not making it a full-on reboot - in terms of reintroducing Bond to the 00 program :)
    I just realised I meant to say (not* showing his first mission as 00) in that last message my bad.

    I just think doing something like this can be the "return-to-form" that a lot of fans want, while EON and those others who want it can feel like they're doing something different.
  • edited May 2020 Posts: 4,409
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Got to hit back against the 'Jamie Dornan can't act crowd'. I mean, he's not exactly Lawrence Oliver, but he can certainly act. He was terrific in A Private War; his role is fairly insubstantial but he often does his best work when silently conveying emotion. Especially during the film's final emotional beat in Homs, Syria......It's not a flashy part but it certainly a promising bit of career rehabilitation following the 50 Shades films (which I'm so intrigued to see quite how bad they are).

    Also, Rosamund Pike is a bloody great actress (even when given pretty mundane scripts). Officially starting the campaign to reboot Miranda Frost in Bond 26.

    maxresdefault.jpg

    Also, Dakota Johnson is hot......Imagine if they cast Dornan as 007 and then Johnson as a Bond girl. That would either be terrific or the worst idea ever. There will be no inbetween.

    tumblr_ni513dtlCj1u3xpspo6_r1_1280.jpg

    It’s a matter of opinion. You like him and others like myself think that he looks the part but has limited, wooden and limited acting prowess.

    He is an actor because of his looks, not acting talent. IMO.

    You can say this of A LOT of actors. especially folk such as Pierce Brosnan, Henry Cavill, Robert Pattinson, Margot Robbie, Megan Fox, Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt, George Clooney, etc.

    Some rose to the occasion and displayed the serious acting chops required. On the other hand, others have faltered hugely and shown themselves to just be a pretty face.

    I think Dornan could very well just be that 'pretty face', but there is mounting evidence that he is an actor worth paying attention to.

    tumblr_o8vo63iaXT1tuefaeo2_250.gif
    GettyImages-1052614128.jpg
    GettyImages-1173282436.jpg
    33368110df0b99a4e65087eaf0077927.png
    JDornanLife-Anthropoid1.jpg
    167131f9e5ce44d207c743c8c34943e3.jpgDOkBt1dUQAAIacX.jpg:large
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited May 2020 Posts: 7,553
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Agent_One wrote: »
    Please, not another reboot.
    It doesn't have to be a reboot - it's like what they're doing with the new Batman with Robert Pattinson. They're reintroducing the character with a "younger" actor but they're not rebooting it in the sense of showing you how he became Batman. The same could work here, a younger actor but we're showing his first mission as a 00.

    I wouldn't mind them doing it with a younger actor, but I also wouldn't want to see a reboot, and to me, if they're showing his first mission as a 00, that's a reboot.

    In both the novels and the films, Bond's first mission is Casino Royale, and should be left that way.

    If they go with a younger actor, fine, just make his first film a mission like any other.
    Exactly my point; they can easily approach a younger actor while not making it a full-on reboot - in terms of reintroducing Bond to the 00 program :)
    I just realised I meant to say (not* showing his first mission as 00) in that last message my bad.

    I just think doing something like this can be the "return-to-form" that a lot of fans want, while EON and those others who want it can feel like they're doing something different.

    Oh, haha yes that changes things. In that case, I 100% agree.

    In fairness to Dornan, I've only seen him in Fifty Shades, which of course is abysmal material. But his acting did *not* help.

    I wish time and fate would just let Luke Evans do one Bond film, I think he'd be perfect. :'(
  • Dornan would likely bring some new fans into the franchise... and see some old fans out.
    I doubt that this kind of classic actor profile pushes fans to grow away from the series. That it causes discontent perhaps, but probably not something as extreme as a boycott.

    Regarding the idea of reboot, it is certainly not the only option on the table but by far the most likely. A soft-reboot is not synonymous with an origin story and Goldeneye was already something similar.

    The Craig era was so interconnected that any will to deviate from it and to not bring back the supporting cast or this iteration of SPECTRE would be kind of a sof-reboot. It remains to be seen what will be the path followed by relaunch and a younger actor seems possible to build a new continuity over time. In this case, Dornan would already be too old. But after all the breaks that punctuated the Craig era, I think the series would really need some regularity which could only be accomplished by a leading star with a light schedule, so maybe not a well-known actor like Dornan.
  • edited May 2020 Posts: 6,709
    No young Bond. No reboot either.

    Damn it, I hate all of this James Bond Jr. crap. I hate reboots and origin stories. All I want is a seasoned agent doing non personal stuff with a hint of fun and glamour. Is that too much to ask? Why does everything nowadays has to be infused with teen angst. Give it a rest. No more personal stuff. No more rookie nonsense.

