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
Like this?
He would make a great Bond villain!
Maybe a modern version like Max Zorin.
I think they should lean more heavily into the fact that Bond is an antihero.
Yeah. I've mentioned him too. He's someone EON should also look at. I think he's got potential. He even has the cruel mouth.
I keep seeing Christopher Nolan in this guy!
Would personally love a Cillian trilogy while he's "young" of a deeply cold Bond.
Lol. I know what you mean. He does look a bit like Nolan though. But at the same time, he looks Bondian.
Lol, I see it.
I have to say though that he is the first suggestion in a long time that has really caught my attention.
I’d say the great thing about Bond is that while the core traits of the character is the same in each portrayal, each actor’s take on the role is idiosyncratic. The producers learnt during the Moore era that they couldn’t write for Moore in the same way they could with Connery, and actually vice versa. It’s the same for every other actor.
I mean, Connery’s portrayal of Bond was very specific. By his own admission he went into the role ‘making fun’ of the idea of the character, so you had a good mixture of that sardonic quality alongside a natural toughness. I’d argue Moore and Craig’s takes on the role were just as specific and engrossing to watch. Heck, for most people my age Craig IS Bond, not Connery. That’s even if they’ve rewatched the Connery films. Anyway, I do think it’s important to find an actor who will bring something unique to the role that makes them distinct from the others.
I always enjoy your incisive posts 007HallY, and you're bob-on as per usual with this. For us fans Connery is the guy, but for folks up to their mid-30s or so, Craig is the definitive James Bond. He was Bond right from when those folks were able to watch the films, and he was brilliant and completely owned it. They've probably seen Connery, but to be honest those old films are losing their relevance slightly now and feel of their time. You might watch Goldfinger in the afternoon and enjoy it, but Casino Royale is the one you put on in the evening with a beer and friends on the big home entertainment system (and that's an old movie!).
I love Connery as much as the next fan, but he was playing a cartoon character really (even more so than Roger was, bizarrely- counter-intuitively, his movies actually showed a bit more in the way of emotion and range and he was a more human Bond); Craig is the one to beat.
I've been impressed by what I've seen of him in Industry (not like that), but I guess physically he's not quite the alpha male type perhaps. He's fit, but very lean.
He's totally got the presence.
Cheers, appreciate it. I'm a big Connery fan and think his portrayal of Bond is an important one. But it's not the definitive one. That's the point - there's no definitive version of this cinematic character. Each actor brought something of themselves to that role. Dependent on when you were born, which of the films you watched first, which ones you like most etc. you can potentially feel that any one of the six actors is 'your Bond'. For me, while I was born after GE (probably closer to TND), it's Craig who I feel that connection with the most. Some people I know would actually feel more of a kinship with Brosnan's Bond. Heck, there's even quite a bit of love for Dalton and Moore amongst general viewers (and yes, Moore's ability to give that role a genuine sense of humanity is an underrated quality of his).
I do think it's exciting to see what the next actor will do with this role. The precedent seems to be that each new actor distinguishes themselves from the previous one, even if the films themselves retain stylistic and plot elements from the previous Bond's tenure.
Harry Lawtey wouldn't be bad at all from I've seen him in.
We've always rooted for Bond. Even when he goes rogue or kills someone in self defense he does the right thing. It would be interesting if he didn't do the right thing and was less likeable. Cillian has the looks to play dead cold and is beautiful enough to compensate for being despicable. We should hate that we like him. It's a take that wouldn't be family friendly but it wouldn't pale in comparison to its predecessors.
For me, TB is the one where he's in total control. He's giving it everything and he's become so good at it by this point. I also think he's in movie star mode in DAF and is being a real Hollywood star in that film, but perhaps not the sharpest Bond performance as such.
I actually don't like him in Dr No: he's being way too abrasive and is actually quite unlikeable at several points. It's amazing how much he smoothed that off in time for FRWL.
Anyway, Thomas Doherty is interesting. I do find, however, that I'm seeing him as more a villain than Bond (similar to the criticisms made about Sam Clafin a few pages back - both good looking and competent actors, but there's just a lack of warmth to them that might not suit the cinematic Bond). And yes, he does look an awful lot like Connery, albeit his screen presence is very different.
Steven Seagal. The western hemisphere's proudest export product.
GF Connery > TB Connery
I would say that the wig is certainly immeasurably better!
I wonder how much of that is Hitchcock's doing. ;-)
Sure, DN Connery is -- how did Ken Adam put it? -- a rough diamond. At the same time, his actions were brisk and fast, which I like. When he tricks Miss Taro, confronts Dent, introduces himself to Sylvia, gets arrogant with No, and meets Honey, he is at the top of his game, IMO. I'm very satisfied with Connery's acting in DN, but I agree that there was room for improvement.
This is also why I wish that Lazenby had done a few more. He too, I reckon, could have improved his acting fast.