Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1120912101212121412151220

Comments

  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,932
    I will say that the benefit of actors like Callum and Leo, beyond the specific qualities that make them suitable, is that they would feel rather fresh, which might be something EON wants. For audiences to completely get to know the actor as they get to know their version of the character besides the few of us they are already aware of them.
  • Posts: 15,022
    007HallY wrote: »
    I don't see a major issue with his voice to be honest. Plenty of wonderful actors had/have higher pitched voices and used them exceptionally well onscreen. Toby Stephens doesn't exactly have a deep, booming voice and people here praise his voice work as the character in the Bond radio plays.

    His voice really isn't going to be a dealbreaker. It's the same with any other actor (short of some extraordinary vocal problem). And I'm talking as someone not sold on him.

    But there's a difference between a voice acting and acting acting, if that makes sense. You can do loads of weird mimics to get the proper tone and depth in a studio. I suspect it's one of the reasons why Erich Pohlmann never played Blofeld in the flesh.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    I hope the next Bond has a strong voice, it's a big part of the character. Arguably all the Bond's have had a powerful voice (aside from Pierce although his was distinctive) I think it's important that Bond's voice resonates with the audience, it should be as instantly recognisable as his face.
  • Posts: 1,626
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    I hope the next Bond has a strong voice, it's a big part of the character. Arguably all the Bond's have had a powerful voice (aside from Pierce although his was distinctive) I think it's important that Bond's voice resonates with the audience, it should be as instantly recognisable as his face.


    for all these comments about Bond's voice, I hear you, and it resonates deeply....(ahem)...couldn't resist
  • ArapahoeBondFanArapahoeBondFan Colorado
    Posts: 39
    Since62 wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    I hope the next Bond has a strong voice, it's a big part of the character. Arguably all the Bond's have had a powerful voice (aside from Pierce although his was distinctive) I think it's important that Bond's voice resonates with the audience, it should be as instantly recognisable as his face.


    for all these comments about Bond's voice, I hear you, and it resonates deeply....(ahem)...couldn't resist

    Did you hear it in an ATJ voice???
  • George_KaplanGeorge_Kaplan Being chauffeured by Tibbett
    Posts: 649
    My two cents on some of the current candidates:

    Leo Suter doesn’t make much of an impression on me. He looks very young, but I guess there aren’t many 30-something actors as rugged looking as Connery around these days. He also has a bit of the same posh public-school type feel as Tom Hiddleston.

    Callum Turner, I found rather boring. I don’t get much charisma or intelligence from his performances, and I don’t think he looks quite right either.

    I liked ATJ in Nowhere Boy and he was quite good in Bullet Train, but again, not someone with the sort of ‘wow factor’ a role like Bond demands. And yes, I’m afraid his voice is also a problem for me.

    The best I’ve seen so far is Theo James. Good looks, sex appeal, charisma, swagger; I’m yet to see any of the other suggested actors embody these qualities as well as him, which is a shame, as I think he’s the one with the least chance of getting it.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    Since62 wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    I hope the next Bond has a strong voice, it's a big part of the character. Arguably all the Bond's have had a powerful voice (aside from Pierce although his was distinctive) I think it's important that Bond's voice resonates with the audience, it should be as instantly recognisable as his face.


    for all these comments about Bond's voice, I hear you, and it resonates deeply....(ahem)...couldn't resist

    Good one my friend 🥂

    @George_Kaplan great points as always. I definitely think Theo James has done the best "Bond audition" to become Bond #7 in The Gentlemen, but like you say he's least likely to get the role
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited August 7 Posts: 5,932
    The cons I have with James is not his capabilities but more that he's rather uninspired and a kinda boring as a choice. He'd be good, for sure, but I've seen him a play a leading man a thousand times in a thousand different genres in very similar ways, and I don't really see him doing anything different or interesting with Bond, personally, so I struggle to get excited. It's kinda the same issue I had with Aiden a few years ago.

