Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1122512261228123012311234

Comments

  • Posts: 4,266
    True. I would honestly say this is the worst example as well.

    Roger_Moore_650_841_64_c1.jpg

    Not quite as jarring as the others, but something about Roger Moore's early career as a sweater model just doesn't scream Bond.
  • Posts: 975
    I like that mustard colour. Not too sure what colour hair he had then haha
  • Posts: 4,266
    I like that mustard colour. Not too sure what colour hair he had then haha

    It's a very strange picture for me. Is he a red head or is he brunette? Is he 25 or 35? Is he smiling or has he just opened his mouth in the middle of speaking?
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,356
    It's a black and white photo that's been colorized. That's why it looks off.
  • SeveSeve The island of Lemoy
    edited October 30 Posts: 436
    As others have said, there have been two types of Bond, those who were well known for having played a similar style of character before becoming Bond i.e. Moore and Brosnan, and those who were relatively unknown, i.e. everyone else.

    Moore and Brosnan "auditioned" for the role by playing "International Men of Mystery" on TV. The public had given them their seal of approval by watching those shows, so the Bond producers felt they were safe bets. I think that percieved "goodwill" was a factor in the producers picking them, despite both being in their 40s

    I don't think there is an equivalent situation out there at the moment, so the producers will have to "play a hunch", "take a punt", as they did with the other actors who have been chosen for the role.

    I think anyone who has passed the age of 40 is unlikely to be selected, which rules out perenial candidates like Idris Elba, Tom Hardy, Henry Cavill and Tom Hiddleston, as well as outsiders like Ben Barnes and Jamie Dornan.

    That leaves the likes of Sam Clafin, Kit Harington, Regie-Jean Page and Nicholas Hoult

    We are currently living in a "bearded age" and many of the actors under consideration only really look the part when they have a bit of growth going, is the World ready for a bearded Bond?
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    edited October 31 Posts: 1,112
    Seve wrote: »
    As others have said, there have been two types of Bond, those who were well known for having played a similar style of character before becoming Bond i.e. Moore and Brosnan, and those who were relatively unknown, i.e. everyone else.

    Moore and Brosnan "auditioned" for the role by playing "International Men of Mystery" on TV. The public had given them their seal of approval by watching those shows, so the Bond producers felt they were safe bets. I think that percieved "goodwill" was a factor in the producers picking them, despite both being in their 40s

    I don't think there is an equivalent situation out there at the moment, so the producers will have to "play a hunch", "take a punt", as they did with the other actors who have been chosen for the role.

    I think anyone who has passed the age of 40 is unlikely to be selected, which rules out perenial candidates like Idris Elba, Tom Hardy, Henry Cavill and Tom Hiddleston, as well as outsiders like Ben Barnes and Jamie Dornan.

    That leaves the likes of Sam Clafin, Kit Harington, Regie-Jean Page and Nicholas Hoult

    We are currently living in a "bearded age" and many of the actors under consideration only really look the part when they have a bit of growth going, is the World ready for a bearded Bond?

    I think that depends on whether they choose the right actor for it. Maybe a Bond with a light stubble beard?
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    edited October 31 Posts: 13,887
    Seve wrote: »
    As others have said, there have been two types of Bond, those who were well known for having played a similar style of character before becoming Bond i.e. Moore and Brosnan, and those who were relatively unknown, i.e. everyone else.

    Moore and Brosnan "auditioned" for the role by playing "International Men of Mystery" on TV. The public had given them their seal of approval by watching those shows, so the Bond producers felt they were safe bets. I think that percieved "goodwill" was a factor in the producers picking them, despite both being in their 40s

    I don't think there is an equivalent situation out there at the moment, so the producers will have to "play a hunch", "take a punt", as they did with the other actors who have been chosen for the role.

    I think anyone who has passed the age of 40 is unlikely to be selected, which rules out perenial candidates like Idris Elba, Tom Hardy, Henry Cavill and Tom Hiddleston, as well as outsiders like Ben Barnes and Jamie Dornan.

    That leaves the likes of Sam Clafin, Kit Harington, Regie-Jean Page and Nicholas Hoult

    We are currently living in a "bearded age" and many of the actors under consideration only really look the part when they have a bit of growth going, is the World ready for a bearded Bond?

    I think that depends on whether they choose the right actor for it. Maybe a Bond with a light stubble beard?
    Early 40s Bond easily expected and received. (Today, 40 is the new 30?) The thinking is men look younger in modern times. And following Moore (older than Connery who just finished the role 1971), Dalton, and Brosnan a seasoned look is ideal and essential.

    Stubble beard, no. Or have it as a cover and shave it off early on after a mission like SF is fine.

  • Posts: 15,194
    I think we got actors cast in their 40s to play Bond for circumstances that no longer exist: you could make a Bond movie every year or two. This is no longer the case. Both Moore and Brosnan looked younger than their age, which helped
    Also, Moore was meant to be a transition Bond, if I'm not mistaken, for a shorter tenure. In any case, he was cast in a time of crisis for the franchise when they needed a more famous actor to get out of the large shadow of Connery.