    For Martha's pearls sake, no more of it. Please.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    I mean as.@Herr_Stockmann stated before, some kind of reboot, soft or not, is hard to avoid considering the way narrative of the Craig-era has worked. Also, again, a younger actor doesn't mean an origin story, it can just create newer and fresher dynamics.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,553
    I think "reboot" gets thrown around a lot ("soft reboot", "hard reboot", the term becomes a bit meaningless), without a clear definition. Personally, I wouldn't consider the first film of any of the Bond actors to be reboots, except Craig. If a new actor came in and had a film like LALD, that wouldn't be a reboot, and it wouldn't be hard to avoid. But as @Denbigh said, it could be a chance to do something fresh which probably is needed after Craig.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited May 2020 Posts: 5,970
    I think "reboot" gets thrown around a lot ("soft reboot", "hard reboot", the term becomes a bit meaningless), without a clear definition. Personally, I wouldn't consider the first film of any of the Bond actors to be reboots, except Craig. If a new actor came in and had a film like LALD, that wouldn't be a reboot, and it wouldn't be hard to avoid. But as @Denbigh said, it could be a chance to do something fresh which probably is needed after Craig.
    Exactly, plus a higher chance of getting more films out of them :)
    Also EON has already taken plenty of inspiration from the Batman universe. Maybe if Pattinson's Batman is successful enough, it will inspire the next-era, as Batman Begins inspired the Craig-era?
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited May 2020 Posts: 7,553
    Denbigh wrote: »
    I think "reboot" gets thrown around a lot ("soft reboot", "hard reboot", the term becomes a bit meaningless), without a clear definition. Personally, I wouldn't consider the first film of any of the Bond actors to be reboots, except Craig. If a new actor came in and had a film like LALD, that wouldn't be a reboot, and it wouldn't be hard to avoid. But as @Denbigh said, it could be a chance to do something fresh which probably is needed after Craig.
    Exactly, plus a higher chance of getting more films out of them :)
    Also EON has already taken plenty of inspiration from the Batman universe. Maybe if Pattinson's Batman is successful enough, it will inspire the next-era, as Batman Begins inspired the Craig-era?

    Agreed. Would you say a longer run with one actor is better than multiple shorter runs with different actors? Seems the Connery, Lazenby and Dalton runs are very highly regarded by fans.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    Denbigh wrote: »
    I think "reboot" gets thrown around a lot ("soft reboot", "hard reboot", the term becomes a bit meaningless), without a clear definition. Personally, I wouldn't consider the first film of any of the Bond actors to be reboots, except Craig. If a new actor came in and had a film like LALD, that wouldn't be a reboot, and it wouldn't be hard to avoid. But as @Denbigh said, it could be a chance to do something fresh which probably is needed after Craig.
    Exactly, plus a higher chance of getting more films out of them :)
    Also EON has already taken plenty of inspiration from the Batman universe. Maybe if Pattinson's Batman is successful enough, it will inspire the next-era, as Batman Begins inspired the Craig-era?

    Agreed. Would you say a longer run with one actor is better than multiple shorter runs with different actors? Seems the Connery, Lazenby and Dalton runs are very highly regarded by fans.
    I enjoy either tbh, but I think it's just a matter of if you can get multiple films out of them, why not?
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,553
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    I think "reboot" gets thrown around a lot ("soft reboot", "hard reboot", the term becomes a bit meaningless), without a clear definition. Personally, I wouldn't consider the first film of any of the Bond actors to be reboots, except Craig. If a new actor came in and had a film like LALD, that wouldn't be a reboot, and it wouldn't be hard to avoid. But as @Denbigh said, it could be a chance to do something fresh which probably is needed after Craig.
    Exactly, plus a higher chance of getting more films out of them :)
    Also EON has already taken plenty of inspiration from the Batman universe. Maybe if Pattinson's Batman is successful enough, it will inspire the next-era, as Batman Begins inspired the Craig-era?

    Agreed. Would you say a longer run with one actor is better than multiple shorter runs with different actors? Seems the Connery, Lazenby and Dalton runs are very highly regarded by fans.
    I enjoy either tbh, but I think it's just a matter of if you can get multiple films out of them, why not?

    Yeah. I suppose it's safer.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited May 2020 Posts: 5,970
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    I think "reboot" gets thrown around a lot ("soft reboot", "hard reboot", the term becomes a bit meaningless), without a clear definition. Personally, I wouldn't consider the first film of any of the Bond actors to be reboots, except Craig. If a new actor came in and had a film like LALD, that wouldn't be a reboot, and it wouldn't be hard to avoid. But as @Denbigh said, it could be a chance to do something fresh which probably is needed after Craig.
    Exactly, plus a higher chance of getting more films out of them :)
    Also EON has already taken plenty of inspiration from the Batman universe. Maybe if Pattinson's Batman is successful enough, it will inspire the next-era, as Batman Begins inspired the Craig-era?

    Agreed. Would you say a longer run with one actor is better than multiple shorter runs with different actors? Seems the Connery, Lazenby and Dalton runs are very highly regarded by fans.
    I enjoy either tbh, but I think it's just a matter of if you can get multiple films out of them, why not?

    Yeah. I suppose it's safer.
    I wouldn't say safer because they could easily go for an older actor who they know will only do two films and it could be great, but I think considering how far we've come through the Craig-era, a younger actor would freshen things up a bit and help develop something new.

    This is actually why I think Fukunaga should do this next Bond's first film as he seems to have filled NTTD with this air of freshness and very much feels like modern James Bond - while obviously still honouring what came before (from what we've seen so far I should stress).
Sign In or Register to comment.