› ›

The actual age of the Bond actors during production

245

Comments

  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,582
    DB5 wrote:
    You missed Timothy Dalton for TLD, but I assume he would have been around 40. No, I don't think we'll ever see another Bond actor younger than 35. The men of Connery's generation were more mature. Men who were just slightly older than Connery had actually fought in World War II, many when they were only 18 or 19. Today 25 year olds are likely to still be living at home with their parents.

    I didn't miss him, he is listed with Sean Connery DAF. ;-)
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Two slight corrections to the list:

    Connery was 35/36 during the filming of You Only Live Twice and Moore was 44/45 during the filming of Live And Let Die.
    [/i].

    As far as I can work out YOLT was released in June 1967, which means he probably began filming after his 36th birthday (25th August 1966), but I could be wrong on that, there were insufficient production notes on YOLT.
    As for RM, he appears to have begun filming LALD in November 1972, after his 45th birthday, but again if that is incorrect let me know.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    in terms of how old an actor should be when first suiting up as 007, i tend to lean more towards the 35-40 range.... it makes it a little more believable (at least to me) that he has spent enough time in the military to earn the rank of Commander, and also go through secret service and espionage training.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited July 2012 Posts: 4,399
    DaltonCraig007 wrote:
    NicNac wrote:
    Will we ever go back to an actor in his early 30s?

    No because the next Bond will be Michael Fassbender, who will be in his 40's during his first film ;)

    Fassbender will be too wrapped up with continued X-Men movies, and if the Assassin's Creed film takes off, he'll be wrapped up in that too...

    good rule of thumb when it comes to actors odds to play Bond - the more obvious/popular the choice, the less likely that person is to become Bond...

    Connery was an out of left field choice, when Cary Grant seemed the most obvious choice...

    Lazenby was an out of left field choice to replace Connery...

    Dalton was an out of left field choice, when Brosnan was the overwhelming favorite...

    Craig was an out of left field choice, when Clive Owen was deemed a shoe-in...

    Fassbender seems to be the obvious successor to Craig by popular consensus...... which means he will more than likely not be James Bond

    :)>-
  • DB5DB5
    Posts: 408
    Well I'm 56 and I think Daniel Craig is fine. Yes, he's the first Bond younger than I am but so what?
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited July 2012 Posts: 13,355
    NicNac wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Two slight corrections to the list:

    Connery was 35/36 during the filming of You Only Live Twice and Moore was 44/45 during the filming of Live And Let Die.
    [/i].

    As far as I can work out YOLT was released in June 1967, which means he probably began filming after his 36th birthday (25th August 1966), but I could be wrong on that, there were insufficient production notes on YOLT.
    As for RM, he appears to have begun filming LALD in November 1972, after his 45th birthday, but again if that is incorrect let me know.

    You Only Live Twice was filmed between July 1966 and March 1967. Live And Let Die begin production in October 1972, so Moore may have just been 44, I'm unbale to find an exact date on that, though which is annoying, only if Moore was 44 for a matter of days, I'd love to know the correct answer.
  • OHMSS69OHMSS69
    Posts: 2,341
    Even though Moore was about 1-2 years older than Connery he looked younger in the early seventies. By the eighties his age really started to show. Connery has aged gracefully.

    I think Dalton is a baby boomer (if they call them that in the UK) he was born after the War in 1946.
    Some funny trivia but we already know: Craig is the only Bond who was born after the franchise began (1968).
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,582
    Samuel001 wrote:
    NicNac wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Two slight corrections to the list:

    Connery was 35/36 during the filming of You Only Live Twice and Moore was 44/45 during the filming of Live And Let Die.
    [/i].

    As far as I can work out YOLT was released in June 1967, which means he probably began filming after his 36th birthday (25th August 1966), but I could be wrong on that, there were insufficient production notes on YOLT.
    As for RM, he appears to have begun filming LALD in November 1972, after his 45th birthday, but again if that is incorrect let me know.

    You Only Live Twice was filmed between July 1966 and March 1967. Live And Let Die begin production in October 1972, so Moore may have just been 44, I'm unbale to find an exact date on that, though which is annoying, only if Moore was 44 for a matter of days, I'd love to know the correct answer.

    Yes, the production notes on MI6 says that shooting started at the beginning of October, and Moore's birthday is the 14th. That is...close :-)


  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    We have the answer @NicNac. One of the latest tweets from 007 reveals Moore began filming on 13th October, so he was 44, if only for one day!
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    edited October 2012 Posts: 7,582
    Good enough for me ;-)
    Well I have updated the first post. The only possible major discrepancy is if Timothy Dalton was born in 1944 and not 1946.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    More sources point to 1946. We may not find out the answer though, for a long time. I'm sure one day, Dalton will tell all.
  • MaxRebo120MaxRebo120
    Posts: 136
    It's amazing to compare Connery's 41 in DAF to Brosnan's 41 in Goldeneye.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Brosnan looked 35 in GoldenEye.
  • fanbond123fanbond123
    edited February 2013 Posts: 1,661
    "Tom Cruise is older but look younger then Daniel Craig. DC is from 1968, Tom Cruise from 1962. Brosnan is from 1953."

