Who should/could be a Bond actor? *SPOILERS*

1184185187189190855

Comments

  • Posts: 709
    peter wrote: »
    Hiddles is not going to be Bond.
    Turner is not going to be Bond.
    Bell is not going to be Bond.

    At this point, DC has the best chance of returning as Bond, if he wants it.

    And even then, even if he does want it back, the role still may be taken away from him...

    Am I that arrogant to be making these above, sweeping predictions?

    No.

    I only say this because, until a distributor is attached, no one is 100% guaranteed to be wearing the tux.

    It's the distributor who has to agree to the cast (after all they're going to be selling the film in the markets around the world).

    That's why I say Craig has the best, although, not guaranteed, chance of being 007 (providing he wants to). He's been big bank for the franchise, so, if Sony comes back again, they may want to stick with the goose who lays the golden eggs.

    If it's a new partnership, with another company, they may think the same: we can lessen risk, make guaranteed bank with this guy over two films (providing he wants to. And if he does, lock him up for two more films. If he's not going to commit to two more, then, 'bye-'bye). After this two pic deal, they send him off, make some great capital, then move into the more grinding process of re-casting. Or;

    They might also say: Craig's done, we're the new Sheriff in town, we want a re-boot. We wanna start fresh. We'll take however long it takes to get the casting right, then we'll move into the next film.

    But the casting decision WILL NOT BE MADE without the distribs consent.

    So the media can report all it wants about Hiddles, Turner, et al... But, realistically, and no matter how much it pains to say: this is going to take a while.

    Well said. I wanna requote that deadline article:

    "There have been no negotiations on where the Bond movie will land (Sony or Warner Bros. are out front on this) and although it was thought that negotiations might start after the first quarter 2016, parties are not likely to engage in negotiations until later this year. There is no workable script yet and the creative elements have yet to come into place."

    So...no studio, no director, no script...but they're in "advanced negotiations" with Piddles? Doesn't make any sense. (Wouldnt they have done the traditional FRWL screentest, with several different actors, and if so, how would this not be publicly known at this point? They are not going to hand this massive role to an actor sight unseen). A studio putting up money IS going to want to have a say in who stars and who directs, especially if EON is putting unproven names out there; there were articles about Amy Pascal asking Brosnan back, and having to be convinced about Craig. I believe its entirely possible that EON is putting together a list of potentials - Bell, Turner, Piddles, etc that they can present to a studio. But then again certain studios have their own relationships and deals with people that they might want to put forward - as a random but not irrelevant example, WB has Christopher Nolan and Tom Hardy. Martin Campbell and Marc Forster had pre-existing relationships with Sony, etc.

    And on another note, let's not forget what happened with DAF - they offered Connery a big payday AND a deal for financing for a non-Bond picture. Craig might find something like that more attractive than "just" money, if doing another Bond allows him to get a personal project off the ground.
  • Posts: 709
    bondjames wrote: »
    What should I watch to see Jamie Bell in an action oriented capacity? I know he was in Tintin, which I enjoyed, but that was motion capture.

    Well not a whole lot yet. He (and Q!) were in the WW1 drama The Trench with Daniel Craig but I don't remember much about it. Though the recent article talked about him just completing "6 days" where he plays a real life SAS soldier. There's a photo of him in it on the imdb

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4703048/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_2

    It's entirely possible Babs has gotten a look at it, and liked what she saw.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Thanks @dinovelvet. I'll be sure to try and check these out. I've heard his name mentioned before but don't know much about him apart from Tintin and the fact that he's not the biggest fella.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe "I need a year off" Craig
    edited May 2016 Posts: 7,316
    The only way they could shake it up again is if Liam gets taken BY his daughter.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Taken 3 was so poor, it's an Insult to Taken 2, which itself was
    So Bad, you wish the gangsters had kept his daughter in Taken ! ;)
    Taken 3 was so bad, it made Die Hard 5 look like a classic !
    Liam, Please stop, just stop, walk away. :(
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,534
    @Thunderpussy you disappoint me. ;) I can't get enough of Liam demolishing bad guys.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I much preferred Taken 3 to Die Hard 5. I fell asleep in the theatre for the latter - was woken up when the lights came on.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Sadly I too love to see Liam kick some terrorist/gangster ass ! =D>
    But they have toned the violence down so much, ..... that it's really
    Sad. He now merely smacks their bottoms rather than putting a cap
    In it. ;)
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,534
    Die Hard 5 would be better if they removed Die Hard from the title and change Bruce Willis' character name. To watch dear old Bruce machine gun everything that moves can be entertaining, but it's not Die Hard. And comparison to the previous 4 outings really hurt the film.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Agreed, I may be one of the few who loved DH4 ( It seems to get some hate).
    DH5, seemed to go against the John McClane attitude, some good set pieces
    But a basic action movie, and well below Parr for a Die Hard.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Still waiting for the Jena Malone Batwoman movie that's never going to be made.Moderator
    Posts: 12,099
    bondjames wrote: »
    I much preferred Taken 3 to Die Hard 5. I fell asleep in the theatre for the latter - was woken up when the lights came on.

    Good lord that film was bad. And for an action film, it commited the ultimate sin, it was dull. I could only imagine the level of hatred that Bruce must have for the series.

    Die Hard is on tv, which one? Oh, it's Die Hard 5...

    giphy.gif
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,090
    Agreed, I may be one of the few who loved DH4 ( It seems to get some hate).
    DH5, seemed to go against the John McClane attitude, some good set pieces
    But a basic action movie, and well below Parr for a Die Hard.

