› ›

Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1…787788790792793…1231

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,422
    I always forget until I'm watching him that he has a Freddie Mercury-sized overbite too :D
    I know that's mean of me, but it's always distracting when I notice it again!
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 942
    I thought he was actually good in Man from UNCLE, and kind of charismatic in The Witcher, but Night Hunter was frighteningly bad.

    In other news, Nicholas Hoult is in the trailers for Angelina Jolie's Those Who Wish Me Dead playing a bad guy/henchman, could be a good role to see if he has any 'Bond edge' to him. He's definitely got comedic chops, and was one of the stand-outs for me in Fury Road, but I've not seen him play dangerous yet.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited April 2021 Posts: 16,422
    That looks a bit of an odd film, somehow.
    Looks like a good role to see how well Hoult goes gritty and dangerous though, you're right. Funny that the two American baddies seem to be both from the British Isles.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    It does indeed. Like four films smashed together. Or in a way, it looks the way films used to be 15 years ago. "Big action star X has to safe child witness from assassins with the help of local sidekick/love interest Y while external threatening circumstance Z occurs" used to be it's own genre, more or less.
    Honestly, not too hopeful for our man Nic here (fourth lead?), but he certainly is wearing a suit and holding guns in this.

    And has Taylor Sheridan just been writing stuff for 24h for the last five years? That man just pops up everywhere at the moment. Yellowstone and its multiple spin-offs. Mayor of Kingstown. Without Remorse. This. Really impressive.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 942
    The trailer makes me think of Stallone's Cliffhanger, though I'm sure this being based on a novel and having Taylor Sheridan writing/directing, it will be a bit more substantial-feeling.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,422
    Yes I thought it was a bit 90s-ish too; maybe because I've been catching up with a few 90s thrillers I missed recently, like River Wild and Crimson Tide :) Panic Room too, although I know that's not 90s :)
  • QsCatQsCat London
    edited April 2021 Posts: 253


    Certainly interesting to see Hoult holding a gun. Jolie looks incredibly skinny here, skeletal..
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,217
    QsCat wrote: »

    Certainly interesting to see Hoult holding a gun. Jolie looks incredibly skinny here, skeletal..

    Sadly, she has for the last decade

  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    Sometimes, she looks like Michael Jackson.
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    Posts: 1,318
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    Sometimes, she looks like Michael Jackson.

    So does Bullock
    DwQTjSzUwAAweXN.jpg
  • jetsetwillyjetsetwilly
    Posts: 3,327
    FatherValentine wrote: »
    QsCat wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    FatherValentine wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    FatherValentine wrote: »
    Whoever is given the part, they need to have the gravitas of being believable as a Royal Navy Commander.

    Whether this is a part of his history now or not I don't know, but if they keep the same background as Craig's incarnation, then he needs to have been a serving SBS officer too. I am guessing Craig's Bond was both (I think SBS teams are led by either RN Commanders or Marines from what I remember reading).

    You can be relatively young and do this (early thirties I think if you work hard and talented - so Bond would fit the mark), but you do need that gravitas.

    Something to remember when thinking of casting. It can't just be someone who is British and handsome.

    Couldn't agree more with this, well said mate
    It's one thing I think people always forget about when they suggest potential candidates. That and the actors voice, Bond should always have a commanding voice to match his presence

    Yes, voice is very important. Good point.

    And to be honest, on both points I think Brosnan falls down! :) I don't buy him as a military man at all (certainly not a special forces type), plus his voice isn't really his strong point. I don't dislike him in the role though so I think there's an awful lot that a bit of straightforward movie star charisma can just make up for, but I do agree that I prefer someone who does have those aspects, like Craig or Connery (plus the charisma of course!).

    I don't understand how PB's voice doesn't stand up. His voice as an actor is distinctive and he uses it very well. Now if you're saying his voice doesn't suggest he was a Commander in the Navy, well, we're now entering the realm of the ridiculous.
    I think Bond is similar to Lawrence of Arabia; an outsider who doesn't seem to fit in.
    eb6f96_5a08206a972c4e74b9294c535ac93eea~mv2.jpg

    If Bond were to initially appear somewhat unbelievable as having been in the Navy and Commando's, I don't think it's too much of a problem because it fulfils that outsider quality and also helps him to blend in as a spy.

    As much as I love Craig's interpretation and the change he helped bring to the franchise, I don't think its necessary for Bond to be as close as possible to a real life agent. The main thing is that he can get by on his wit and be the ruthless man of action when he needs to be- and that we believe him when he does.

    I like all the Bond's for different reasons. Next time round I'd like to see a Bond who is a bit more positive, more extrovert, who smiles now and then. I think the charisma of the actor and their watchability may actually be far more important than if they tick the right boxes. Ticking boxes can be boring. I loved Craig's Bond at first, but since Skyfall I find him pretty boring. He seems constantly depressed. Talking often even seems a challenge for him.

