Who should/could be a Bond actor?

19989991001100310041037

Comments

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 21,994
    I see nothing of Dalton in Turner to be honest. I wish I did. I'd love a return to the Dalton Bond.
  • Posts: 14,103
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    Agree with @DarthDimi ... If I thought Aidan Turner was Bond material, seen through my eyes, I'd state it, and not hide my feelings about him.

    Unfortunately I too find him bland and stagey and I don't want to see that in Bond.

    No harm, no foul.

    Glad I'm not the only one, @peter. I don't dislike Turner, I have nothing against him, but people can repeat his name as often as they want to, I don't see him as Bond and quite surely never will.

    Count me in as well @DarthDimi . I actually suggested him as a potential Bond after seeing ATTWN. I thought he looked the part, if a tad youthful looking. Then I checked his acting with more attention and... well, he struck me as bland. Brosnan without the charisma or the coolness.
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    Posts: 1,229
    Oh well, still miles ahead of the rest. Shame on EoN for postponing years and years and years. I don't care what anyone says. The best years of Bond are way behind us anyway.

    FY3ouAKXoAAOH7y.jpg
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 6,915
    I have to say, that picture is very convincing.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 21,994
    Oh well, still miles ahead of the rest. Shame on EoN for postponing years and years and years. I don't care what anyone says. The best years of Bond are way behind us anyway.

    FY3ouAKXoAAOH7y.jpg

    You're going to places I cannot go. That look may suit a perfume TV commercial, but it takes more than a pretty face to nail Bond in my humble opinion. We can think of hundreds of good-looking men, but I hope we are not reducing our hopes for the next Bond to mere sex-appeal.
  • edited December 2022 Posts: 724
    My problem with Turner, outside of his age considering he's already 40, is that his last really impacting role was seven years ago with And Then There Were None. If Craig resigned after Spectre, I think he would have directly been the strongest contender to win the role, with a profil similar to Lewis Collins in a way. Now, seven years passed and he didn't seem to make much an impression on the big or the small screen. He may be the star of some TV shows, but they don't seem to be much talked about.
  • Posts: 5,868
    We've been talking about him over and over, and the thing is, he looks like what Bond should look like and acts vaguely well. But the truth is, discussing his future casting is a moot conversation, because they are not going to hire a 40 year old. In the old days, he'd be ripe. But now, with production on these mammoths taking so long, they will, for sure, hire a younger actor, with some sort of recognition factor and acting background.

    Aaron Taylor-Johnson, for example, is 32, he has done theatre (Macbeth), studied drama, tap, jazz, acrobatics, and singing, been in Marvel flicks, as well as indies, and a Nolan film, no less. He has won 4 awards and was nominated for 15. He has a good relationship with his costars and everyone has good things to say about him, apparently.

    I could now write about Nicholas Hoult, who is also 32, has also won awards, was nominated for a BAFTA and an Emmy, and is well known.

    I'd also be on board with Jack O'Connell, also 32 (what is it with all these 32 year old?), for his presence and acting abilities. He's won 11 awards and was nominated for 21. And he's on good terms with the producers.

    Theo James is 37, he has a good voice and presence and I believe he can act, moderately.

    All of these are more likely than Turner. But these 5 are the best candidates for me. Solid choices. I'd throw in Richard Madden, who's 36. I know him and Connell are a bit short, and Connell wins on his acting chops alone, but they are solid contenders as well, IMO.

    So, for me, I'd say ATJ, NH, JOC, TJ and RM are the ones we know of that could very well play the character to my own personal liking, and with the respect the intelectual source material deserves.

    Right now, I'm rooting for Aaron Taylor-Johnson. I really liked him in Bullitt Train, albeit a poor, but fun film. Just have him lower his voice a notch. Or two.
  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 560
    Boss post that @Univex
  • edited December 2022 Posts: 136
    It's funny, people don't want Bond to be too young, because he should be manly and experienced and not boyish at all. But they also don't want him too geriatric, since he's supposed to be jumping from planes and getting women. An ageing Bond can be interesting for one film, but nobody wants that for multiple films. And Craig was an ageing Bond starting in his third film (which may answer the person's question as to why people started looking for a new Bond half way through Craig's tenure). People don't want a boy or an old man.

    I think what people want, which is a certain actor to do numerous films, but also for the actor to never be too young or too old for the role, is just not feasible at all if they are only going to be making films every 5 years. The actor starting out at age 35 versus 40 is not going to make much of a difference. It's just basic math. They'll have to either start making films much more regularly or just have an actor for about 3 films. Though it could also help to get an actor who seems like he will age well.

