Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1107210731075107710781193

Comments

  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 1,368
    talos7 wrote: »
    Clean slate…

    Much Agreed!
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,882
    Despite there being a connected character, that goes from NTTD all the way back to DN?
    I hope this simple timeline isn’t broken.
    Either a return of Fiennes or Whishaw would be fine. Both if the wanted too.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,551
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Craig's supporting cast was great, but to recast any of them in the next film undercuts the idea of Bond's death makes a clean break with the past. Talk about a confusing timeline.

    Surely no more confusing than bringing Judy Dench back for CR.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited May 2023 Posts: 2,928
    Yes, I remember the bafflement in a few quarters back in the 00s before it became accepted that it was the same actress playing a different M. Hopefully, people would get it from the start if they did it again with Fiennes, though. Er, he says, maybe a bit too optimistically...
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,034
    Sitting in a theater with a friend watching FYEO, when Sir Frederick Gray appeared at MI6 he commented "they get a new M every film."

    I had to explain. Audiences may have some incorrect notions or confusion, but they pretty much accept all these things.

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,474
    Not at all related to the conversation but this made me think of when I was standing in line for the midnight premiere of SF and this older woman and her husband in front of us were both absolutely, positively convinced that Judi Dench had passed away and I couldn't seem to convince her otherwise.
  • edited May 2023 Posts: 2,901
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Craig's supporting cast was great, but to recast any of them in the next film undercuts the idea of Bond's death makes a clean break with the past. Talk about a confusing timeline.

    True, but tradition does tend to happen with cinematic Bond.

    There's definitely a precedent for old cast members returning. But I don't think it'll happen in this instance. The only MI6 regular from Craig's series whose portrayal of their character is 'iconic'/distinctly recognisable (in much the same way Dench's take on M became) is Wishaw's Q, and it doesn't seem like he's up for returning.

    Fienne's M I just don't think has that same amount of audience endearment. It might be because his M was never quite as warm or authoritative as Lee or Dench's M, or perhaps it's because Fiennes, known for playing villains or morally ambiguous types, just doesn't inspire that same sense of trustworthiness. Simply put I don't think the new Bond era would benefit from such a familiar face in the same way the Craig era benefited from Dench reprising the role of M. Or from Llewelyn reprising his role as Q in the old series. It's nothing against Fiennes, he's a great actor, and I'd say the same for Kinnear's Tanner incidentally, and even Harris' Moneypenny (although I'd be up for her returning in a different role perhaps). I just don't think his presence will add anything of substance to Bond 26, and at worst might, insofar as the average viewer cares, remind audiences of the Craig era (and one of the weaker elements of it no doubt).

    For better or for worse, I think they'll want to start afresh, with any 'familiar' Bondian elements coming from the substance of the story.
  • Posts: 14,831
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Craig's supporting cast was great, but to recast any of them in the next film undercuts the idea of Bond's death makes a clean break with the past. Talk about a confusing timeline.

    Surely no more confusing than bringing Judy Dench back for CR.

    Exactly.

    People will get confused no matter what. When Batman Begins was released, I was appalled to see the number of people on forums thinking it was a prequel to Burton's Batman. After seeing the movie, mind you.

    A lot of viewers have misconceptions about Bond anyway: they think he lives on 221B Baker Street, steals from the rich to give to the poor and has drawn Excalibur from the stone. I'm exaggerating, but barely.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,980
    There is no right or wrong when it comes to bringing back an actor, or actors from previous incarnations; it’s a matter of preference. My preference in this case is a clean slate. More than what had been done previously, Craig’s era is truly its own self contained universe which had a definitive conclusion. While bringing back Dench worked I don’t wan to see it repeated. The next incarnation needs to stand on its own legs and have its own identity. If done correctly, the new actors cast as iconic characters will be embraced by the audience.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited May 2023 Posts: 2,928
    talos7 wrote: »
    If done correctly, the new actors cast as iconic characters will be embraced by the audience.
    Yes, they will. Plenty of us will remember the stir of protest when Whishaw was cast - the most extreme example of it was someone over on AJB who was absolutely outraged that 'this child', as they put it, was playing Q (until it was pointed out that Ben was the same age in SF that Connery had been in Dr. No!). Compare that to how genuinely well-liked Whishaw's version of Q is now. So, yes, the next incumbents will hopefully be embraced in their turn.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,980
    I've never seen Bridgerton or heard of this actor, Corey Mylchreest, but I came across this interview and have to say that, in an interview he impressive; he has a great voice and conducts himself well. He also has a strong "Conneryesque" brow game going on. Lol. Is anyone familiar with his work?

