Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1100210031005100710081231

Comments

  • edited December 2022 Posts: 6,709
    It's so interesting that everyone seems to have their own ideia of who James Bond is. And then there are groups of people who share their views. And then we're of to clubism land sometimes, where it's fine to say that wanting a Craig 2.0 is a flawed theory because there's only one Daniel Craig, but then it's easy to say one does not want a Pierce Brosnan 2.0 (which I, for one, wouldn't mind) - looking at you @peter, my friend ;) (eheh, just kidding). But hey, it's all normal and expected. Really, I'm not being critical. I admire loyalty to one's vision of Bond. We all have our favourite(s) and we should admit that from the get go. And admit we want the next one to be closer to our favourite one. That is normal. I, for one, would love a mix of Dalton with Pierce, or a Connery second coming. Dalton's intensity and looks, Connery's coolness and Pierce's suaveness. That would be my choice, besides maybe having Daniel Craig's presence, Lazenby's nonchalance and Moore's eyebrow. Or, someone that would add something to that list, but something from the books, maybe Some dialectic between cruelty and humanity, between service and escapism. But I suppose, one way or another, they all had that.

    Also, I would love it if they keep being respectful of Fleming's depiction of Bond and what still works from his bio data. I still maintain that keeping the ethnicity of a character the same as it was written originally, is not being racist. Yes, there is nothing in today's society that demands it that Bond should remain caucasian (unless we take in account that he was born from a Swiss mother and a Scottish father), but that's not the point. He was written that way and imagined that way by its creator, so I'd keep it that way. The same goes for any other literary character. I'd keep it as close as possible to its depiction. And yes, I think smaller characteristics should also be as close to it as possible (dark hair, height, eye colour, ...) and if they have someone who is simply brilliant for the role, they should put those traits aside, yes race as well. But it would have to be a very special case. As were Daniel Craig and Roger Moore (hair colour wise). Still, I'd say they should keep the man as close as possible to the one Fleming wrote, whatever that means.

    Also, @Denbigh, my friend, agreed on what you said, 100%.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,636
    Univex wrote: »
    It's so interesting that everyone seems to have their own ideia of who James Bond is. And then there are groups of people who share their views. And then we're of to clubism land sometimes, where it's fine to say that wanting a Craig 2.0 is a flawed theory because there's only one Daniel Craig, but then it's easy to say one does not want a Pierce Brosnan 2.0 (which I, for one, wouldn't mind) - looking at you @peter, my friend ;) (eheh, just kidding). But hey, it's all normal and expected. Really, I'm not being critical. I admire loyalty to one's vision of Bond. We all have our favourite(s) and we should admit that from the get go. And admit we want the next one to be closer to our favourite one. That is normal. I, for one, would love a mix of Dalton with Pierce, or a Connery second coming. Dalton's intensity and looks, Connery's coolness and Pierce's suaveness. That would be my choice, besides maybe having Daniel Craig's presence, Lazenby's nonchalance and Moore's eyebrow. Or, someone that would add something to that list, but something from the books, maybe Some dialectic between cruelty and humanity, between service and escapism. But I suppose, one way or another, they all had that.

    Also, I would love it if they keep being respectful of Fleming's depiction of Bond and what still works from his bio data. I still maintain that keeping the ethnicity of a character the same as it was written originally, is not being racist. Yes, there is nothing in today's society that demands it that Bond should remain caucasian (unless we take in account that he was born from a Swiss mother and a Scottish father), but that's not the point. He was written that way and imagined that way by its creator, so I'd keep it that way. The same goes for any other literary character. I'd keep it as close as possible to its depiction. And yes, I think smaller characteristics should also be as close to it as possible (dark hair, height, eye colour, ...) and if they have someone who is simply brilliant for the role, they should put those traits aside, yes race as well. But it would have to be a very special case. As were Daniel Craig and Roger Moore (hair colour wise). Still, I'd say they should keep the man as close as possible to the one Fleming wrote, whatever that means.

    Also, @Denbigh, my friend, agreed on what you said, 100%.

