Who should/could be a Bond actor?

17347357377397401231

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 2020 Posts: 16,370
    Denbigh wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Hemsworth, to me, is another choice that completely changes what the films are about. I don’t want to watch Hemsworth in a James Bond film, I want to watch someone be James Bond, and casting Hemsworth wouldn’t be doing that.
    I can understand that, although I guess that was what it was like when Roger became Bond. He was already pretty famous around the world for the Saint and the Persuaders and he basically played it the same as those two: he was Roger Moore in a James Bond film more than he was really James Bond. And that worked for me! :)
    See that's different for me cause as someone who grew up knowing him as Bond, and as someone whose never seen anything else he's done, he is James Bond. He was certainly Moore's James Bond, but he's always been James Bond to me...

    ...but now as someone who loves and understands the franchise more, and loves to see these actors really become the character, and certainly has more awareness of other actors like Hemsworth, Elba, and Cavill; to cast someone who would probably just be themselves, and would just be similar to other parts they've played, bar maybe an accent, is just not very appealing to me.

    Sure, but then the kids growing up with Hemsworth as Bond would feel exactly as you do about Roger: he just would be Bond.

    You’ve never seen Roger in anything else?
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Hemsworth, to me, is another choice that completely changes what the films are about. I don’t want to watch Hemsworth in a James Bond film, I want to watch someone be James Bond, and casting Hemsworth wouldn’t be doing that.
    I can understand that, although I guess that was what it was like when Roger became Bond. He was already pretty famous around the world for the Saint and the Persuaders and he basically played it the same as those two: he was Roger Moore in a James Bond film more than he was really James Bond. And that worked for me! :)
    See that's different for me cause as someone who grew up knowing him as Bond, and as someone whose never seen anything else he's done, he is James Bond. He was certainly Moore's James Bond, but he's always been James Bond to me...

    ...but now as someone who loves and understands the franchise more, and loves to see these actors really become the character, and certainly has more awareness of other actors like Hemsworth, Elba, and Cavill; to cast someone who would probably just be themselves, and would just be similar to other parts they've played, bar maybe an accent, is just not very appealing to me.

    Sure, but then the kids growing up with Hemsworth as Bond would feel exactly as you do about Roger: he just would be Bond.

    You’ve never seen Roger in anything else?
    Nope, I can't think of anything.

    And I see your point, but Roger Moore being the Saint in a television series is a bit different to Hemsworth being Thor, and appearing in multiple franchises. Also, the industry is a lot different than it was then, especially considering how much Marvel specifically, which includes Hemsworth himself, has shaped it in recent times.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,370
    Not really much different, the Saint and Persuaders were big international shows and got shown on network TV in the US I believe. He was a big star, and in fact it was probably worse than Hemsworth because he was known for playing parts which were very similar to Bond.

    You should check them out, they’re lots of fun. I tend to prefer the Persuaders but if you enjoy Bond you’ll probably enjoy them.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited October 2020 Posts: 5,970
    Again, I suppose, and I'll definitely check those shows out...

    ...but I just think looking at the way things are today, I just think, not only do we not need another franchise with Hemsworth in the lead, I just think James Bond deserves an actor whose going to become that character and be that character for a whole audience and generation, not just be this famous actor doing the stuff James Bond does.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited October 2020 Posts: 5,131
    mtm wrote: »
    Not really much different, the Saint and Persuaders were big international shows and got shown on network TV in the US I believe. He was a big star, and in fact it was probably worse than Hemsworth because he was known for playing parts which were very similar to Bond.

    You should check them out, they’re lots of fun. I tend to prefer the Persuaders but if you enjoy Bond you’ll probably enjoy them.

    I love the Saint with Roger, it’s brilliant.

    I’m recording all the Persuaders to watch as I’ve never seen it properly.

    Sir Roger was such an obvious choice and a safe bet for Bond in 73.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,205
    I had absolutely no problem accepting Harrison Ford as Jack Ryan ; his profile, as Han and Indy , was substantially greater than that of Hemsworth’s
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    If it is going to be someone of Hemsworth's stature, then it may as well be Henry Cavill. At least he is British and looks more like the classical fit of James Bond.