    The one good thing about most of these current actors who are much more boyish and less rugged is that they should at least age well. Look at Connery, Moore, and Craig. Their ruggedness was perfect at the beginning, but they looked too old just 10 years after their first movies. And Dalton was also looking much older and going bald in 1997 (if he had stayed on).

    Say what you want about Aidan Turner, but do you guys really think he's going to look like a frumpy grandpa when he's in his 50s? Of course not. I think he'll probably look even better at age 50 then he does at 40. I'm not saying Turner is perfect for the role, but him and a lot of these more youthful looking actors we have now are not going to look anywhere close to as old as Moore did in the 80s. At least I can't see it. People just look younger these days.

    I think we might be taking the age requirement thing too seriously. The poster right before me actually said that Turner at 39 was too old, but 37 year old Theo James would be fine... Also, was it ever confirmed that they are only looking at actors who will be in their 30s? I know there was an article, but I thought it was to be taken with a grain of salt.

    Edit: Also, would it really be that bad of a thing if the next actor only did 3 films? What's wrong with a trilogy? Most superhero actors don't do more than 3 movies it seems. We could have an actor do films around age 40, 45, and 50. And just skip films where he's just starting out or at the very end of his career. Make all 3 prime-career Bond.
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    edited December 2022 Posts: 1,229
    It's funny, people don't want Bond to be too young, because he should be manly and experienced and not boyish at all. But they also don't want him too geriatric, since he's supposed to be jumping from planes and getting women. An ageing Bond can be interesting for one film, but nobody wants that for multiple films. And Craig was an ageing Bond starting in his third film (which may answer the person's question as to why people started looking for a new Bond half way through Craig's tenure). People don't want a boy or an old man.

    I think what people want, which is a certain actor to do numerous films, but also for the actor to never be too young or too old for the role, is just not feasible at all if they are only going to be making films every 5 years. The actor starting out at age 35 versus 40 is not going to make much of a difference. It's just basic math. They'll have to either start making films much more regularly or just have an actor for about 3 films. Though it could also help to get an actor who seems like he will age well.

    The one good thing about most of these current actors who are much more boyish and less rugged is that they should at least age well. Look at Connery, Moore, and Craig. Their ruggedness was perfect at the beginning, but they looked too old just 10 years after their first movies. And Dalton was also looking much older and going bald in 1997 (if he had stayed on).

    Say what you want about Aidan Turner, but do you guys really think he's going to look like a frumpy grandpa when he's in his 50s? Of course not. I think he'll probably look even better at age 50 then he does at 40. I'm not saying Turner is perfect for the role, but him and a lot of these more youthful looking actors we have now are not going to look anywhere close to as old as Moore did in the 80s. At least I can't see it.

    I think we might be taking the age requirement thing too seriously. The poster right before me actually said that Turner at 39 was too old, but 37 year old Theo James would be fine... Also, was it ever confirmed that they are only looking at actors who will be in their 30s? I know there was an article, but I thought it was to be taken with a grain of salt.

    Edit: Also, would it really be that bad of a thing if the next actor only did 3 films? What's wrong with a trilogy? Most superhero actors don't do more than 3 movies it seems. We could have an actor do films around age 40, 45, and 50. And just skip films where he's just starting out or at the very end of his career. Make all 3 prime-career Bond.

    A very good post with solid points throughout. Cannot agree more actually. This time I'm not in agreement with @Univex but hey, time does pass and things change.

    A trilogy would be great, fitting for Turner. Funny thing is, Sope Dirisu a lot of members are fawning over looks very old to me yet he's around 30. Age is subjective, both looks wise as well as physically. It's daft in this day and age, look at Pitt in Bullet Train, nearly 60, looking great and standing his own beating up guys 25 years younger. Tom Cruise anyone?

    Stop the ageism.
  • Posts: 5,868
    You got me wrong, @JeremyBondon, my friend. My post was intended to be a logic one, not a wishful one. If I had my wish, it would be Turner playing Bond, for sure. But logic dictates they are looking for a younger actor for their reinvention. Am I in agreement with them? No, not at all. I'd have Cillian Murphy for a trilogy. Or our man Turner. But the times they are a changing. What can we do but hope for the best? And those options I've listed, are, IMO, the best we can hope for.
  • edited December 2022 Posts: 1,268
    I do think most of these 'strict' requirements such as height and age always have a bit of leeway dependent on the candidate. I'm sure if an actor aged 40 or a bit older auditioned this time round and was exactly what they were looking for they'd go with them. And why not? That'd still realistically give this actor 10 years as Bond, perhaps a bit more. That's three or four films potentially. Even if the next Bond were in their early 30s they'd likely only play the role for this long anyway.