    Great observations, @Univex. We all have our own views on who James Bond is. This is why I think that the continuation novels authors need to be spared some criticism. They might be flawed in their writings, but it is technically their own viewpoint on who James Bond is on that particular mission and/or story.
  • Posts: 6,709
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    It's so interesting that everyone seems to have their own ideia of who James Bond is. And then there are groups of people who share their views. And then we're of to clubism land sometimes, where it's fine to say that wanting a Craig 2.0 is a flawed theory because there's only one Daniel Craig, but then it's easy to say one does not want a Pierce Brosnan 2.0 (which I, for one, wouldn't mind) - looking at you @peter, my friend ;) (eheh, just kidding). But hey, it's all normal and expected. Really, I'm not being critical. I admire loyalty to one's vision of Bond. We all have our favourite(s) and we should admit that from the get go. And admit we want the next one to be closer to our favourite one. That is normal. I, for one, would love a mix of Dalton with Pierce, or a Connery second coming. Dalton's intensity and looks, Connery's coolness and Pierce's suaveness. That would be my choice, besides maybe having Daniel Craig's presence, Lazenby's nonchalance and Moore's eyebrow. Or, someone that would add something to that list, but something from the books, maybe Some dialectic between cruelty and humanity, between service and escapism. But I suppose, one way or another, they all had that.

    Also, I would love it if they keep being respectful of Fleming's depiction of Bond and what still works from his bio data. I still maintain that keeping the ethnicity of a character the same as it was written originally, is not being racist. Yes, there is nothing in today's society that demands it that Bond should remain caucasian (unless we take in account that he was born from a Swiss mother and a Scottish father), but that's not the point. He was written that way and imagined that way by its creator, so I'd keep it that way. The same goes for any other literary character. I'd keep it as close as possible to its depiction. And yes, I think smaller characteristics should also be as close to it as possible (dark hair, height, eye colour, ...) and if they have someone who is simply brilliant for the role, they should put those traits aside, yes race as well. But it would have to be a very special case. As were Daniel Craig and Roger Moore (hair colour wise). Still, I'd say they should keep the man as close as possible to the one Fleming wrote, whatever that means.

    Also, @Denbigh, my friend, agreed on what you said, 100%.

    Great observations, @Univex. We all have our own views on who James Bond is. This is why I think that the continuation novels authors need to be spared some criticism. They might be flawed in their writings, but it is technically their own viewpoint on who James Bond is on that particular mission and/or story.

    That's a very good point, @MaxCasino. But I'd say they've been very apt on keeping the main traits and the depiction of our man Bond. None has changed him physically, for example, not his hair colour, not is height, not his ethnicity,...
  • I think Olivia Colman would be a good choice for M if the role gets recast. I think she'd give it her own spin just like Dench did.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,970
    I think Olivia Colman would be a good choice for M if the role gets recast. I think she'd give it her own spin just like Dench did.
    +1
  • Posts: 6,709
    Denbigh wrote: »
    I think Olivia Colman would be a good choice for M if the role gets recast. I think she'd give it her own spin just like Dench did.
    +1
    +1
    She did have somewhat of a similar role in the espionage business in The Night Manager, didn't she? I liked her in that. She's brilliant in everything.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2022 Posts: 16,413
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The only thing with those questions is that some of them don't even apply to previous actors. The only two actors I think could, and one of them did, hold their own against Mikkelsen is Craig and Dalton. Craig and Connery in my eyes are the only ones that could believably put up a fight against Bautista, and the only actor I couldn't believe seducing Bellucci is Roger Moore.

    Respectfully, I would say that Connery remains one of the greatest movie stars ever, and I don't think Mads would outshine him.; although would be well balanced against him, because he's great. In a way we'll see how his 'son' copes in the new Indiana Jones film! :)
    And I think Roger would do as well with Bellucci as with any of his co-stars, which is to say they all had a slightly sexless relationship with him: he was handsome like a shop mannequin but never actually sexy as Bond; although he could be romantic at times. Much like Pierce, really; they were both pretty sexless as 007.