    Let's be thankful for what Craig brought to the series, but after NTTD, let's leave him on a golden beach, alone, with a bottle of Blackwells. There, as he thinks of Vesper, he may drink himself into the grave he longs for.

    To those of you who deride Brosnan- I don't understand you. You may think him too slight -possibly the least important fault- but what about all his positives?? I don't see how he himself could have been any better in the films he had. He worked his arse off and did a brilliant job. I think he had the best balance of all the elements, even though he's not necesserily my favourite Bond. How lucky we would be to have an actor of Brosnan's calibre next time round. I hope those of you who dislike Brosnan aren't also the ones suggesting Nicholas Hoult or Jack Lowden. @-)

    anigif_sub-buzz-19038-1475818310-2.gif?output-quality=auto&output-format=auto&downsize=360:*
    hCEnFUC.gif
    1-7.gif






    Personally, Brosnan is my least favourite, but that doesn't mean I think he is bad. In many respects he is the best thing about the films he is in. I rank GE very lowly, but not because of his performance. I think he's good in all four of his efforts. Also, personally I think he does a good job of the ex military aspect too. He carries himself with confidence. But everyone sees things differently, and that's fair.

    As I have said before, I think EON have chosen the lead actor brilliantly each and every time. The fact that the films have continued to be successful proves that. Whatever one thinks of Brosnan, or Moore, or Dalton, they each in their own way kept things going when the series was in doubt. And even in the case of Lazenby, the only instance where you could say they made an error, his performance is actually terrific for the most part, and the film now stands as one of the very best. So retrospectively it has worked out - even if has taken 50 years!

    James Bond 007 is both a very simple character and a complex one. Each actor has brought out certain elements of the character that the other actors haven't. And I think when people suggest actors here, they acknowledge that nobody can really encapsulate every single aspect of the character perfectly. So what you get are actors who bring out particular traits more than others.

    Yes I agree. Brosnan was unfortunate in that he appeared in some of the worst movies of the franchise, but I always thought physically he looked good. The voice wasn't his strongest asset, as others here have already mentioned.

    Personally I think the next actor to play Bond needs to be deep voiced, dark haired and dark eyed, in the Connery/Lazenby mould. Not a pretty boy model or a thespian stage actor.

    A tough guy in real life who embodies all the characteristics of the character naturally. Swagger and toughness in spades.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    Who's the favourite to be the next Bond?
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,217
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Who's the favourite to be the next Bond?

    Depends what time of day it is, and which Netflix series is flavour of the month.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    CraigMooreOHMSS wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Who's the favourite to be the next Bond?

    Depends what time of day it is, and which Netflix series is flavour of the month.

    Haha touché
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,125
    CraigMooreOHMSS wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Who's the favourite to be the next Bond?

    Depends what time of day it is, and which Netflix series is flavour of the month.

    Yup.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,422
    Yes, I saw someone getting excited that betting had been suspended on the next Bond because of a flurry of bets on Page, forgetting that we'd had exactly the same story six months before but with Tom Hardy. In fact if you Google for 'betting suspended on James Bond' you get the story having popped up in previous years with various other nonsense names like Hiddleston, no wonder Eon have a policy of not commenting on press speculation; it's just the same thing over and over again.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited April 2021 Posts: 6,304
    I blame Mendes. He saw how SF delved into Bond's past, and doubled down in SP. At least in SF he knew enough to have Bond brush M off: "You know the whole story." (I didn't buy Bond being the heir to that estate house, either.)

    Blofeld should not have been Oberhauser! That made zero sense.

    Now, Spectre recruiting Oberhauser and using him to ensnare Bond (kind of a twist on FRWL) has potential, but would require a page 1 rewrite.

    I just hope that in NTTD they forget the past and let Blofeld be Blofeld.

    God help me, I think I need a reboot for B26. And a fresh, largely unknown actor. One of the best things BB ever did was to look beyond the obvious contenders and cast Craig.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,422
    There's not much doubt that B26 will be a reboot of some kind. It's kind of impossible for it not to be.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,217
    Many of the “top picks “ of the past 5 to 10 years are aging out of range and younger actors aging in .
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    mtm wrote: »
    There's not much doubt that B26 will be a reboot of some kind. It's kind of impossible for it not to be.

    Yeah, even if they just go back to the old way of basically not mentioning continuity and origin and all that, it would be a reboot, because of how pronounced it was in Craig's run. And I don't think there is any chance they try to pull some crap along the lines of "This is happening between QoS and Skyfall". Or at least I hope.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,169
    talos7 wrote: »
    Many of the “top picks “ of the past 5 to 10 years are aging out of range and younger actors aging in .

    I firmly believe we're looking at an incredibly long gap post NTTD.
    The current six year hiatus is only the blink of an eye by comparison. I wouldn't be surprised if Craig's replacement is barely high school age currently.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Many of the “top picks “ of the past 5 to 10 years are aging out of range and younger actors aging in .