    The pros of ATJ, Callum or even Leo, in my opinion, is that I can't fully tell what they'd do or how they'd do it. I find that more exciting than someone I've come to know what to expect.
  • edited August 7 Posts: 3,825
    Ludovico wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    I don't see a major issue with his voice to be honest. Plenty of wonderful actors had/have higher pitched voices and used them exceptionally well onscreen. Toby Stephens doesn't exactly have a deep, booming voice and people here praise his voice work as the character in the Bond radio plays.

    His voice really isn't going to be a dealbreaker. It's the same with any other actor (short of some extraordinary vocal problem). And I'm talking as someone not sold on him.

    But there's a difference between a voice acting and acting acting, if that makes sense. You can do loads of weird mimics to get the proper tone and depth in a studio. I suspect it's one of the reasons why Erich Pohlmann never played Blofeld in the flesh.

    I think it depends on how they use their voice more than the pitch (on the flip side some actors have nice voices but have no idea how to use them). ATJ seems comfortable moulding his voice to a role so I don’t think this’ll be his issue. My main concern is his lack of impact as an actor.
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The cons I have with James is not his capabilities but more that he's rather uninspired and a kinda boring as a choice. He'd be good, for sure, but I've seen him a play a leading man a thousand times in a thousand different genres in very similar ways, and I don't really see him doing anything different or interesting with Bond, personally, so I struggle to get excited. It's kinda the same issue I had with Aiden a few years ago.

    The pros of ATJ, Callum or even Leo, in my opinion, is that I can't fully tell what they'd do or how they'd do it. I find that more exciting than someone I've come to know what to expect.

    Not sold on James either. I understand why many rate him highly after seeing him in The Gentlemen (and yes, it’s a vaguely Bondian role) but I see it as similar to Aidan Turner in And Then There Were None. I think if you scratch a bit deeper into that performance I don’t think there’s much there that indicates he’d make a great Bond. I think you’re right, I don’t think he’d be able to bring anything interesting.

    He has a wonderful voice though, and I’d love him to be Bond in, say, a Fleming radio/podcast adaptation, or perhaps a video game. But I just don’t get the sense he’s the full package. That and he’s clearly not interested in taking the role.
  • George_KaplanGeorge_Kaplan Being chauffeured by Tibbett
    edited August 7 Posts: 649
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The cons I have with James is not his capabilities but more that he's rather uninspired and a kinda boring as a choice. He'd be good, for sure, but I've seen him a play a leading man a thousand times in a thousand different genres in very similar ways, and I don't really see him doing anything different or interesting with Bond, personally, so I struggle to get excited. It's kinda the same issue I had with Aiden a few years ago.

    The pros of ATJ, Callum or even Leo, in my opinion, is that I can't fully tell what they'd do or how they'd do it. I find that more exciting than someone I've come to know what to expect.

    Yes, I can see that. He's a fairly obvious choice and I guess there's a bit of laziness on my part regarding the other actors and not being prepared to look a bit deeper. This is also the first time I've been through a change in actor (I'm too young to remember Brosnan leaving) so it may just be a knee jerk reaction on my part in favour of tradition.
    007HallY wrote: »
    Not sold on James either. I understand why many rate him highly after seeing him in The Gentlemen (and yes, it’s a vaguely Bondian role) but I see it as similar to Aidan Turner in And Then There Were None. I think if you scratch a bit deeper into that performance I don’t think there’s much there that indicates he’d make a great Bond. I think you’re right, I don’t think he’d be able to bring anything interesting.

    Is there anything in particular that makes him an uninteresting choice for you?
  • Posts: 3,825
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The cons I have with James is not his capabilities but more that he's rather uninspired and a kinda boring as a choice. He'd be good, for sure, but I've seen him a play a leading man a thousand times in a thousand different genres in very similar ways, and I don't really see him doing anything different or interesting with Bond, personally, so I struggle to get excited. It's kinda the same issue I had with Aiden a few years ago.

    The pros of ATJ, Callum or even Leo, in my opinion, is that I can't fully tell what they'd do or how they'd do it. I find that more exciting than someone I've come to know what to expect.