    Craig and Bellucci were great though: you really got the sense that they just purely wanted each other. Same with Caterino Murino: I think their scene together in Bond's room is probably the sexiest ever in a Bond film. Any other candiates?
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited December 2022 Posts: 5,970
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The only thing with those questions is that some of them don't even apply to previous actors. The only two actors I think could, and one of them did, hold their own against Mikkelsen is Craig and Dalton. Craig and Connery in my eyes are the only ones that could believably put up a fight against Bautista, and the only actor I couldn't believe seducing Bellucci is Roger Moore.
    And I think Roger would do as well with Bellucci as with any of his co-stars, which is to say they all had a slightly sexless relationship with him: he was handsome like a shop mannequin but never actually sexy as Bond; although he could be romantic at times. Much like Pierce, really; they were both pretty sexless as 007.
    I just never believed it when Moore would have to seduce the female characters that appeared in his films, and always thought that he was seducing these women because the script said he did as opposed to any kind of real chemistry or sexual tension, but you do make a good point regarding the sexlessness of his era, but makes you wonder if the reason for that is because of how unbelievable Moore was with the more seductive side of James Bond or was it specifically sexlesss because of his own attitudes to how things should appear like his whole thing with the violence.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited December 2022 Posts: 5,970
    mtm wrote: »
    Craig and Bellucci were great though: you really got the sense that they just purely wanted each other. Same with Caterino Murino: I think their scene together in Bond's room is probably the sexiest ever in a Bond film. Any other candiates?
    Apologies for the double post, but just wanted to say I agree that the scenes with Murino in Bond's room were incredibly sexy. I'd have to add Bond and Xenia in the sauna though cause as a bisexual man that scene was.... um....

    aroused-hot.gif
  • Posts: 6,709
    Pierce Brosnan, sexless...yeah right 8-|
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,413
    Denbigh wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The only thing with those questions is that some of them don't even apply to previous actors. The only two actors I think could, and one of them did, hold their own against Mikkelsen is Craig and Dalton. Craig and Connery in my eyes are the only ones that could believably put up a fight against Bautista, and the only actor I couldn't believe seducing Bellucci is Roger Moore.
    And I think Roger would do as well with Bellucci as with any of his co-stars, which is to say they all had a slightly sexless relationship with him: he was handsome like a shop mannequin but never actually sexy as Bond; although he could be romantic at times. Much like Pierce, really; they were both pretty sexless as 007.
    I just never believed it when Moore would have to seduce the female characters that appeared in his films, and always thought that he was seducing these women because the script said he did as opposed to any kind of real chemistry or sexual tension, but you do make a good point regarding the sexlessness of his era, but makes you wonder if the reason for that is because of how unbelievable Moore was with the more seductive side of James Bond or was it specifically sexlesss because of his own attitudes to how things should appear like his whole thing with the violence.

    I don't know really, I guess there's just some leading men who do sexy and there's others who don't. As I say though, I think Roger did romantic quite well, and you could believe he cared for people (which I think totally worked for his Bond); he just didn't want to rip their clothes off. He was just.. nice. :)
    Denbigh wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Craig and Bellucci were great though: you really got the sense that they just purely wanted each other. Same with Caterino Murino: I think their scene together in Bond's room is probably the sexiest ever in a Bond film. Any other candiates?
    Apologies for the double post, but just wanted to say I agree that the scenes with Murino in Bond's room were incredibly sexy. I'd have to add Bond and Xenia in the sauna though cause as a bisexual man that scene was.... um....

    aroused-hot.gif

    Well fair enough, I think she's doing all of the heavy lifting there though! :)
  • Posts: 6,709
    Well, she was a femme fatale...

    And I know @Denbigh and I would like some more of those in future films, wouldn't we? ;)
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited December 2022 Posts: 5,970
    Univex wrote: »
    And I know @Denbigh and I would like some more of those in future films, wouldn't we? ;)
    100%

    The only thing that truly grated me about the Craig-era was the lack of a proper femme-fatale akin to Xenia and Fiona. The fact that Valenka in Casino is the closest we got was a damn shame.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,413
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    And I know @Denbigh and I would like some more of those in future films, wouldn't we? ;)
    100%

    The only thing that truly grated me about the Craig-era was the lack of a proper femme-fatale akin to Xenia and Fiona. The fact that Valenka in Casino is the closest we got was a damn shame.

    Yeah that's a good point; it would have been quite good seeing Craig's Bond being quite brutal with one of those!
  • Denbigh wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    And I know @Denbigh and I would like some more of those in future films, wouldn't we? ;)
    100%

    The only thing that truly grated me about the Craig-era was the lack of a proper femme-fatale akin to Xenia and Fiona. The fact that Valenka in Casino is the closest we got was a damn shame.
    That's why Elektra King continues to stand out for me as a villain, there just hasn't been anyone like her since. She, Brosnan, Dench and David Arnold make that movie rewatchable for me despite its shortcomings.

