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
I did think Damien Lewis would have been a decent Bond a few years back.
From the three, I’d pick the Irish fella, Drea. But all of them are top notch actors, who could be groomed into the role, IMO.
The best, and only way, @talos7 …
I don’t think I’ve seen the actors in pics two and three, but superficially, what great looks they have. Handsome. Masculine. And number two is like a younger Dalton (who I always found to have the greatest face of the Bond actors); Number Three has a dark, ruggedness that I’d love for a new James Bond.
Yeah, these guys play against each other - sort of - in the Apple TV show "Surface", and they're all great in their respective roles. I was watching the show, and couldn't decide which one would be a better Bond. So, the days when there were but a few choices out there are gone. There is talent out there. Young, fresh talent, with both the looks and the chops. Great physicality, presence,... That Gavin Drea does look like Dalton. Has a very distinct Irish accent, but I suppose he can change it at will. And Phil Dunster has this villanesque, creepy quality about him that would also be very interesting to explore. Oliver Jackson-Cohen is simply very, very versatile. The least favorite of the three, for me, but very versatile.
Oliver Jackson-Cohen is indeed a very talented actor. I have no dog in the fight, and I’m keeping a blank mind and expectations are nil on who they cast, but if Jackson-Cohen got the tap on the shoulder, I don’t think he’d disappoint the majority of filmgoers. He’s likeable with chops.
I don't know, charisma doesn't work that way. There's a big difference between someone we like to hate and someone we want to be.
It depends on the villain. It’s not uncommon for viewers to be drawn to certain villains due to the character’s charisma, and even to some extent their actions. In fact I’d say you have to like a villain on some level for them to be great ones.
I wouldn’t say it’s a hard rule that a Bond actor should be able to play a baddie, but I do agree the actor should be able to display convincingly certain qualities (sometimes that sense of arrogance, a darker side at times etc).
Connery didn't work that well as a villain in The Avengers. We like him too much.
I don't think Clint Eastwood could make a good villain either, despite being a problematic guy.
That kind of charisma works for Bond, but not so much for the villain.
And there are plenty of villains who are just... villains. We love them because we hate them.
Like I said, it depends, and as you hinted we’re getting into specifics. Again, I don’t think it’s a hard rule or even something provable, but I can understand the sentiment.
Just recently watched the 2025 adaptation of Agatha Christie's Towards Zero, featuring Jackson-Cohen. Although an Agatha Christie adaptation is hardly the best type of production to showcase an actors range, I felt there was something "more" to his performance than what many other similar male actors are able to show in these types of adaptations. One to keep an eye on, for sure.
There's something of mischief about Mr. Bond, some ruthfullness as well, something that swings between hot and cold. A bit of a devil, he is.
Like some clever snowflake said in some Amazon meeting, he's not a hero. Well, he was right in that sense. He's an anti-hero. One of the very best. Dark, moody, conflicted, and yet given to enjoying life's excesses, even to his own decline and prejudice.
A complex man, he is, as one should be.
Yes! My understanding/reference of an anti-hero are characters like Patrick Bateman and Travis Bickle on the extreme end. With TV you get Tony Soprano, and Walter White.
James Bond is flawed, and should be depicted as such. He has plenty of vices, and often his womanising, drinking, and love of adventure do not always pan out well for himself or others involved. But it's also part of his lust for life and appeal as a character. He also has an extraordinarily high sense of duty towards his country and even doing the right thing as he sees it. To paraphrase Fleming, if this character has virtues they are bravery and a sense of duty (and of course patriotism). I can see why Broccoli got annoyed, if not offended at someone at Amazon claiming Bond wasn't a hero, as much as we don't know the context!
I don't think he has "flaws". He is perfectly fine because he is an antihero. ;)
And he is an antihero because he is a killer.
Well, it's not as simple as that. In terms of the stories it's generally made clear Bond only kills villains or 'bad people' out of that sense of higher duty (and when Bond is faced with a situation in the films in which he has to kill an innocent - ie. Kara in TLD - he chooses not to. In the books he dislikes killing in general as a human with a basic sense of morality, even if he accepts it's part of his job).
Anyway, plenty of heroes, (including superheroes) kill people (I know a character like Wolverine in X-Men certainly does, at least in the films. No idea about the comics). I'd say it comes down to Bond being a complex character in many ways. But I can't see how he's an anti hero and I don't believe thinking of the character in that way does him any justice. The viewer needs to understand he's a man who'll ultimately always do the right thing (at least in terms of the story). It's why EON were very clear about him not putting civilians in harms way or taking bribes etc.
That doesn't make Bond an antihero. Lancelot is a killer, Hercules is a killer, Robin Hood is a killer. Oedipus is a parricide AND incestuous. All are heroes. Antiheroes don't lack moral, they are not ruthless, they lack heroic traits. Papageno is a coward, a braggard, a liar etc. That's an antihero.
Absolutely right. Already regret casually dropping the antihero thing in here, as I wanted to define him as a hero with flaws (which one doesn’t have them?) and not an antihero. So sorry about that. Carry on, my friends ;) And thank you for your knowledgeable clarification :)
Oh, btw, on the subject of duality and the manichean nature of Fleming’s writing and James Bond himself, have you read Umberto Eco’s work on the subject? Worth a read, IMO. It further clarifies the dualistic nature of the universe Ian invented, and the way that reflects in his character personality construction.