    On the subject of Roger Moore, I don't think his portrayal is as far removed from Fleming's ideal as most people seem to assume. When people say that Moore plays it lightly, it doesn't mean he can't be brutal. It has always seemed odd to me that people always refer to kicking Loque off the cliff, but not the way Moore's Bond deals with Sandor, or the way he kills Stromberg.

    And onscreen fighting has come a long way in the last 50 years, but I happen to really like most of the fist fights in the Moore era (with the exception of AVTAK obviously). There's some great punch ups in The Saint too.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,205
    If it is going to be someone of Hemsworth's stature, then it may as well be Henry Cavill. At least he is British and looks more like the classical fit of James Bond.

    .
    I know this is subjective, but Cavill doesn’t have a fraction of the charisma of Hemsworth.
    Based on his looks alone I was very enthusiastic about Cavill; but as time passed, and with each performance, even in MI, my enthusiasm has waned . I find him flat, and I can always sense him “acting” .
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    Not sure why this need for charisma is so high. Does Bond have charisma? Moore and Brosnan have it. Connery has it (onscreen, at least). Dalton and Craig absolutely do not have it. Yet they are still as highly regarded by most fans and play excellent versions of the character. I have my issues with Craig's interpretation, but he doesn't play it like a personality piece like Brosnan and Moore sometimes do.

    Hemsworth has that sort of popular charisma, for sure. But if that's the criteria then nearly all the usual candidates would be disqualified.

    Maybe we differ on what charisma actually means here, but personally I would say that charisma as I understand it - basically the sort of guy who has a popular personality with lots of people - is not required for the character of James Bond. The ability to seduce is not the same as being charismatic, though clearly it can help and the talents cross over.

    And when we are talking about seduction, we can see how awkward the seduction scenes are in Craig's films. They are really iffy, with embarrassing lines, and cringey moves ("help me find the stationary"). In SF they even have him just appearing in the shower so it looks as if he's crept up on an unsuspecting woman.

    In other words, Craig's Bond makes up for this lack of charisma with women (only talking onscreen here, not really life), by being good in the role in other areas. I don't see why that can't be the strategy for other acutes in the role. Nobody is perfect, after all.

    And finally, on the issue of 'acting'. I think we are overestimating what it takes to play Bond. And without being overly negative about Craig in this post, his acting ability is rather overstated on these boards I think.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 2020 Posts: 16,370
    If it is going to be someone of Hemsworth's stature, then it may as well be Henry Cavill. At least he is British and looks more like the classical fit of James Bond.

    Hemsworth is a better star presence in a movie though.
    On the subject of Roger Moore, I don't think his portrayal is as far removed from Fleming's ideal as most people seem to assume.

    It’s not really assumption, more observation. He’s not really playing the character from the books. I have no problem with that though!
    Not sure why this need for charisma is so high. Does Bond have charisma? Moore and Brosnan have it. Connery has it (onscreen, at least). Dalton and Craig absolutely do not have it.

    I would say Craig has loads of it. Dalton indeed doesn’t as Bond, and his Bond was possibly the least popular. I would say the two are linked.
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 395
    Denbigh wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Hemsworth, to me, is another choice that completely changes what the films are about. I don’t want to watch Hemsworth in a James Bond film, I want to watch someone be James Bond, and casting Hemsworth wouldn’t be doing that.

    Lol, well we know we have drastically different tastes. I believe the one actor where we have common ground is Sam Claflin.
    Judging by stories of the casting a new Bond for CR, the same dynamic seemed to exist in the EON brain trust, with Barbara having the final say.
    Yes, Sam Claflin is certainly someone I'd be happy to see get a screentest at least.

    But I'm sure you must understand where I come from. I like an actor to properly become the character of James Bond, rather than just be a big name who's gonna wear a tuxedo and do some action sequences.

