› ›

Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1…317318320322323…1193

Comments

  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 7,988
    suavejmf wrote: »
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    I really wanted Idris Elba but that's never going to happen so Jack O Connell would be my first choice. He's got a lot of presence and charisma and could do really well as a young, dangerous, roguish Bond imo.

    He does look young though. It's tricky. Back in the 60s they could cast a 28 year old and he'd be credible as a seasoned agent. Now? If they want someone who looks like Craig or Connery they'd have to go older, and it's difficult to do that and find an actor who isn't too famous/already attached to a franchise. Longetivity also becomes an issue. It was alright when they did them every two years but if they cast a 40 something actor now we'd get two or three films out of him at best before he got too old.

    Still though, I think Jack O'Connell would work as a younger Bond. A lot of the current crop of candidates just seem like skinny indie looking teenagers. But with him, he's young but still has masculinity in spades.

    jack-oconnell-met-ball-2015-02.jpg

    This was taken a couple of years ago. Shave the bum fluff, weather him a bit ala Brosnan in GE and I think he could easily pull it off. He's worked with Yann Demange before so if he does have the directing gig and Craig is out, hopefully he'll keep O'Connell in mind.

    I assume this is a joke, most amusing, ha ha. In this incarnation would 007 have a genetic growth deficiency disorder? Jack O'Connell is 5 ft 7 in - i.e. a midget.

    Well google is telling me 5 ft 8, but to be homest I don't put that much importance on height. Movie magic and all that. Sylvester Stallone is apparently 5ft 8 at best in real life and still managed to convincingly play a heavyweight boxer. Craig is the shortest Bond so far and it didn't stop women fawning over him when he came out the sea in CR. Tom Cruise is 5ft 7 at most and they manage to hide it fairly well in all his films.

    Height isn't an important part of Bond for me, yeah Fleming described him as tall but none of the Bond actors really fit his description. Bond's height isn't important. He isn't Jack Reacher. In terms of appearance, for me he just needs to come across as manly, good looking and having genuine sex appeal and I don't think height has much impact on that, at least not in films. Height (as long as he's not distractingly short), hair colour, I'd even go as far to argue in this day and age skin colour are just arbitary details that don't really matter in the grand scheme of things. I've never seen any posts from the women on here saying an actor is too short for example.

    Height is an absolute must with me for 007 (at least the average UK of 5 ft 10 in). Height was important to Fleming and Cubby (the founders of the vision). Agreed, In terms of appearance, for me he needs to come across as manly, good looking and having genuine sex appeal. I've never heard a woman say that being short is a sexy trait in a man or a Bond! Bond is also a white character as created by Fleming.

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/fulfillment-any-age/201306/why-women-want-tall-men
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    suavejmf wrote: »
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    I really wanted Idris Elba but that's never going to happen so Jack O Connell would be my first choice. He's got a lot of presence and charisma and could do really well as a young, dangerous, roguish Bond imo.

    He does look young though. It's tricky. Back in the 60s they could cast a 28 year old and he'd be credible as a seasoned agent. Now? If they want someone who looks like Craig or Connery they'd have to go older, and it's difficult to do that and find an actor who isn't too famous/already attached to a franchise. Longetivity also becomes an issue. It was alright when they did them every two years but if they cast a 40 something actor now we'd get two or three films out of him at best before he got too old.

    Still though, I think Jack O'Connell would work as a younger Bond. A lot of the current crop of candidates just seem like skinny indie looking teenagers. But with him, he's young but still has masculinity in spades.

    jack-oconnell-met-ball-2015-02.jpg

    This was taken a couple of years ago. Shave the bum fluff, weather him a bit ala Brosnan in GE and I think he could easily pull it off. He's worked with Yann Demange before so if he does have the directing gig and Craig is out, hopefully he'll keep O'Connell in mind.

    I assume this is a joke, most amusing, ha ha. In this incarnation would 007 have a genetic growth deficiency disorder? Jack O'Connell is 5 ft 7 in - i.e. a midget.

    Well google is telling me 5 ft 8, but to be homest I don't put that much importance on height. Movie magic and all that. Sylvester Stallone is apparently 5ft 8 at best in real life and still managed to convincingly play a heavyweight boxer. Craig is the shortest Bond so far and it didn't stop women fawning over him when he came out the sea in CR. Tom Cruise is 5ft 7 at most and they manage to hide it fairly well in all his films.