    Talking of transition Bond, isn't the casting process now a bit like a conclave? The cardinal walking in as presumptive pope walks out still a cardinal. Might be the same for Bond: those the general public consider the best candidates will not get the role.
  • Posts: 1,416
    Brosnan and Moore were famous too.

    Becoming a star after the age of forty is quite unlikely.
  • edited October 31 Posts: 4,266
    I think an element of Moore's casting was that he was the right actor even despite his age. The guy was older than Connery at the time (although he definitely came off as younger) and I suspect the goal was to keep an actor in the role for as long as possible even with the two year output.

    Moore's casting was a risk in that sense. But it paid off getting an actor confident and seasoned. If this time round they wanted to lean into a slightly younger Bond I can see them going more early 30s than late 30s/early 40s. Just depends on what they want. But it's very possible an actor now could start at 42 and do ten years as Bond (so three films effectively) and still look good in their early 50s, which was effectively the case with Brosnan.
  • Posts: 1,416
    Well, TMWTGG was released just a year later. It's possible that they still thought about making movies every year.
  • Posts: 4,266
    Well, TMWTGG was released just a year later. It's possible that they still thought about making movies every year.

    No idea. Perhaps with how stripped back LALD and TMWTGG were they might have presumed a yearly cycle was possible in the short term (although by the time we get to YOLT it's two year gaps I suspect due to the scale of the films).
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 31 Posts: 16,558
    007HallY wrote: »
    I think an element of Moore's casting was that he was the right actor even despite his age. The guy was older than Connery at the time

    Indeed, he was older than Connery for his whole life! :P
    007HallY wrote: »
    Well, TMWTGG was released just a year later. It's possible that they still thought about making movies every year.

    No idea. Perhaps with how stripped back LALD and TMWTGG were they might have presumed a yearly cycle was possible in the short term (although by the time we get to YOLT it's two year gaps I suspect due to the scale of the films).

    Broccoli and Saltzman were also basically taking it turns to be lead producer on the films at that point too I think, so along with being slightly smaller productions I guess that made it possible. Personally I prefer the approach from Spy onwards: Spy is almost a reboot of the series.
  • Posts: 4,266
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    I think an element of Moore's casting was that he was the right actor even despite his age. The guy was older than Connery at the time

    Indeed, he was older than Connery for his whole life! :P

    😂
  • edited October 31 Posts: 2,169
    007HallY wrote: »
    Well, TMWTGG was released just a year later. It's possible that they still thought about making movies every year.

    No idea. Perhaps with how stripped back LALD and TMWTGG were they might have presumed a yearly cycle was possible in the short term (although by the time we get to YOLT it's two year gaps I suspect due to the scale of the films).

    Not to put on my pedantic glasses, but LALD released June 73 (USA) and TMWTGG released December 1974, so there was actually 18 months between films.

    Thunderball (Dec 1965) to YOLT (June 1967) was similarly 18 months.
  • Posts: 15,194
    Brosnan and Moore were famous too.

    Becoming a star after the age of forty is quite unlikely.

    They were famous tv actors. But I'd argue that Brosnan wasn't that famous. He was mostly known for being the actor who should have been James Bond. I know that's why between 1989 and 1995 I watched every tv miniseries and B movie he starred in I could find.
    007HallY wrote: »
    Well, TMWTGG was released just a year later. It's possible that they still thought about making movies every year.

    No idea. Perhaps with how stripped back LALD and TMWTGG were they might have presumed a yearly cycle was possible in the short term (although by the time we get to YOLT it's two year gaps I suspect due to the scale of the films).

    From what I understand they wanted to establish Moore as Bond quickly, so they rushed TMWTGG after the success of LALD.
  • edited November 1 Posts: 1,416
    I knew him as Remington Steele. He was as famous as a TV actor could be.
  • Posts: 15,194
    I knew him as Remington Steele. He was as famous as a TV actor could be.

    Yes, as a tv actor. He played in lots of b movies. As a main character in a major film he didn't have much. Maybe only The Lawnmower Man.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited November 2 Posts: 6,355
    Everything that happened in 1986 propelled Brosnan into the stratosphere in the US. It was all over the tabloids here.

    Dalton lived in Brosnan's shadow in the US. It's ironic (even though I preferred Dalton to Brosnan). The best thing that happened to Brosnan and his career was publicly losing the role. Instead of being a TV actor, he was suddenly Bond-worthy.

    http://pbfiles.net/interviews/Inter047-People-The_Spy_Whos_Loved_Too_Much_1986.html?i=1
  • Posts: 15,194
    echo wrote: »
    Everything that happened in 1986 propelled Brosnan into the stratosphere in the US. It was all over the tabloids here.