  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,882


    I’m going to throw Tom Hughes name back into the ring.
    37 years old, very gifted and intense actor.
  • Posts: 3,279
    Benny wrote: »


    I’m going to throw Tom Hughes name back into the ring.
    37 years old, very gifted and intense actor.

    Not bad. Decent hair. A little bit on the effeminate side, particularly with his facial features (small nose), but I need to see him act to really pass judgement.
  • zebrafishzebrafish <°)))< in Octopussy's garden in the shade
    edited May 2023 Posts: 4,312
    talos7 wrote: »
    I've never seen Bridgerton or heard of this actor, Corey Mylchreest, but I came across this interview and have to say that, in an interview he impressive; he has a great voice and conducts himself well. He also has a strong "Conneryesque" brow game going on. Lol. Is anyone familiar with his work?

    I have started to watch Queen Charlotte and thought Corey Milcreest's looks and voice are quite Bondian, but so far I am not convinced by his acting abilities. More importantly, he does NOT own the room.

  • Posts: 2,901
    Benny wrote: »


    I’m going to throw Tom Hughes name back into the ring.
    37 years old, very gifted and intense actor.

    Not bad. Decent hair. A little bit on the effeminate side, particularly with his facial features (small nose), but I need to see him act to really pass judgement.

    He was pretty good in The Game which was a BBC spy drama from 2014 I believe. He plays a young and rather cynical MI5 agent. So not a million miles away from Fleming’s Bond, especially in terms of demeanour (although his character is much more morally ambiguous). Reminded me a lot of Timothy Dalton’s Bond in places actually.

    I think he’s an interesting actor and could be a very different Bond to Craig’s.
  • Posts: 14,831
    talos7 wrote: »
    I've never seen Bridgerton or heard of this actor, Corey Mylchreest, but I came across this interview and have to say that, in an interview he impressive; he has a great voice and conducts himself well. He also has a strong "Conneryesque" brow game going on. Lol. Is anyone familiar with his work?


    Good face, good natural voice, just low and raspy enough.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 726
    He’s good looking and everything, but he’s only done 3 projects. I think Eon won’t pick someone with so little experience for Bond (but what do I know - back in the day they hired the inexperienced Lazenby after all).
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,980
    He’s good looking and everything, but he’s only done 3 projects. I think Eon won’t pick someone with so little experience for Bond (but what do I know - back in the day they hired the inexperienced Lazenby after all).

    Laz wasn’t an actor. I find it interesting that many’ people want an “ unknown “ but dismiss some suggestions because of a lack of experience. I understand that there is a happy medium.
  • edited May 2023 Posts: 2,901
    I think the truth is if someone with Lazenby's looks/lack of experience/offscreen demeanour were to audition for Bond today he almost certainly wouldn't get the part. Whether that's a good or bad thing is up for debate. Personally, I'd say it's a good thing.

    That said I think an actor with only 3 projects could come under EON's radar, but it really depends on the candidate. I do think the standard of acting talent required has gone up since Craig though, and they clearly have their own criteria for what they want in these candidates.
  • Posts: 6,677
    Daniel Craig set an unrepeatable standart, an interesting paradox, I’d say. There is simply no actor n hos 20s or 30s, nowdays, with that level of charisma and experience. He steals the room, as someone else put it. Who else has that feline, animalistic, panther like presence? Cilian Murphy? Too old. There is no one. That’s why we don’t like any of the so called candidates, and we’ll probably never will. That kind of a thespian simply does not exist in today’s showbizz world. The age of stars is gone. There are no world leaders, there are no idols, there are no stars. We live in a global sterilised world where anyone can be everything but no one is something. No one is someone. Even the word “self” has gone out of fashion. Superman is dead. Man is dead.