    I firmly believe we're looking at an incredibly long gap post NTTD.
    The current six year hiatus is only the blink of an eye by comparison. I wouldn't be surprised if Craig's replacement is barely high school age currently.

    No offence mate I hope you're wrong 😅 this 6 year wait is such a killer, I dread the thought of a longer one post NTTD
    What makes you think that though, out of interest?
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,217
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Many of the “top picks “ of the past 5 to 10 years are aging out of range and younger actors aging in .

    I firmly believe we're looking at an incredibly long gap post NTTD.
    The current six year hiatus is only the blink of an eye by comparison. I wouldn't be surprised if Craig's replacement is barely high school age currently.

    It depends on who owns the franchise; new ownership would not let it sit dormant for a prolonged period.

  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,169
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Many of the “top picks “ of the past 5 to 10 years are aging out of range and younger actors aging in .

    I firmly believe we're looking at an incredibly long gap post NTTD.
    The current six year hiatus is only the blink of an eye by comparison. I wouldn't be surprised if Craig's replacement is barely high school age currently.

    No offence mate I hope you're wrong 😅 this 6 year wait is such a killer, I dread the thought of a longer one post NTTD
    What makes you think that though, out of interest?

    I hope I'm wrong as well. I just think after NTTD Barbara and Michael may want to take a nice long break from Bond. Michael will probably retire while Barbara pursues other projects.
    Also Cubby was more or less solely devoted to only making Bond films, and thus we had consistent intervals between films. Barbara occasionally makes a Bond film now and then which keeps her father's legacy alive, but clearly she has other passions.
    It wouldn't surprise me if it takes quite some time to contemplate the series' future once Craig departs.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    That's interesting and makes sense absolutely.
    I do think they'll be something like a 4 year break after NTTD.
    Daniel Craig just is James Bond and they won't want the next guy unfairly compared, while the memory of Craig is still fresh in everyone's mind
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    edited April 2021 Posts: 16,169
    talos7 wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Many of the “top picks “ of the past 5 to 10 years are aging out of range and younger actors aging in .

    I firmly believe we're looking at an incredibly long gap post NTTD.
    The current six year hiatus is only the blink of an eye by comparison. I wouldn't be surprised if Craig's replacement is barely high school age currently.

    It depends on who owns the franchise; new ownership would not let it sit dormant for a prolonged period.

    Good point.
    Personally I wouldn't want anyone other than Eon to produce Bond. I'd rather wait for a good Eon entry than somebody else's crack at a Bond film. NSNA is about as far outside of Eon as I'd wish for.
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    That's interesting and makes sense absolutely.
    I do think they'll be something like a 4 year break after NTTD.
    Daniel Craig just is James Bond and they won't want the next guy unfairly compared, while the memory of Craig is still fresh in everyone's mind

    Exactly. I think the Craig era is Barbara's true legacy in the franchise and a hard act to follow. It will probably take some time to decide what direction to go afterwards.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited April 2021 Posts: 16,422
    Yes I think it's more that casting a new guy and picking an approach is more work than just pressing ahead with the next in the series: it will most probably take a little time. They don't even appear to have opened a company for the next film yet which is unusual.
  • BonSimonLeBon_1BonSimonLeBon_1
    edited April 2021 Posts: 2,436
    mtm wrote: »
    Yes I think it's more that casting a new guy and picking an approach is more work than just pressing ahead with the next in the series: it will most probably take a little time. They don't even appear to have opened a company for the next film yet which is unusual.

    I think all their energies are focused on making NTTD as profitable as possible after all that has happened over the last year - I suspect they're not really thinking much more in advance of it's release right now.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,125
    echo wrote: »
    I blame Mendes. He saw how SF delved into Bond's past, and doubled down in SP. At least in SF he knew enough to have Bond brush M off: "You know the whole story." (I didn't buy Bond being the heir to that estate house, either.)

    Blofeld should not have been Oberhauser! That made zero sense.

    Now, Spectre recruiting Oberhauser and using him to ensnare Bond (kind of a twist on FRWL) has potential, but would require a page 1 rewrite.

    I just hope that in NTTD they forget the past and let Blofeld be Blofeld.

    God help me, I think I need a reboot for B26. And a fresh, largely unknown actor. One of the best things BB ever did was to look beyond the obvious contenders and cast Craig.
    They had already forgotten that Oberhauser was Blofeld by the end of SP. Bond him called him Blofeld! I think it might be mentioned briefly, then ignored.
  • patbpatb
    edited April 2021 Posts: 4,617
    Hoult as a supporting role in a contempory Hollywood action movie wearing a suit and firing a gun. Got to be a positive sign. 500 to 1 at William Hilll - max bet 50p worth a go :-)
Sign In or Register to comment.