    I agreed about Sam Claflin.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    MSL49 wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Hemsworth, to me, is another choice that completely changes what the films are about. I don’t want to watch Hemsworth in a James Bond film, I want to watch someone be James Bond, and casting Hemsworth wouldn’t be doing that.

    Lol, well we know we have drastically different tastes. I believe the one actor where we have common ground is Sam Claflin.
    Judging by stories of the casting a new Bond for CR, the same dynamic seemed to exist in the EON brain trust, with Barbara having the final say.
    Yes, Sam Claflin is certainly someone I'd be happy to see get a screentest at least.

    But I'm sure you must understand where I come from. I like an actor to properly become the character of James Bond, rather than just be a big name who's gonna wear a tuxedo and do some action sequences.

    I agreed about Sam Claflin.

    Agreed. Worth a screen test.
  • Posts: 4,615
    I'm going to sell my copy of "James Bond Cars" and put it on Hoult at 50-1
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 942

    Charisma in an actor I'd define by how well he (or she) holds your attention on screen. Connery had bags of it - when he comes onscreen in Highlander, the whole movie gets a very noticeable lift. He does this in nearly all of his films, regardless of the type of role. Steve McQueen had it, managing to hold your attention even when he had no lines; he was a consummate scene-stealer, often dragging the audiences' attention away from whoever he was playing against in scenes. Denzel Washington has it, and even in dull films he is electric.

    I think Roger Moore had it, but only really when he playing toward his light-comedic strengths (though he does display decent dramatic skills in The Man Who Haunted Himself). I think Chris Hemsworth is similar, in that he's great as Thor, but absolutely cannot bring any shine to his dead-straight role in Blackhat. It's a dud of a film, and I don't think any actor could have saved it, but I do think Daniel Craig would have brought more interest to the role, because I think he has an intensity to his acting that helps dramatic scenes. I think Hemsworth would work if you wanted to play things lighter, but I don't think he'd have been as good as Craig in Casino Royale. Craig is weaker at the lighter stuff.

    When it comes to charisma I'm of the opinion that a number of the actors in the running have it, but often more when going for lighter roles. Actors that can be charismatic regardless of the type of role are few and far between; I think Bond is a role that requires both an intensity and a lightness of touch, and someone who can do both and is of the right stature and age... that's difficult to find. If you could combine Hemsworth's charm and physicality with Jack O'Connell's dramatic intensity, now then we'd be talking.
  • QsCatQsCat London
    Posts: 253
    Come on guys.. you're all scrabbling around in the dirt, desperately. None of you have mentioned one genuine candidate. It's a big no from me for Holt and the same for Claflin.
    I used to dislike Cavill (as Superman mainly) but as I see no genuine contenders, I'm sorry to say he may be the best choice. This doesn't mean I think he has a chance at getting the part, but that I think he suits the part the most.
    I think we all agree that Fassbender would have been great, but I can't see it happening. I also think he is also too good of an actor to bother with it. As much as I would like to see him as Bond, I'd rather see him doing more interesting and challenging films over the time being Bond occupies. I was a fan of Craig before Bond and it's a shame that he has since stopped taking challenging dramatic roles in lower budget films. Enduring Love, The Mother, Some Voices and many others..
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,370
    Charisma in an actor I'd define by how well he (or she) holds your attention on screen. Connery had bags of it - when he comes onscreen in Highlander, the whole movie gets a very noticeable lift. He does this in nearly all of his films, regardless of the type of role. Steve McQueen had it, managing to hold your attention even when he had no lines; he was a consummate scene-stealer, often dragging the audiences' attention away from whoever he was playing against in scenes. Denzel Washington has it, and even in dull films he is electric.

    I think Roger Moore had it, but only really when he playing toward his light-comedic strengths

    Yeah I'd say it's about magnetism, whether you can take your eyes off them, whether they fill the screen. I'd say all but two of the Bonds have had it, and of those two Dalton isn't too bad. I think even though he was never going to be the best actor in the world, something like DAD actually survives because Brosnan has a decent presence in it.
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 395
    Pierce Brosnan has lot of charisma too.
  • Univex wrote: »
    nicholas%2Bhoult%2B1.png

    BTW, guy's got brilliant comedic timing and range.