    Sorry for the niilism, but these are the times we live in. Can James Bond exist now? I don’t know. I really don’t know. But I have hope. In Bond. In people. In the world.
  • Posts: 2,901
    Univex wrote: »
    Daniel Craig set an unrepeatable standart, an interesting paradox, I’d say. There is simply no actor n hos 20s or 30s, nowdays, with that level of charisma and experience. He steals the room, as someone else put it. Who else has that feline, animalistic, panther like presence? Cilian Murphy? Too old. There is no one. That’s why we don’t like any of the so called candidates, and we’ll probably never will. That kind of a thespian simply does not exist in today’s showbizz world. The age of stars is gone. There are no world leaders, there are no idols, there are no stars. We live in a global sterilised world where anyone can be everything but no one is something. No one is someone. Even the word “self” has gone out of fashion. Superman is dead. Man is dead.

    Sorry for the niilism, but these are the times we live in. Can James Bond exist now? I don’t know. I really don’t know. But I have hope. In Bond. In people. In the world.

    No one is born as the heir to James Bond. It's a pool of potential choices they have to choose from. I doubt unless one was looking one would have thought Sean Connery or Daniel Craig possessed such potential for the role. Or indeed star power.

    For what it's worth I'm not a producer and don't claim to see such potential myself, but I'd argue there are many actors who could play the role, have that star power, and would do a great job. They just need to be found.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 726
    talos7 wrote: »
    He’s good looking and everything, but he’s only done 3 projects. I think Eon won’t pick someone with so little experience for Bond (but what do I know - back in the day they hired the inexperienced Lazenby after all).

    Laz wasn’t an actor. I find it interesting that many’ people want an “ unknown “ but dismiss some suggestions because of a lack of experience. I understand that there is a happy medium.
    Don’t get me wrong, I’m not someone who thinks it will be a virtual unknown actor, but I don’t blame anyone for putting forward a new name because they like their look or the way they come across in an interview. I like Fabien Frankel from his interviews for House of the Dragon, but he’s not very experienced (or, frankly, a big screen presence in that show). That didn’t stop me from bringing him up in this thread though, despite thinking he’d have to give not just a good audition, but a spectacularly show-stopping audition to get to be seriously considered as a final candidate.

    I think they are going to be hoping for an actor that is already respected in the acting community that other top actors will be eager to work with. I’m sure they’ll cast their net wide just in case, but I’m guessing they’ll go for someone relatively well-known to the acting community, if not the public in general.

    I’m by no means trying to discourage people from throwing in new names, though. When I say I think actor x won’t get it because of x, y, or z I’m just making conversation.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,980
    Univex wrote: »
    Daniel Craig set an unrepeatable standart, an interesting paradox, I’d say. There is simply no actor n hos 20s or 30s, nowdays, with that level of charisma and experience. He steals the room, as someone else put it. Who else has that feline, animalistic, panther like presence? Cilian Murphy? Too old. There is no one. That’s why we don’t like any of the so called candidates, and we’ll probably never will. That kind of a thespian simply does not exist in today’s showbizz world. The age of stars is gone. There are no world leaders, there are no idols, there are no stars. We live in a global sterilised world where anyone can be everything but no one is something. No one is someone. Even the word “self” has gone out of fashion. Superman is dead. Man is dead.

    Sorry for the niilism, but these are the times we live in. Can James Bond exist now? I don’t know. I really don’t know. But I have hope. In Bond. In people. In the world.

    It’s interesting that you mention Superman; prior to being cast, Christopher Reeve had only four credits to his name , three were television programs.
  • Posts: 6,677
    talos7 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Daniel Craig set an unrepeatable standart, an interesting paradox, I’d say. There is simply no actor n hos 20s or 30s, nowdays, with that level of charisma and experience. He steals the room, as someone else put it. Who else has that feline, animalistic, panther like presence? Cilian Murphy? Too old. There is no one. That’s why we don’t like any of the so called candidates, and we’ll probably never will. That kind of a thespian simply does not exist in today’s showbizz world. The age of stars is gone. There are no world leaders, there are no idols, there are no stars. We live in a global sterilised world where anyone can be everything but no one is something. No one is someone. Even the word “self” has gone out of fashion. Superman is dead. Man is dead.