    Height isn't an important part of Bond for me, yeah Fleming described him as tall but none of the Bond actors really fit his description. Bond's height isn't important. He isn't Jack Reacher. In terms of appearance, for me he just needs to come across as manly, good looking and having genuine sex appeal and I don't think height has much impact on that, at least not in films. Height (as long as he's not distractingly short), hair colour, I'd even go as far to argue in this day and age skin colour are just arbitary details that don't really matter in the grand scheme of things. I've never seen any posts from the women on here saying an actor is too short for example.

    Height is an absolute must with me for 007 (at least the average UK of 5 ft 10 in). Height was important to Fleming and Cubby (the founders of the vision). Agreed, In terms of appearance, for me he needs to come across as manly, good looking and having genuine sex appeal. I've never heard a woman say that being short is a sexy trait in a man or a Bond! Bond is also a white character as created by Fleming.
    I prefer a taller actor too, but don't draw the line (very coincidentally I might add) at Craig's so called 5 ft 10. Take it up to 6 ft 2 where it belongs.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    edited August 2017 Posts: 2,730
    Yes craig is too short for the part, they are able to hide it in the films but when he is promoting the film you can see his true height and lets just say fleming wouldnt be pleased
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    Yes craig is too short for the part, they are able to hide it in the films but when he is promoting the film you can see his true height and lets just say fleming wouldnt be pleased

    And then he'd see his royalties check from the Craig era and buy Jamaica.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    Yes craig is too short for the part, they are able to hide it in the films but when he is promoting the film you can see his true height and lets just say fleming wouldnt be pleased
    It's really not well hidden in the films either. Whenever I watch an old Bond film it's quite apparent and I'm reminded of it. Some don't seem to mind and when Craig's on his game it's not a problem.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Also if Craig returns for Bond 25 it also means Fassbender probably wont ever be bond and i cant imagine anyone else takig over the role right now
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Fassbender won't be Bond regardless imho. Although I think he'd be perfect, the ship sailed some years back.

    I was in a theatre recently where trailers for Logan Lucky and The Snowman played one after the other. My impression: Fassbender is Bond. He doesn't have to act it.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,843
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    Friday August 4th 2017

    Idris Elba's agent phones Idris.

    "Hey, Id, you still interested in playing James Bond?"

    "No, not interested anymore. Don't you remember? I'm in a new sci-fi epic franchise called The Dark Tower! Lots of sequels to make. I won't have time to play James Bond."

    "Fair enough. Bye."

    Monday August 7th 2017:
    The Dark Tower has a low first place take of $19.5M. Dark Tower is the third major studio long-labored misfire of the summer next to Universal’s The Mummy and Warner Bros.’ King Arthur: Legend of the Sword.

    Idris Elba's agent receives a phone call. It's from his client, Idris.

    "Don't suppose there's any chance I can still play Bond? I got a feeling I might have time after all!"

    :P

    Boy that was funny! Incidentally that King Arthur movie also has a Bond wannabe.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    RC7 wrote: »
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    Yes craig is too short for the part, they are able to hide it in the films but when he is promoting the film you can see his true height and lets just say fleming wouldnt be pleased

    And then he'd see his royalties check from the Craig era and buy Jamaica.

    Classic comment! Love it, well said.
  • barryt007barryt007
    edited August 2017 Posts: 19,339
    I just watched 'The Hobbit : Battle of the 5 Armies' and I must admit,as this is the first time I have seen Aiden Turner properly,that he does have something about him.

    As does the brilliant Luke Evans and Richard Armitage....3 possible Bonds in one film.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,894
    barryt007 wrote: »
    As does the brilliant Luke Evans and Richard Armitage....3 possible Bonds in one film.

    I've long though Armitage would have made a credible Bond, ever since the original Strike Back.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    As does the brilliant Luke Evans and Richard Armitage....3 possible Bonds in one film.

    I've long though Armitage would have made a credible Bond, ever since the original Strike Back.

    All 3 of them even have the classic Bond voice as well..
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    As does the brilliant Luke Evans and Richard Armitage....3 possible Bonds in one film.

    I've long though Armitage would have made a credible Bond, ever since the original Strike Back.
    Armitage would have been good. Matthew Goode as well.
  • barryt007barryt007
    edited August 2017 Posts: 19,339
    bondjames wrote: »
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    As does the brilliant Luke Evans and Richard Armitage....3 possible Bonds in one film.