    I think a female main villain could be a distinctive element for the introduction of the 7th Bond. Get a respected/acclaimed actress.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited December 2022 Posts: 3,152
    Didn't Caterina Murino say she wished that the sex scene between Bond and Solange had been longer because 'it was really sexy when he kissed me'?
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited December 2022 Posts: 5,970
    Venutius wrote: »
    Didn't Caterina Murino say she wished that the sex scene between Bond and Solange had been longer because 'it was really sexy when he kissed me'?
    It is kinda funny to think that “realistically” if any other Bond was in that situation, that Skyfleet plane would’ve been a pile of ash and rubble.

    But yes @FrankXavier, all for a female villain going forward. As the main one or henchwoman, don’t care. Just give me a female antagonist who doesn’t change sides EON.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,413
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    And I know @Denbigh and I would like some more of those in future films, wouldn't we? ;)
    100%

    The only thing that truly grated me about the Craig-era was the lack of a proper femme-fatale akin to Xenia and Fiona. The fact that Valenka in Casino is the closest we got was a damn shame.
    That's why Elektra King continues to stand out for me as a villain, there just hasn't been anyone like her since. She, Brosnan, Dench and David Arnold make that movie rewatchable for me despite its shortcomings.

    I think a female main villain could be a distinctive element for the introduction of the 7th Bond. Get a respected/acclaimed actress.

    Yeah I think it's genuinely kind of odd we haven't had one since. Just for the sake of variety if nothing else.
    Venutius wrote: »
    Didn't Caterina Murino say she wished that the sex scene between Bond and Solange had been longer because 'it was really sexy when he kissed me'?

    It really was though! :)
    Compare that with the really awkward sex scene with Bond and Jinx in DAD (the only time we see Bond actually in the throes, incidentally) which just feels sort of empty and cold, somehow; the CR one is properly hot and feels like the real thing.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,152
    Because Caterina Murino - so mission-schmission! :D
  • Posts: 4,162
    Denbigh wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The only thing with those questions is that some of them don't even apply to previous actors. The only two actors I think could, and one of them did, hold their own against Mikkelsen is Craig and Dalton. Craig and Connery in my eyes are the only ones that could believably put up a fight against Bautista, and the only actor I couldn't believe seducing Bellucci is Roger Moore.
    And I think Roger would do as well with Bellucci as with any of his co-stars, which is to say they all had a slightly sexless relationship with him: he was handsome like a shop mannequin but never actually sexy as Bond; although he could be romantic at times. Much like Pierce, really; they were both pretty sexless as 007.
    I just never believed it when Moore would have to seduce the female characters that appeared in his films, and always thought that he was seducing these women because the script said he did as opposed to any kind of real chemistry or sexual tension, but you do make a good point regarding the sexlessness of his era, but makes you wonder if the reason for that is because of how unbelievable Moore was with the more seductive side of James Bond or was it specifically sexlesss because of his own attitudes to how things should appear like his whole thing with the violence.

    To be fair I think Moore’s later films suffered from him having female co-stars who were young enough to be his daughter. They tried to lean into the more comedic side with Bibi in FYEO, but even with Melina in that film he’s more fatherly towards her.

    I do agree though he played better at being romantic than outright seductive. I really think this comes through in OP. Still, it’s definitely a way of playing Bond, and it worked with his interpretation.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,413
    Yeah I think it worked for him: that’s why I see him being a better choice for OHMSS than his contemporaries.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    Yes, Roger was more romantic than seductive, I completely agree. He was also less of a brawler than some of the other Bonds. I see him as one of the more "polished" Bonds, with good manners and all that. With him, it was never sex for breakfast, death for dinner; rather it was roses for breakfast and a warm conversation for dinner. But it's to Roger's credit that he managed to sell this Bond to us the way he did. I'm particularly fond of his Bond, regardless of the fact he rarely "roughed" someone up or "took" a girl. Roger brought a warm charisma to the role that worked both in the more fantastical Bonds as well as in his Cold-War thrillers. I cannot imagine watching FYEO or OP without Roger. And while his Bond was completely different from, say, the Craig Bond in CR, Roger's seven films are still enjoyable films, in large part due to him.
  • edited December 2022 Posts: 4,162
    To Moore’s credit, he was a very human Bond, arguably more so than Connery and even Craig at times. I can’t imagine Connery, for example, giving the same genuinely hurt expression when Anya references Tracy in TSWLM. Moore certainly brought that extra element of humanity to the scene in that same film when he reveals he killed Anya’s boyfriend too. A very underrated actor, despite his scripts not always being perfect.