    Sorry for the niilism, but these are the times we live in. Can James Bond exist now? I don’t know. I really don’t know. But I have hope. In Bond. In people. In the world.

    It’s interesting that you mention Superman; prior to being cast, Christopher Reeve had only four credits to his name , three were television programs.

    I meant somewhat of a Nietzsche’s superman, but yes, I believe CR was fairly unknown. But he had the charisma and presence. A savoir etre that no one seems to have nowadays, IMO.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 726
    Univex wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Daniel Craig set an unrepeatable standart, an interesting paradox, I’d say. There is simply no actor n hos 20s or 30s, nowdays, with that level of charisma and experience. He steals the room, as someone else put it. Who else has that feline, animalistic, panther like presence? Cilian Murphy? Too old. There is no one. That’s why we don’t like any of the so called candidates, and we’ll probably never will. That kind of a thespian simply does not exist in today’s showbizz world. The age of stars is gone. There are no world leaders, there are no idols, there are no stars. We live in a global sterilised world where anyone can be everything but no one is something. No one is someone. Even the word “self” has gone out of fashion. Superman is dead. Man is dead.

    Sorry for the niilism, but these are the times we live in. Can James Bond exist now? I don’t know. I really don’t know. But I have hope. In Bond. In people. In the world.

    It’s interesting that you mention Superman; prior to being cast, Christopher Reeve had only four credits to his name , three were television programs.

    I meant somewhat of a Nietzsche’s superman, but yes, I believe CR was fairly unknown. But he had the charisma and presence. A savoir etre that no one seems to have nowadays, IMO.

    He was also third billed until Superman III. I think Brando and Hackman were the big names to pull the public in. They could do something similar for Bond, I guess.
  • zebrafishzebrafish <°)))< in Octopussy's garden in the shade
    Posts: 4,312
    Corey Mylchreest is not a top-tier actor in my view. Check him out in Queen Charlotte, he has the looks and voice, but no personality.

    And anyway: Corey Mylchreest is Bond, James Bond? Good luck with global marketing that name.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited May 2023 Posts: 2,928
    Univex wrote: »
    Daniel Craig set an unrepeatable standard, an interesting paradox, I’d say. There is simply no actor n hos 20s or 30s, nowadays, with that level of charisma and experience. He steals the room, as someone else put it.
    Indeed. Barbara Broccoli said that when Craig was cast, she already considered him the best actor of his generation. I'd agree with her. The only other Brits of a similar age that I can think of who even approached Dan's acting ability back then were (maybe) Jason Isaacs, slightly earlier, and (definitely) Kevin McKidd, slightly later. But Dan was better than either. This is why, whoever we get next, I've already mentally ruled out any hope that they'll match Craig for actual acting ability. Because they almost certainly won't. Which doesn't mean that they'd actually need to - but that's a different point.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,980
    I don’t believe that the next Bond will be an unknown or a very established actor, a star. I do think he will have a slightly higher profile than Craig did when cast. Nicholas Hoult was in the running for Batman; he and Pattinson have a similar level of accomplishment and fame. I would not be surprised to see him in the running.
  • Posts: 14,831
    talos7 wrote: »
    He’s good looking and everything, but he’s only done 3 projects. I think Eon won’t pick someone with so little experience for Bond (but what do I know - back in the day they hired the inexperienced Lazenby after all).

    Laz wasn’t an actor. I find it interesting that many’ people want an “ unknown “ but dismiss some suggestions because of a lack of experience. I understand that there is a happy medium.

    By the time they do the casting he might have had more projects under his belt. Beside his filmography doesn't say everything. Did he do stage work? Not the same medium but still.

    On a side note how many actors from Bridgerton gave been mentioned as Bond so far, here or elsewhere?
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,513
    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-12076209/amp/Aaron-Taylor-Johnson-tipped-James-Bond-replace-Daniel-Craig.html

    I'm not sold on ATJ, he's not a bad choice by any means and they could do a lot worse. I don't know what it is about him, he just doesn't seem very cool or particularly like an alpha.

    I'm sure if he was cast he'd be a decent Bond, but I don't think there's anything about him that stands out if that makes sense.
Sign In or Register to comment.