    Yes, I can see that. He's a fairly obvious choice and I guess there's a bit of laziness on my part regarding the other actors and not being prepared to look a bit deeper. This is also the first time I've been through a change in actor (I'm too young to remember Brosnan leaving) so it may just be a knee jerk reaction on my part in favour of tradition.
    007HallY wrote: »
    Not sold on James either. I understand why many rate him highly after seeing him in The Gentlemen (and yes, it’s a vaguely Bondian role) but I see it as similar to Aidan Turner in And Then There Were None. I think if you scratch a bit deeper into that performance I don’t think there’s much there that indicates he’d make a great Bond. I think you’re right, I don’t think he’d be able to bring anything interesting.

    Is there anything in particular that makes him an uninteresting choice for you?

    It’s nothing bad about him. I think he’s a good actor. I just I don’t see anything special about him that makes me think I’d immediately want to see him play Bond.

    Maybe if I’m being nitpicky I’ve never felt he’s been able to convincingly portray that harder edge/raw energy needed for the character even in some of his action roles. Not to say he’s unconvincing, just that I think compared to Connery, Craig, Dalton (and even Moore and Brosnan in their own ways) he just doesn’t quite have those natural qualities. Not sure if I’m describing it very well, and he’s better than a lot of other choices. But for me he just seems like he wouldn’t quite work. And as I said it’s very unlikely he’s interested.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,111
    Totally the same here, I don't think he's on the same level as the others.
  • George_KaplanGeorge_Kaplan Being chauffeured by Tibbett
    Posts: 649
    007HallY wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The cons I have with James is not his capabilities but more that he's rather uninspired and a kinda boring as a choice. He'd be good, for sure, but I've seen him a play a leading man a thousand times in a thousand different genres in very similar ways, and I don't really see him doing anything different or interesting with Bond, personally, so I struggle to get excited. It's kinda the same issue I had with Aiden a few years ago.

    The pros of ATJ, Callum or even Leo, in my opinion, is that I can't fully tell what they'd do or how they'd do it. I find that more exciting than someone I've come to know what to expect.

    Yes, I can see that. He's a fairly obvious choice and I guess there's a bit of laziness on my part regarding the other actors and not being prepared to look a bit deeper. This is also the first time I've been through a change in actor (I'm too young to remember Brosnan leaving) so it may just be a knee jerk reaction on my part in favour of tradition.
    007HallY wrote: »
    Not sold on James either. I understand why many rate him highly after seeing him in The Gentlemen (and yes, it’s a vaguely Bondian role) but I see it as similar to Aidan Turner in And Then There Were None. I think if you scratch a bit deeper into that performance I don’t think there’s much there that indicates he’d make a great Bond. I think you’re right, I don’t think he’d be able to bring anything interesting.

    Is there anything in particular that makes him an uninteresting choice for you?

    It’s nothing bad about him. I think he’s a good actor. I just I don’t see anything special about him that makes me think I’d immediately want to see him play Bond.

    Maybe if I’m being nitpicky I’ve never felt he’s been able to convincingly portray that harder edge/raw energy needed for the character even in some of his action roles. Not to say he’s unconvincing, just that I think compared to Connery, Craig, Dalton (and even Moore and Brosnan in their own ways) he just doesn’t quite have those natural qualities. Not sure if I’m describing it very well, and he’s better than a lot of other choices. But for me he just seems like he wouldn’t quite work. And as I said it’s very unlikely he’s interested.

    By harder edge and raw energy do you mean visible aggression and intensity during action scenes? Or general physical ability?

    I'm sorry if I sound confrontational by the way. I'm genuinely interested in what you're saying, I just don't think I'm quite getting it.
  • edited August 7 Posts: 3,825
    007HallY wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    The cons I have with James is not his capabilities but more that he's rather uninspired and a kinda boring as a choice. He'd be good, for sure, but I've seen him a play a leading man a thousand times in a thousand different genres in very similar ways, and I don't really see him doing anything different or interesting with Bond, personally, so I struggle to get excited. It's kinda the same issue I had with Aiden a few years ago.