    So no, I don't think Turner's age rules him out at all. Still, I doubt he'll even get an audition. He's already said rather openly he doesn't want the role, and I think there are more interesting candidates anyway.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,135
    007HallY wrote: »
    LucknFate wrote: »
    Here's a what-if: What if the Aaron Taylor-Johnson story is an intentional story plant by the studio to test the waters of casting him, before they ever sign any deal? Could you blame them for wondering how he'd go over?

    I do feel like Turner and some others are worthy of a screen test. Apparently ATJ can work a room, but who works on screen?

    I'm not sure if even EON go to those lengths to test the waters. It really wouldn't tell them anything anyway because it doesn't matter what the public thinks about the actor before they appear/are seen onscreen. The real test is how they are received when the film comes out.

    Exactly. EoN have always marched to the beat of their own drum. Had they listened to the public and media previously, Craig would have "dropped out" prior to the cameras rolling for CR.
  • Posts: 14,103
    doubleoego wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    LucknFate wrote: »
    Here's a what-if: What if the Aaron Taylor-Johnson story is an intentional story plant by the studio to test the waters of casting him, before they ever sign any deal? Could you blame them for wondering how he'd go over?

    I do feel like Turner and some others are worthy of a screen test. Apparently ATJ can work a room, but who works on screen?

    I'm not sure if even EON go to those lengths to test the waters. It really wouldn't tell them anything anyway because it doesn't matter what the public thinks about the actor before they appear/are seen onscreen. The real test is how they are received when the film comes out.

    Exactly. EoN have always marched to the beat of their own drum. Had they listened to the public and media previously, Craig would have "dropped out" prior to the cameras rolling for CR.

    And Jude Law would have been cast as Bond. Or Robbie Williams.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,135
    talos7 wrote: »
    As with several of the other “ candidates “, Doherty would benefit from a bit of quality weight and a bit of weathering.

    Maybe, but I’d say he has a much better frame for said weathering than some other candidates, and some photos posted previously show that he’s more than built enough.

    If I recall he was pretty rugged and in great shape in TENET.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 6,915
    doubleoego wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    As with several of the other “ candidates “, Doherty would benefit from a bit of quality weight and a bit of weathering.

    Maybe, but I’d say he has a much better frame for said weathering than some other candidates, and some photos posted previously show that he’s more than built enough.

    If I recall he was pretty rugged and in great shape in TENET.

    Thomas Doherty?
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,135
    Ludovico wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    LucknFate wrote: »
    Here's a what-if: What if the Aaron Taylor-Johnson story is an intentional story plant by the studio to test the waters of casting him, before they ever sign any deal? Could you blame them for wondering how he'd go over?

    I do feel like Turner and some others are worthy of a screen test. Apparently ATJ can work a room, but who works on screen?

    I'm not sure if even EON go to those lengths to test the waters. It really wouldn't tell them anything anyway because it doesn't matter what the public thinks about the actor before they appear/are seen onscreen. The real test is how they are received when the film comes out.

    Exactly. EoN have always marched to the beat of their own drum. Had they listened to the public and media previously, Craig would have "dropped out" prior to the cameras rolling for CR.

    And Jude Law would have been cast as Bond. Or Robbie Williams.

    Lol exactly.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,135
    talos7 wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    As with several of the other “ candidates “, Doherty would benefit from a bit of quality weight and a bit of weathering.

    Maybe, but I’d say he has a much better frame for said weathering than some other candidates, and some photos posted previously show that he’s more than built enough.

    If I recall he was pretty rugged and in great shape in TENET.

    Thomas Doherty?

    Sorry, I must have misread the post. I was talking about ATJ.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 1,852
    If the ideal candidate was 40, they wouldn't go with a worse option who was, say, 37, would they? Shot. Foot.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2022 Posts: 12,067
    Craig was really too old for the character as written in CR, but that didn't stop them.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    edited December 2022 Posts: 45,487
    Wrong thread.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 21,994
    mtm wrote: »
    Craig was really too old for the character as written in CR, but that didn't stop them.