    Woah....When did Nicholas Hoult get so sexy? Damn...Okay, now I can see why he was in contention for the Batman role opposite Pattinson. I think hoult could be the man to beat.

    It's just his body of work - outside that mischievous role in Mad Max - that doesn't inspire confidence. Perhaps if he can nab a killer role or two in some great films. I mean it wasn't like Pattinson was killing it until his streak from Good Time, The Lighthouse to High-Life.

    So Hoult has plenty of time to get some more high-value projects over the next two years. I'm actually glad he dropped out of Mission Impossible, he's better suited to indies. Hopefully, he can break through again.

    00a6a86d65e8f66431885f377565c977.jpg?width=1200&height=500
    gl_5e160685-dfc0-45fa-8053-0424ac110006.jpg
    GQHype_NicholasHolt_GQ_NicholasHoult2020-0007.jpg
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 395
    I think Hoult is a screentest material.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Honestly, if I can't have Dalton or Connery plucked out of time in & brought to present day to star in 5 new Bond movies, I'm sure whomever they get will be fine. I didn't think Dan would work at first, but I was proved wrong (thankfully). Not wild about Cavill's Superman, but every other film I've seen him in makes me think he'd be a fine Bond (after losing a bit of Kryptonian bulk).
    The Bond universe will unfold as it should, whomever they pick....
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,205
    Univex wrote: »
    nicholas%2Bhoult%2B1.png

    BTW, guy's got brilliant comedic timing and range.

    Woah....When did Nicholas Hoult get so sexy? Damn...Okay, now I can see why he was in contention for the Batman role opposite Pattinson. I think hoult could be the man to beat.

    It's just his body of work - outside that mischievous role in Mad Max - that doesn't inspire confidence. Perhaps if he can nab a killer role or two in some great films. I mean it wasn't like Pattinson was killing it until his streak from Good Time, The Lighthouse to High-Life.

    So Hoult has plenty of time to get some more high-value projects over the next two years. I'm actually glad he dropped out of Mission Impossible, he's better suited to indies. Hopefully, he can break through again.

    00a6a86d65e8f66431885f377565c977.jpg?width=1200&height=500
    gl_5e160685-dfc0-45fa-8053-0424ac110006.jpg
    GQHype_NicholasHolt_GQ_NicholasHoult2020-0007.jpg

    I was one of the first , if not the first to suggest Hoult and was roundly dismissed.
    There is no way that he’s not on EON’s radar.
    In recent years they’ve gone after established directors, writers, composers and actors. Hoult is exactly what they like ; he’s a strong actor, well known but not a megastar and he’s not tied to another franchise. X-Men is well in the past, and he was in heavy prosthetics. He’s got the charm and acting chops; get him together with a good fight coordinator and he’s good to go.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Hoult would definitely work.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,205
    ZZyTAPD.jpg

    AabWPUR.jpg
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    I don't see the appeal in Hault.
  • cwl007cwl007 England
    Posts: 611
    Hoult as Bond with Hugh Grant as M.
    B26 could be called About a Man.
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 395
    How about Liam Hemsworth, he is not famous as her brother?
  • Posts: 6,709
    cwl007 wrote: »
    Hoult as Bond with Hugh Grant as M.
    B26 could be called About a Man.

    =)) =D>
  • Posts: 6,709
    cwl007 wrote: »
    Hoult as Bond with Hugh Grant as M.
    B26 could be called About a Man.

    =)) =D>
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,205
    cwl007 wrote: »
    Hoult as Bond with Hugh Grant as M.
    B26 could be called About a Man.

    Lol, that’s a good one, but would actually be great casting.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,370
    I think Hugh Grant is brilliant, I would be happy to see him do something like that.

    Actually I was just imagining him as Denbeigh in Spectre: I genuinely think that would have been much better.
Sign In or Register to comment.