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
Also, at least to me, he looks too soft and effete, almost child like. Nothing potentially menacing.
You haven't watched Peaky Blinders then.
I raised a point before that he looks a bit like Ben's Q as well. Even though he is a phenomenal actor.
Then we have Daniel Craig who was too short, too blonde, too thuggish, too wimpy, too everything. Yet CR gave us all a good idea of how his audition must have looked.
I'm not sold on Aiden Turner (but I'm happy to be proven wrong if and when the time comes). But, now that Craig has proven that we can accept an actor who doesn't tick the boxes of the traditional 'tall, dark and handsome' Bond then maybe the next 007 will be an actor who will shock and surprise us. And for the record I'm not suggesting changing Bond's gender, colour or Nationality.
Just give us someone with an interesting face and a bit of charisma and personality.
But an actor who is just over .5’7”?
He's twenty feet on a cinema screen, it doesn't matter.
So should Peter Dinklage be screentested?
What’s your minimal height for Bond? 5’5? 4’11?
How tall a person is on a projected image is irrelevant.
Yes that's exactly what I'm saying.
Well alright then ...
Too short then. Bond should not be below average or unexceptional in any respect.
A short actor can’t carry the ‘brand’ on the red carpet, even if it can be ‘disguised’ on film.
To not see this is ... shortsighted, so to speak.
I can't imagine caring about this. Can a bald actor 'carry the brand' on the red carpet?
My point exactly.
Yes that's exactly what I'm saying, obviously. You can see it in all of those sentences I didn't type 8-|
Oh, I see what you’re typing, I just can’t believe that you’re this delusional and completely detached from reality.
I assume you are referring to Connery. He got away with it in later years, but wore a wig at first. But being bald isn’t the same as being short. Look at Jason Stratham. However, he’s hardly comparable with a Peter Dinklage.
There is no hiding a small actor next to Bond women who tower over him. Bond is supposed to be a man that all women fancy and who all men want to be.
“I want a short man” said no women ever. “I want to be short”, said no man ever.
Why are models generally tall. The answer is the same for the Bond actor. It’s considered more attractive and physically superior. Like Bond.
Cubby first of all had a thing about tall people. Bond had to be tall. Fleming also had Bond at 6ft. I do wonder why?
So a Bond as tall as Nick Nick is acceptable using this rule. Mental. Positively Mental.
At 5ft 10in, Craig is on the very border of acceptability.
Great, thanks.
I didn't say he was: you did. Just then.
But it's good to know that you don't have to look exactly like James Bond in real life to play him on the screen, thanks for confirming that. Yes, we agree.
I'm sure Statham has lost exactly as many roles because he's too short that Connery lost because he was too bald.
It's very odd to see you two getting excited by an argument that you've invented yourselves. The 'rule' being that there's no minimum height for Bond, presumably.
You suggested that being bald was comparable to being being short? But they aren’t. Being bald is purely ‘looks’. Being short is both negative in terms of looks and physicality (and presence). And having no minimum size for Bond means a midget could be cast. It’s laughable really, but thank you for the entertainment.
Ideally Bond should be tall, handsome and have good hair. That’s the point of the character.....he’s better than most.
“I want a short man” said no women ever. “I want to be short”, said no man ever.
Why are models generally tall. The answer is the same for the Bond actor. It’s considered more attractive and physically superior. Like Bond.
They're both looks-based. It's what you are judging someone on right now: their looks. If you're telling me Statham has no physicality or presence... I don't know what to say.
He's not the world's greatest actor but he gets by on his physicality and presence.
Yes I expect so. Again you're arguing with yourself there though, because nobody has said that no minimum size should happen, apart from yourself and the other one.
Yeah, you resort to this one a lot; it's a bit tired. I don't think I'll bother reading any more.
I think the idea that Bond is somehow different to all other fictional characters in that no aspect of his appearance can change is the puzzling one. How is it other characters manage to survive the process of being cast? Is it that we think no script is written with a physical type imagined by the scriptwriter, which then gets altered slightly by the casting agent? Are all of Statham's roles (as we're using him as an example) written with "must be balding and 5'8" " written in the character description? Of course not. Batman, Iron Man, Sherlock Holmes, Robin Hood etc. can all survive having actors who aren't exact doubles of the original physical description of the character (and some of them even played by actors under 5'9"! Shock horror!) but Bond can't?
Bond is the one special character out of all of the many millions, and out of the dozens of really iconic ones? I don't think so. And yet somehow he survived being first played in movies by a guy who couldn't do the accent and didn't have enough hair, and most certainly didn't look like Hoagy Carmichael.
But this will fall on deaf ears. It'll just be 'he can't do the accent' and 'he's not tall enough' until the end of time.
I am saying Stratham is bald but has height and presence and he’s a guy women fancy.
If he was short, he wouldn’t be the star he is. He’s average height, it’s not an issue.
Shortness is a weakness Bond should not have.
Ha ha ha.
It constantly happens and discussions always boil down to the exact same ad hominem, antagonistic nonsense, perpetrated usually by the same few gatekeeper members. This thread needs to be put out of it's misery.