    I feel Moore’s Bond could be that cold killer when needed, but his Bond was a slightly less cold version of the character in his personal life, and certainly with the women in his films. It’s still a valid interpretation of Bond - hell it even has roots in Fleming.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited December 2022 Posts: 4,343
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tv/20716678/james-bond-star-new-filmmaker-reveal-franchises-march/

    “Kick-Ass actor Aaron Taylor-Johnson shot the scene as Eon looks to reveal the franchise’s new star in March”.

    I do not believe this.
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,138
    As others have said, if he’s been cast. Then why wait till March.
    File under not true.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2022 Posts: 16,413
    007HallY wrote: »
    To Moore’s credit, he was a very human Bond, arguably more so than Connery and even Craig at times. I can’t imagine Connery, for example, giving the same genuinely hurt expression when Anya references Tracy in TSWLM. Moore certainly brought that extra element of humanity to the scene in that same film when he reveals he killed Anya’s boyfriend too. A very underrated actor, despite his scripts not always being perfect.

    I feel Moore’s Bond could be that cold killer when needed, but his Bond was a slightly less cold version of the character in his personal life, and certainly with the women in his films. It’s still a valid interpretation of Bond - hell it even has roots in Fleming.

    Indeed: the funny thing is that although Connery was the better actor, his was actually the more cartoonish, 2D character of the two. Roger’s had a little more in the way of emotional depth. It’s slightly counter intuitive as he’s always thought of as the wise-cracking, button-pressing one, but really it’s Sean of the two of them.
    Benny wrote: »
    As others have said, if he’s been cast. Then why wait till March.
    File under not true.

    Absolutely, when the deal is signed they have always revealed it as quickly as possible to stop it leaking.
    They have said he’ll be revealed in three months because they’re banking on everyone having forgotten this story by then :D

    Mod edit: double posts merged. @mtm, please use the edit button. Thank you.
  • edited December 2022 Posts: 1,661
    .
    matt_u wrote: »
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tv/20716678/james-bond-star-new-filmmaker-reveal-franchises-march/

    “Kick-Ass actor Aaron Taylor-Johnson shot the scene as Eon looks to reveal the franchise’s new star in March”.

    I do not believe this.

    It's a bold claim. I can't recall other potential Bond actors getting media coverage about gun barrels filmed. Sounds a bit like self-promotion - the easiest way to get some attention is to leak claims you're the next Bond (!) but I guess there's no reason why he wouldn't get a screentest. It's feasible he would be considered.

    Regarding the time the new Bond is announced:

    Daniel Craig was announced 14th October 2005. Casino Royale released 16th November 2006 (UK)

    My guess is Bond 26 will be released in 2025. The producers take their time getting the script done so let's go with October/November 2025. That means next actor can be announced in autumn 2024. I think 2025 is a realistic time frame because there was a four year gap between Brosnan (Die Another Day 2002) and Craig (Casino Royale 2006). No Time To Die 2021 - Bond 26 2025.

    I doubt we'll get the new Bond announced next year but it's possible Amazon will put pressure on Eon to get Bond 26 out by the end of 2024. That still leaves autumn 2023 to announce the next Bond actor. But I'm going with 2025. Eon take their time.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Benny wrote: »
    As others have said, if he’s been cast. Then why wait till March.
    File under not true.

    Exactly, it's almost comical at this point. I mean, the big three outlets for the entertainment industry have been updating the drama unfolding at WB, they've been doing interviews with potentially nominated filmmakers and talent, they've even written about Craig being cast in Queer. But when it comes to the world's most famous spy and the character's recasting, they're mute...

    The click-bait papers are just foul.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,583
    Now that the actor's in the bag, we should get a title reveal tomorrow. How about:

    As The Sun Goes Down
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,217
    QBranch wrote: »
    Now that the actor's in the bag, we should get a title reveal tomorrow. How about:

    As The Sun Goes Down

    The Daily Mail Never Dies
Sign In or Register to comment.