    Dalton lived in Brosnan's shadow in the US. It's ironic (even though I preferred Dalton to Brosnan). The best thing that happened to Brosnan and his career was publicly losing the role. Instead of being a TV actor, he was suddenly Bond-worthy.

    http://pbfiles.net/interviews/Inter047-People-The_Spy_Whos_Loved_Too_Much_1986.html?i=1

    Brosnan was famous for the role he didn't have at the time.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,545
    According to Deux Moi casting is now under way.
  • Posts: 4,266
    I’d be quite skeptical that official casting is underway before a director/official film announcement and release date. Unofficial approaching of actors for a nearish date? Sure. But not sure about anything official yet.
  • Posts: 15,194
    Yeah and any news on anyone working on a script, or even a synopsis?
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,240
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    According to Deux Moi casting is now under way.

    I listened to this; it was excruciating
  • Posts: 353
    talos7 wrote: »
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    According to Deux Moi casting is now under way.

    I listened to this; it was excruciating

    Until The Sun newspaper confirm it, it's never official.

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRgliXXwsDmVg-6FP8U2YUbI6netP7Pz8i8sg&usqp=CAU


  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,731
    bondywondy wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Red_Snow wrote: »
    According to Deux Moi casting is now under way.

    I listened to this; it was excruciating

    Until The Sun newspaper confirm it, it's never official.

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRgliXXwsDmVg-6FP8U2YUbI6netP7Pz8i8sg&usqp=CAU


    :))
    =;
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    edited November 5 Posts: 1,731
    It's fairly obvious that Babs & co. haven't a CLUE where to take this character. Let someone else take over the creative reigns, please.

    As for the actor - his age should be the least of our worries. If EoN's track record since 2005 is anything to go by, they will look to other franchises and movies to see what is trending (they did exactly that with CR through to SP...) and just go with that for sheer lack of own inspiration.

    So looking at Hollywood's trends in the last year we can see that they are re-hashing a lot of old stories, playing it safe with casting and using a lot of virtual production.
    https://signalscv.com/2024/08/movie-trends-a-look-at-2024-top-grossing-films/

    My bet is for a very populist choice, an actor around 35 with broad appeal, far more of a 'safe bet' than DC was 20 yrs ago... and a script that essentially copies one of the more popular movies that do well with the broader crowd, such as TB, TSWLM, GE, CR, SF
  • edited November 5 Posts: 4,266
    Unless any of us have a direct insight into what EON are doing behind the scenes at this time, no, it's not obvious that they don't know where to go or at the very least don't have any ideas. I'm not sure who this hypothetical alternative to take the creative reigns will be either, but it doesn't guarantee anything better.

    Saying stuff like 'big franchise films with 'recycled' stories, safe casting choices, and lots of VFX have done well' has been the case for at least a decade now. It's not new and means absolutely nothing in the context of trying to craft a Bond film. To some extent all Bond movies take things from each other as well, so reworking something is pretty much guaranteed no matter what it is. I'm sure they keep an eye on what's being released, but we're talking about a creative direction in this case. This time round Bond doesn't have the same criticisms it faced in 2004/5 (namely the over-reliance on fantastical gadgets and scenarios) which stood in contrast to the Bourne films.

    It depends on what you mean by an actor having 'broad appeal'. I think the issue is there'll always be some push back with the new Bond actor, regardless of who they are. Are we talking about someone along the lines of Henry Cavill as a 'safe bet' with his level of fame? As we've discussed here he's actually not a very safe bet at all, and to some extent the new actor has to become Bond in the eyes of the public.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,558
    There was some rumour somewhere that because Amazon don't have studios they were looking at getting Sony involved in the production side of things. I don't believe that's true, but there could be any amount of things like that which Amazon's takeover of MGM has introduced which would be enough to stall production of B26 alone.
  • edited November 6 Posts: 353
    mtm wrote: »
    There was some rumour somewhere that because Amazon don't have studios they were looking at getting Sony involved in the production side of things. I don't believe that's true, but there could be any amount of things like that which Amazon's takeover of MGM has introduced which would be enough to stall production of B26 alone.

    The rumour is false.

    I read a few months Amazon were acquiring new studios space in the UK.

    Amazon website - July 2024

    Amazon Prime Video is acquiring the historic Bray Film Studios in Water Oakley, Berkshire, just 26 miles outside central London. The iconic studio is approximately 53,600 square feet and includes five sound stages, 77,400 square feet of workshops, 39,400 square feet of office space, 182,900 square feet of backlot, and 156,000 square feet of parking space.

    “With Bray as our creative home in the UK, we are committed to deepening our relationships with the UK creative community, which is rich with world-class storytellers and creative talent of all kinds,” said Mike Hopkins, Head of Prime Video and Amazon MGM Studios. “The acquisition of a studio with such a storied heritage not only empowers us to produce more film and television in the UK, but also unveils a wealth of opportunities in the local community with respect to jobs and skills training at all levels of the production process.”

    According to the Bray Studios Wikipedia page the studios are owned by Amazon Prime Video.
Sign In or Register to comment.