    I've long though Armitage would have made a credible Bond, ever since the original Strike Back.
    Armitage would have been good. Matthew Goode as well.

    Yep I can see Goode as well....4 talented British actors who could easily be 007.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited August 2017 Posts: 13,894
    barryt007 wrote: »
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    As does the brilliant Luke Evans and Richard Armitage....3 possible Bonds in one film.

    I've long though Armitage would have made a credible Bond, ever since the original Strike Back.

    All 3 of them even have the classic Bond voice as well..

    All three fit the classic Bond image, too. But of the three, Armitage would have been my choice.
    bondjames wrote: »
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    As does the brilliant Luke Evans and Richard Armitage....3 possible Bonds in one film.

    I've long though Armitage would have made a credible Bond, ever since the original Strike Back.
    Armitage would have been good. Matthew Goode as well.

    I find Goode to be a little on the soft side for Bond.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    I find Goode to be a little on the soft side for Bond.
    Fair enough. I prefer the slightly more refined and less aggressive style myself, but I can appreciate your viewpoint.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,894
    bondjames wrote: »
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    I find Goode to be a little on the soft side for Bond.
    Fair enough. I prefer the slightly more refined and less aggressive style myself, but I can appreciate your viewpoint.

    I would rather a mix of the two. While I see Goode as being too soft, Craig is too rough.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    MajorDSmythe wrote: »
    I find Goode to be a little on the soft side for Bond.
    Fair enough. I prefer the slightly more refined and less aggressive style myself, but I can appreciate your viewpoint.

    I would rather a mix of the two. While I see Goode as being too soft, Craig is too rough.
    We're in agreement. That mix of the two is what has been missing for a long time imho and is what makes the best Bonds.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I really do think we should get a Roger Moore type of a Bond after Craig, but someone who knows how to handle himself in fistfight and is agile, much like Moore was in The Saint and by a wide margin at that compared to his Bond films.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    I really do think we should get a Roger Moore type of a Bond after Craig, but someone who knows how to handle himself in fistfight and is agile, much like Moore was in The Saint and by a wide margin at that compared to his Bond films.
    I agree. Moore in The Saint moved very differently from Moore as Bond. He was quite credible in the fight scenes in the series. Age had caught up with him by the time he took the role on.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    bondjames wrote: »
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    I really do think we should get a Roger Moore type of a Bond after Craig, but someone who knows how to handle himself in fistfight and is agile, much like Moore was in The Saint and by a wide margin at that compared to his Bond films.
    I agree. Moore in The Saint moved very differently from Moore as Bond. He was quite credible in the fight scenes in the series. Age had caught up with him by the time he took the role on.
    Definitely, @bondjames. Although, I could say some of it was still evident in Live And Let Die, but that was already fading away in the succeeding film. Moore was at his prime during his Saint years and looked best than he did as Bond (and dressed better, if I may say so). I wouldn't have minded if he were to be Bond in You Only Live Twice and onward, possibly having For Your Eyes Only as his last Bond.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I completely agree @ClarkDevlin, and should have mentioned LALD in my previous post. He still had the dexterity there, and it's particularly apparent in Kananga's lair. He had a bit more bulk in his frame during the Saint years as well (and faced the inevitable muscle mass decline transition from age 30s to 40s I believe).
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited August 2017 Posts: 15,423
    bondjames wrote: »
    I completely agree @ClarkDevlin, and should have mentioned LALD in my previous post. He still had the dexterity there, and it's particularly apparent in Kananga's lair. He had a bit more bulk in his frame during the Saint years as well (and faced the inevitable muscle mass decline transition from age 30s to 40s I believe).
    Precisely, @bondjames. It was after his forties most likely that he started losing his agility, because... that Bond some people call "weak" was super strong on Connery level in The Saint. I heard he did most of his stunts as well. It was only yesterday I was watching the "Interlude In Venice" episode that featured an outstanding cast (including our very own Lois Maxwell as well as Paul Stassino, and last but not least, William Sylvester of 2001:
    A Space Odyssey    , who also appeared in a Danger Man episode). That's one of my favorite episodes and it definitely showed more Bond in Simon Templar than it has in Bond himself in YOLT, OHMSS and DAF. I wouldn't have minded Moore to have taken over from Sean, making his debut in 1967 as Bond.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,843
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I just watched 'The Hobbit : Battle of the 5 Armies' and I must admit,as this is the first time I have seen Aiden Turner properly,that he does have something about him.

