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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
If I recall he was pretty rugged and in great shape in TENET.
Thomas Doherty?
Lol exactly.
Sorry, I must have misread the post. I was talking about ATJ.
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.
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).
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.
Cast the best man for the job as always
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.
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.