    Was he? I got the impression that he had already had a military career prior to moving on to mi6, so 30-something struck me as appropriate. Or am I wrong?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 38,239
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Craig was really too old for the character as written in CR, but that didn't stop them.

    Was he? I got the impression that he had already had a military career prior to moving on to mi6, so 30-something struck me as appropriate. Or am I wrong?

    That's the vibe I had too. He's clearly established as a Commander later on so his prior military service seemed confirmed without having to show it. Mid-to-late 30s at the time of filming of CR seems reasonable.
  • edited December 2022 Posts: 1,268
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Craig was really too old for the character as written in CR, but that didn't stop them.

    Was he? I got the impression that he had already had a military career prior to moving on to mi6, so 30-something struck me as appropriate. Or am I wrong?

    I think the main reason why some people say Craig was too old for the version of the character in CR is because Bond is portrayed as more of a loose cannon. He did stuff like break into M's flat in order to gain information, disobey orders etc. We'd sort of seen it before in the series in LTK and DAD granted, but not quite to this extent. In a way Bond having that 'ends justifies the means' mentality and approach to his work is more akin to Jack Bauer than Fleming's 'blunt instrument' of a secret agent. His Bond in that film has an arrogant streak and even makes a quip about only sleeping with married women. Again, not out of the ordinary for the character but it ones up what we've seen in the past. It's natural to think that sort of personality would be that of a younger rookie than a seasoned professional.

    For what it's worth I never saw it like that. To do all those things Bond really needed a lot of life experience, both personal and professional. The implication is that 00 agents are already seasoned agents of some sort anyway with little life outside of their work, and that 'loose cannon' element of Craig Bond's personality is always there throughout his five films. It's not like that version of Bond was the one from earlier drafts of CR who had never worn a tuxedo and was fresh out of the SAS. So yeah, I always saw Craig's age as appropriate (mid to late 30s, which I guess is what Fleming's Bond was anyway in that first novel).
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 12,067
    I think they wrote around it to suit Craig: the dossier on the website would certainly only have been created after he was cast.
    The whole film was about a youngish Bond, that was the point of it. And they tested Cavill for it too when he was 22. I think ideally they were probably after someone around 30 or early 30s.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 1,768
    It's like the height thing, don't just cast the tallest man, don't just cast the youngest man for the sake of it.
    Cast the best man for the job as always
  • edited December 2022 Posts: 1,268
    For sure. From what I can tell they were planning to go even younger in early drafts and have a Bond in his 20s (which explains Cavill, although I think they came to the conclusion he was too young somewhat ironically). I guess it was more 'Bond begins' earlier on than what we eventually got. But yes, all the other actors screen-tested seem to have been in their early 30s or so. So Craig was older and a bit of an outlier in a way. I'm not sure if they radically rewrote the script or if elements such as Bond not having worn a tuxedo were already being filtered out, but I think you're right to some extent that they wrote around Craig. Then again that's not unusual in the later rewrites and once they cast an actor...

    Still though, it does seem this time round they're a bit more conscious of Bond needing to be (or at least come across as) a bit older. Perhaps they learnt that from a combination of the CR rewrites and eventually casting Craig. Anyway, like I say it's possible we'll get an actor this time who's 40 even if they're starting from the concept of a younger Bond.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Moderator
    Posts: 13,103
    If they re-wrote it after Craig was cast, i'm curious to know what was altered. Because to me, CR feels like it was written for a younger actor, and then not changed when Craig was cast. It all feels jarring, Bond comes off as immature to have had been a former SBS operative.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 38,239
    I can't say I followed the production enough at the time (the days when I only knew what to expect thanks to a trailer) to have been privy to all that but I completely get the feelings about that. That should put my next viewing in a more revealing light.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,135
    If they re-wrote it after Craig was cast, i'm curious to know what was altered. Because to me, CR feels like it was written for a younger actor, and then not changed when Craig was cast. It all feels jarring, Bond comes off as immature to have had been a former SBS operative.

    I agree. Given his age and his career history by that point, his professional disposition and attitude seemed off and as you said immature. Someone above made a comparison to Jack Bauer which I sort of get but Bauer wasn't immature and his actions felt in line with an experienced CTU agent who had seen it all and was justified in his actions to get the job done as he was surrounded by self-serving beaurocrats and traitors...God, I miss 24.
Sign In or Register to comment.