    But Tom Cruise is actually an alien - from the planet 'Scientology 5' in the Cult Sector of the galaxy. He ages differently to humans. Daniel Craig looks like he was born old and his face is meant to be used to sandpaper walls. :D

    Actors like Depp, Cruise, Pitt are going to look weird in the next ten years or so. I think they may use botox or have slight face lifts to stop the dreaded gravity spoiling their faces. They will look unnatural but it will help to keep them popular with women. Daniel Craig - because he is a real man and can eat an entire weetabix with one gulp - does not care about vanity and he will embrace gravity and old age. This means we've got two more films of him looking really craggy and old. Whoo-hoo!!!!! :P
  • jka12002jka12002 Banned
    Posts: 188
    fanbond123 wrote:
    "Tom Cruise is older but look younger then Daniel Craig. DC is from 1968, Tom Cruise from 1962. Brosnan is from 1953."

    But Tom Cruise is actually an alien - from the planet 'Scientology 5' in the Cult Sector of the galaxy. He ages differently to humans. Daniel Craig looks like he was born old and his face is meant to be used to sandpaper walls. :D

    Actors like Depp, Cruise, Pitt are going to look weird in the next ten years or so. I think they may use botox or have slight face lifts to stop the dreaded gravity spoiling their faces. They will look unnatural but it will help to keep them popular with women. Daniel Craig - because he is a real man and can eat an entire weetabix with one gulp - does not care about vanity and he will embrace gravity and old age. This means we've got two more films of him looking really craggy and old. Whoo-hoo!!!!! :P

  • fanbond123fanbond123
    Posts: 1,661
    Come on down!

    :D



  • fanbond123fanbond123
    Posts: 1,661
    "I thnk Craig's hair in Skyfall is too short, but that is just my preference. It makes him look not just older but haggard. "

    Yeah, I sorta agree. I took that photo of Connery and put it on Craig.

    It would be nice to see a slig
  • jka12002jka12002 Banned
    Posts: 188
    here we go with the repeats again
  • fanbond123fanbond123
    edited February 2013 Posts: 1,661
    My browser doesn't seem to work well on this site. Keeps posting my unfinished posts. Oops.

    Anyway... here is Daniel Craig with darker fuller hair and darker eyebrows.

    http://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/96/71629379.jpg

    I would like to see that sort of look in Bond 24. Why not go for a new look? I'm sure people will embrace the change. :)
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited February 2013 Posts: 28,694
    fanbond123 wrote:
    My browser doesn't seem to work well on this site. Keeps posting my unfinished posts. Oops.

    Anyway... here is Daniel Craig with darker fuller hair and darker eyebrows.

    http://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/96/71629379.jpg

    I would like to see that sort of look in Bond 24. Why not go for a new look? I'm sure people will embrace the change. :)

    Yuck.

    One, that is atrocious. Two, what sense does it make to change Bond's look now more than half a decade in? I certainly wouldn't embrace that travesty.
  • jka12002jka12002 Banned
    Posts: 188
    That looked more like a wax statue of Craig
  • hoppimikehoppimike Kent, UK
    Posts: 290
    Hm, I think they want a Bond who looks "mature but hunky" lol

    That way you get the guys watching it for the character and the action and the girls watching it (often) for the actor!

    Also it kind of fits with his classy character.

    30-40 seems to be preferred as the starting age for a Bond it seems, then you can squeeze 10 years or so out of them comfortably before they look too old for the role and/or move onto other things...

    Interesting thread - I did wonder this too!
  • AliAli
    Posts: 319
    4EverBonded wrote:
    it won't bother my enjoyment of his performance.

    Wasn't that the point though?
  • TuuliaTuulia
    Posts: 2,081
    fanbond123 wrote:
    Actors like Depp, Cruise, Pitt are going to look weird in the next ten years or so. I think they may use botox or have slight face lifts to stop the dreaded gravity spoiling their faces. They will look unnatural but it will help to keep them popular with women.

    Eh? What makes you think women like "unnatural" look on men? None that I know do.

  • BondWillReturnBondWillReturn
    edited February 2013 Posts: 816
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote:
    fanbond123 wrote:
    My browser doesn't seem to work well on this site. Keeps posting my unfinished posts. Oops.

    Anyway... here is Daniel Craig with darker fuller hair and darker eyebrows.

    http://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/96/71629379.jpg

    I would like to see that sort of look in Bond 24. Why not go for a new look? I'm sure people will embrace the change. :)

    Yuck.

    One, that is atrocious. Two, what sense does it make to change Bond's look now more than half a decade in? I certainly wouldn't embrace that travesty.

    So, since we are once again discussing Craig's haircut, I'll go a little off-topic and post what I hope his hair will look like in B24:

    daniel-craig-Collage.jpg

    (the second photo, with the Skyfall background)
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,582
    Hopefully not too early to drag my old thread back, as (barring accidents) DC's actual age for Bond 24 can be added.
    Interesting to see how he leaps through the list because of the longer than usual gaps between films. He will now be officially older than RM was in his first 2 Bond films. Who knows where he will be in the list when B25 comes around?

    Will he look simply too old by the time he gets to B25, even though he will still possibly be under 50?

  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,718
    Tom Cruise is now the same age as Moore in FYEO, right? And I think Tom looks like a good 20 years younger than Moore in that film! No disrespect to Sir Rog, of course :D
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    I think people of Moore's era sometimes had a tendency to look older than the equivalent generation today. It's something to do with their smart style, even in more casual clothes.
  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    Posts: 6,432
    Read my mind, was thinking a Bond actor early 30s is a good idea. Roger seemed to age quick, though felt despite his age in Live and Let Die he looked young in that film.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    By moonraker his age was starting to catch up with him and then by FYEO Moore looked cooked.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Moore had certainly aged by the time MR came along but I think that REALLY became an issue in AVTAK. Not so much because of how old he was but because he was bed hopping with women who were models. It just felt a bit...creepy.
Sign In or Register to comment.