    The pros of ATJ, Callum or even Leo, in my opinion, is that I can't fully tell what they'd do or how they'd do it. I find that more exciting than someone I've come to know what to expect.

    Yes, I can see that. He's a fairly obvious choice and I guess there's a bit of laziness on my part regarding the other actors and not being prepared to look a bit deeper. This is also the first time I've been through a change in actor (I'm too young to remember Brosnan leaving) so it may just be a knee jerk reaction on my part in favour of tradition.
    007HallY wrote: »
    Not sold on James either. I understand why many rate him highly after seeing him in The Gentlemen (and yes, it’s a vaguely Bondian role) but I see it as similar to Aidan Turner in And Then There Were None. I think if you scratch a bit deeper into that performance I don’t think there’s much there that indicates he’d make a great Bond. I think you’re right, I don’t think he’d be able to bring anything interesting.

    Is there anything in particular that makes him an uninteresting choice for you?

    It’s nothing bad about him. I think he’s a good actor. I just I don’t see anything special about him that makes me think I’d immediately want to see him play Bond.

    Maybe if I’m being nitpicky I’ve never felt he’s been able to convincingly portray that harder edge/raw energy needed for the character even in some of his action roles. Not to say he’s unconvincing, just that I think compared to Connery, Craig, Dalton (and even Moore and Brosnan in their own ways) he just doesn’t quite have those natural qualities. Not sure if I’m describing it very well, and he’s better than a lot of other choices. But for me he just seems like he wouldn’t quite work. And as I said it’s very unlikely he’s interested.

    By harder edge and raw energy do you mean visible aggression and intensity during action scenes? Or general physical ability?

    I'm sorry if I sound confrontational by the way. I'm genuinely interested in what you're saying, I just don't think I'm quite getting it.

    No it’s all good mate. I’m trying to say I can’t quite put my finger on it either!

    It’s not necessarily visible intensity or aggressiveness. It’s more a general screen presence thing. For me he just doesn’t quite give that sense that he could be dangerous, or turn heads as he walks into a casino, or that one of his stares could be dark or sufficiently cold enough. It’d feel less like he’d actually be Bond, but that he’d be playing Bond (and many actors can play Bond, not as many can really inhabit the role as all the actors have done). It’s kind of the sense I got from him in The Gentlemen and other films I’ve seen of him. That and I’ve just never been captivated by any of his performances despite him being a good actor. I just think they can do better.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,111
    I'd say he's the current Clive Owen.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,170
    I'm very much in the pro-James camp. He has the look, the presence and the voice - and I certainly saw a lot of natural ability when it comes to the physical stuff. If being captivated by someone's performance is the bar we're setting for an actor to take on the role, then we're likely not going to have much of a list of candidates (if any). The only reason I say that is my own personal feeling of not being captivated by Craig in any of his prior Bond roles (though similarly, he was always very good), and he ended up being one of the best Bonds.

    I don't really have much of an issue with knowing what to expect from someone's performance either, as long as the performance is strong and works for the kind of film they're making.
  • edited August 7 Posts: 3,825
    mtm wrote: »
    I'd say he's the current Clive Owen.

    Yes, I think that’s it! Someone who’s done vaguely Bondian roles, has a following amongst fans, but when you really think about it something about him actually in the role doesn’t quite click. He’s just missing that something. Incidentally I think James is a better actor.
    I'm very much in the pro-James camp. He has the look, the presence and the voice - and I certainly saw a lot of natural ability when it comes to the physical stuff. If being captivated by someone's performance is the bar we're setting for an actor to take on the role, then we're likely not going to have much of a list of candidates (if any). The only reason I say that is my own personal feeling of not being captivated by Craig in any of his prior Bond roles (though similarly, he was always very good), and he ended up being one of the best Bonds.

    I don't really have much of an issue with knowing what to expect from someone's performance either, as long as the performance is strong and works for the kind of film they're making.