    Die hard 4 wasn't so bad. It was moderately decent. Die Hard 5 was an unrepentant abomination.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Maggie Q ruled in DH4, and Justin Long & Mary Elizabeth Winstead had some spark.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Costa Mucho
    Posts: 42,020
    bondjames wrote: »
    I much preferred Taken 3 to Die Hard 5. I fell asleep in the theatre for the latter - was woken up when the lights came on.

    Good lord that film was bad. And for an action film, it commited the ultimate sin, it was dull. I could only imagine the level of hatred that Bruce must have for the series.

    Die Hard is on tv, which one? Oh, it's Die Hard 5...

    giphy.gif

    Is that Octobenny?
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded Riding a white swan to Matera
    Posts: 12,377
    The only way they could shake it up again is if Liam gets taken BY his daughter.
    =))

    Yes it's too bad as I love Liam kicking ass and enjoyed the first one a lot.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded Riding a white swan to Matera
    Posts: 12,377
    Interesting points about the distributor. I do think all rumors about final decisions on casting next Bond are way too soon. Looking at actors yes, but I so doubt anything is even close to complete decision on casting.

    I don't hate Jamie Bell per se; I simply don't see him as Bond. Is anybody thinking Fassbender is still a contender? I simply hope so; he is one of two choices for me that are at least more ... acceptable for me. I would still not be surprised if a different actor entirely gets the role, one not talked about yet. Mainly because I think this is still all in flux.

    AND I'm still hoping Craig does one more. I do want that more than anything.

    I wonder where the next actual news will break. I doubt if soon, but I'm just thinking of reliable sources vs. usual suspects ...
  • Posts: 8,808
    Perhaps Babs meet Jamie bell to see if this chap would be 007
    http://m.imdb.com/name/nm1497752/?ref_=m_tt_cl_i10

    I know nothing about him except he looks more like bond then Jamie Bell
  • Posts: 1,469
    I think the only thing I've seen Hiddleston in is the Thor movies. Seems to me the camera likes him, and he can act well...I think he's got the intellectual or mental aspect down. But could he be physical like Craig? I don't see that kind of "magnetism". In that regard I think of Craig, of Connery. Does anyone know if Hiddleston's done any roles calling for physicality? Strikes me if he's chosen, he'd play it kind of similar to Roger Moore, though he's not as "pretty" as Moore, and I'm sure that kind of Bond humor (from the Moore years) is long gone.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe "I need a year off" Craig
    edited May 2016 Posts: 7,316
    Imagine if EON just found a good theatre actor and offered them £250,000 to play Bond for one film. Then the budget could be cut way back, to say 150 million. I'm more of the opinion that the guy in the suit doesn't really matter. If the film he is in is good, then people will like him by association. Obviously EON should still be looking with someone with the right characteristics, but perhaps worrying whether they can carry the film its important. The film should carry them. Spend the money on writers and directors and making the film better, then you can't lose.
  • edited May 2016 Posts: 1,644
    IMDB has one of its lead news items:

    Next James Bond will not be who you expect, Sam Mendes says

    http://www.imdb.com/news/ni59885382?pf_rd_m=A2FGELUUNOQJNL&pf_rd_p=2494921022&pf_rd_r=1P82NVGCYBKKJJTJ5TAA&pf_rd_s=center-5&pf_rd_t=15061&pf_rd_i=homepage&ref_=hm_nw_uk_tp5

    I think this is coded language that Daniel Craig will not be returning? Sounds like it. Perhaps Mendes knows 100 percent for sure Daniel Craig has quit. Feels like he's saying he's not coming back for one more film.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Next James Bond will not be who you expect...
    Hasn't that always been the case? ;)
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Costa Mucho
    Posts: 42,020
    Doubt he means Idris Ebola will get it.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Doubt he means Idris Ebola will get it.
    You don't cease to amaze me, Thunderfinger!! =))
  • edited May 2016 Posts: 1,644
    I think Mendes comments could be hugely significant! It means the search is on for a new guy and it could be anyone, yep, even that bloke off Hollyoaks or Holby City! \:D/

    We need to watch lots of tv dramas and obscure British films that no-one pays to see cos they're so boring just in case the new Bond actor is appearing!

    Here's a contender:

    Sam Claflin

    http://cdn.fansided.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/319/files/2015/04/Sam-Claflin-CelebHealthy_com-SW-Rogue-One.jpg

    British, age 30, appearing in films like The Hunger Games. Actors like that might appeal to B Broccoli, perhaps.

  • Posts: 6,601
    I pretty much take Mendes words as a sign, he is not returning.
    But is all the "next unexpected guy" valid, because in the deadline article, for example, I didn't read THAT.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 6,156
    I wonder if any screen-test have been done. Have any of the previous Bonds been cast without one?
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Public should never... Ever... choose Bond... Ever...

    Because, they'll choose someone really really inappropriate for the role, without even understanding the character.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 35,205
    Public should never... Ever... choose Bond... Ever...

    Because, they'll choose someone really really inappropriate for the role, without even understanding the character.

    This. It'd be an awful idea.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Public should never... Ever... choose Bond... Ever...

    Because, they'll choose someone really really inappropriate for the role, without even understanding the character.

    This. It'd be an awful idea.

    Maybe Mendes's comments are referring to his assumption that the public is expecting Elba? Which of course we are not.
Sign In or Register to comment.