    As does the brilliant Luke Evans and Richard Armitage....3 possible Bonds in one film.

    Armitage is too old. There's something about Turner in The Hobbit?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    @ClarkDevlin, I can't recall the episode you mentioned. I have the entire box set but have only gone through them once. Time for a revisit!

    Here's an interesting article on the two different Saville Row sartorial approaches of the 'best' Bonds (imho of course). I preferred Connery's style to Moore's in the Saint but really like Rog's look in LALD / TSWLM.

    http://www.bondsuits.com/james-bond-vs-saint-two-1960s-conduit-street-suits/
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,894
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I just watched 'The Hobbit : Battle of the 5 Armies' and I must admit,as this is the first time I have seen Aiden Turner properly,that he does have something about him.

    As does the brilliant Luke Evans and Richard Armitage....3 possible Bonds in one film.

    Armitage is too old.

    At 45, now he is, yes. But around the time of Craigs casting, I see no reason why he couldn't have been cast.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    There's something about Turner in The Hobbit?

    I haven't seen The Hobbit myself, but And Then There Were None got me thinking that Turner could potentially be Bond.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I just watched 'The Hobbit : Battle of the 5 Armies' and I must admit,as this is the first time I have seen Aiden Turner properly,that he does have something about him.

    As does the brilliant Luke Evans and Richard Armitage....3 possible Bonds in one film.

    Armitage is too old. There's something about Turner in The Hobbit?

    Yes..he had a big part in it and was very good..he surprised me.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited August 2017 Posts: 15,423
    bondjames wrote: »
    @ClarkDevlin, I can't recall the episode you mentioned. I have the entire box set but have only gone through them once. Time for a revisit!

    Here's an interesting article on the two different Saville Row sartorial approaches of the 'best' Bonds (imho of course). I preferred Connery's style to Moore's in the Saint but really like Rog's look in LALD / TSWLM.

    http://www.bondsuits.com/james-bond-vs-saint-two-1960s-conduit-street-suits/
    Definitely, @bondjames. I've also seen that article and like you, prefer Connery's first two (plus Woman of Straw) Bond wardrobes to Moore's Saint, but both are sensational compared to what the other Bonds had. Brosnan's was a close third, in my honest opinion (who also is on the same line as the aforementioned two in my best Bonds book).

    But, if we're talking the Moore Bonds, I like his style in For Your Eyes Only the best. Nothing too flashy, but gives him that distinguished, older and wiser gentleman's look. Kind of feels like an aged Simon Templar there, which is why I love that film a bit too much.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,843
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I just watched 'The Hobbit : Battle of the 5 Armies' and I must admit,as this is the first time I have seen Aiden Turner properly,that he does have something about him.

    As does the brilliant Luke Evans and Richard Armitage....3 possible Bonds in one film.

    Armitage is too old. There's something about Turner in The Hobbit?

    Yes..he had a big part in it and was very good..he surprised me.

    He had a big part in it? And he was very good? Turner was forgettable in and forgotten after The Hobbit.

    @MajorDSmythe was Armitage considered circa 2005? He played Guy of Guisburn (spelling?) in that dreadful Robin Hood series on the BBC back in 2006. He had more charisma and presence than the lead. I'm glad we ended up with Craig but maybe he could have played Bond.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    I just watched 'The Hobbit : Battle of the 5 Armies' and I must admit,as this is the first time I have seen Aiden Turner properly,that he does have something about him.

    As does the brilliant Luke Evans and Richard Armitage....3 possible Bonds in one film.

    Armitage is too old. There's something about Turner in The Hobbit?

    Yes..he had a big part in it and was very good..he surprised me.

    He had a big part in it? And he was very good? Turner was forgettable in and forgotten after The Hobbit.

    @MajorDSmythe was Armitage considered circa 2005? He played Guy of Guisburn (spelling?) in that dreadful Robin Hood series on the BBC back in 2006. He had more charisma and presence than the lead. I'm glad we ended up with Craig but maybe he could have played Bond.

    Yes.
Sign In or Register to comment.