    I dunno, even if James were interested and the producers picked him, I don’t think this would be a case of playing safe but going with an inferior candidate that wouldn’t give us the best performance.

    I think a better way of putting it is rather than needing to be captivated by a performance, I need to see more there than just the actor doing a vaguely Bondian role. That’s deceptive. There needs to be something else - maybe it’s that swagger that Craig and Connery had, the fantastic charm/humour/self confidence that Moore had, Dalton’s intensity, Brosnan’s sheer star quality etc. James is good, but he’s a wee bit bland for me. Not terribly so. To use an analogy it’s like a good meal missing a much needed bit of spice/seasoning.

    I don’t think he’ll be the next Bond regardless, but that’s fine.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited August 7 Posts: 8,170
    007HallY wrote: »
    There needs to be something more there - maybe it’s that swagger that Craig and Connery had, the fantastic charm/humour/self confidence that Moore had, Dalton’s intensity, Brosnan’s sheer star quality etc. James is good, but he’s a wee bit bland for me.

    I guess I'm probably seeing all of those things there - aside from maybe the humour that Moore had (which James hasn't really shown in any of his roles thus far, though he has in spades in real life) - because I've decided that I really like him.

    You're right though: he probably won't be on the radar for the role. Despite my fondness for James, I've always maintained that the next Bond is likely someone that hasn't been mentioned anywhere on these boards so far.
  • Posts: 3,825
    007HallY wrote: »
    There needs to be something more there - maybe it’s that swagger that Craig and Connery had, the fantastic charm/humour/self confidence that Moore had, Dalton’s intensity, Brosnan’s sheer star quality etc. James is good, but he’s a wee bit bland for me.

    I guess I'm probably seeing all of those things there - aside from maybe the humour that Moore had (which James hasn't really shown in any of his roles thus far, though he has in spades in real life) - because I've decided that I really like him.

    You're right though: he probably won't be on the radar for the role. Despite my fondness for James, I've always maintained that the next Bond is likely someone that hasn't been mentioned anywhere on these boards so far.

    I think these things are subjective to a point. But still, he just doesn’t quite click for me. My theory is people are a bit biased towards him because of the roles he’s played, much like Owen. It’s easier to slot him into the part in the mind’s eye compared to other actors. That’s what I mean by such roles being deceptive. But really, I can see why people like him. He is a good actor at the end of the day - not Bond for me but good.

    It’ll be interesting seeing who gets the role. It’s hard to believe we haven’t mentioned him even briefly, but you never know. Actors get their breaks/do noteworthy stuff all the time, and it might put them on the radar. I do think the next actor will have some level of noteworthy experience though in film/tv.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,170
    007HallY wrote: »
    I do think the next actor will have some level of noteworthy experience though in film/tv.

    Certainly, they'd have to. Though, while being the lead in a film would be added weight to a CV; with the way television/streaming has gone in the last 5-10 years, I could easily foresee someone being chosen whose resumé has a lot more series work than theatrical releases on it.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,932
    This is why I mentioned above, the probable benefit of actors like Callum and Leo, who audiences can completely get to know as an actor just as they get to know their version of the character, besides the few of us they are already aware of them. I think that would appeal to EON greatly.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,156
    Combining the charm of Moore with the physicality of Craig, Hugh would have been an excellent Bond .

    Lcsamjw.jpg
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited August 7 Posts: 3,112
    I still can't shake the impression that Theo was playing himself when he played that uber jerk in the Inbetweeners movie - so I can't give an unbiased opinion of him! ;)
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    I wish we had another Pierce type available. I really do. Is there a young, up-and-coming actor who reminds anybody of Pierce? I'd like to know.
  • Posts: 15,022
    I wish we had another Pierce type available. I really do. Is there a young, up-and-coming actor who reminds anybody of Pierce? I'd like to know.

    I feel like there's plenty of Pierce types available, and that's the problem: there's too many of them, without the consensus or the public's appetite for them.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    edited August 8 Posts: 1,606
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I wish we had another Pierce type available. I really do. Is there a young, up-and-coming actor who reminds anybody of Pierce? I'd like to know.

    I feel like there's plenty of Pierce types available, and that's the problem: there's too many of them, without the consensus or the public's appetite for them.

    That is interesting to think about. The current industry definitely tailors its male actors after the Brosnan mould. ATJ is a prime example, plays it pretty clean in publicity (obviously more hotted up and overtly sexual than Brosnan was comparably but times do change and Brosnan was definitely "sexy" back in the day.) Could be fair to add that Brosnan brought something more, since ATJ isn't connecting like Brosnan did back with Remington Steele.
  • edited August 8 Posts: 15,022
    What Brosnan had in the days was plebiscite. And I'm talking about 1987. Nobody has it now and I'm not sure anyone had it before, except maybe Moore. Maybe. Obviously, the sampling is extremely small, but I doubt a Bond actor will be have such consensus upon casting.
  • Posts: 3,825
    Ludovico wrote: »
    What Brosnan had in the days was plebiscite. And I'm talking about 1987. Nobody has it now and I'm not sure anyone had it before, except maybe Moore. Maybe. Obviously, the sampling is extremely small, but I doubt a Bond actor will be have such consensus upon casting.

    Moore was a bit of a handpicked choice by Broccoli (I don’t think he even auditioned formally). It’s just not something I can imagine happening today. Brosnan at least auditioned (and to be fair the ‘86 casting seems pretty intensive/close to what we’d get today with certain members at EON preferring, say, Sam Neil but with Brosnan ultimately proving himself through the process, and then Dalton doing so later).

    But I dunno, I suspect specific people have their favourites. Maybe it’s someone they’ve had their eyes on for a while (ie what happened with Craig) or perhaps it’ll be someone recommending a certain actor and the producers approaching them (so a Connery situation).
  • Posts: 15,022
    007HallY wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    What Brosnan had in the days was plebiscite. And I'm talking about 1987. Nobody has it now and I'm not sure anyone had it before, except maybe Moore. Maybe. Obviously, the sampling is extremely small, but I doubt a Bond actor will be have such consensus upon casting.

    Moore was a bit of a handpicked choice by Broccoli (I don’t think he even auditioned formally). It’s just not something I can imagine happening today. Brosnan at least auditioned (and to be fair the ‘86 casting seems pretty intensive/close to what we’d get today with certain members at EON preferring, say, Sam Neil but with Brosnan ultimately proving himself through the process, and then Dalton doing so later).

    But I dunno, I suspect specific people have their favourites. Maybe it’s someone they’ve had their eyes on for a while (ie what happened with Craig) or perhaps it’ll be someone recommending a certain actor and the producers approaching them (so a Connery situation).

    Moore was cast in very specific, even extreme, circumstances. When Connery was pretty much perceived as the one and only James Bond. I doubt anyone else would have been able to make the franchise survive.
  • Posts: 3,825
    Ludovico wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    What Brosnan had in the days was plebiscite. And I'm talking about 1987. Nobody has it now and I'm not sure anyone had it before, except maybe Moore. Maybe. Obviously, the sampling is extremely small, but I doubt a Bond actor will be have such consensus upon casting.

    Moore was a bit of a handpicked choice by Broccoli (I don’t think he even auditioned formally). It’s just not something I can imagine happening today. Brosnan at least auditioned (and to be fair the ‘86 casting seems pretty intensive/close to what we’d get today with certain members at EON preferring, say, Sam Neil but with Brosnan ultimately proving himself through the process, and then Dalton doing so later).

    But I dunno, I suspect specific people have their favourites. Maybe it’s someone they’ve had their eyes on for a while (ie what happened with Craig) or perhaps it’ll be someone recommending a certain actor and the producers approaching them (so a Connery situation).

    Moore was cast in very specific, even extreme, circumstances. When Connery was pretty much perceived as the one and only James Bond. I doubt anyone else would have been able to make the franchise survive.

    Agreed. Probably another reason why it wouldn't happen today (as popular as Craig was people are expecting a new Bond).
Sign In or Register to comment.