Who should/could be a Bond actor?

13253263283303311190

Comments

  • edited October 2017 Posts: 3,333
    Sorry folks, I've been busy recently so Haven't had time to look at any replys. But just to address these points below:
    Revelator wrote: »
    It's also a matter of fact that Fleming quickly reconciled himself to Connery's casting and began praising the actor, as shown in The Man With the Golden Typewriter, Lycett's biography, etc. The idea that Fleming despised Connery's casting is untrue beyond a brief period of discomfort.
    Sorry again, but how does a belated biography first published on 8 October 2015 be considered a "matter of fact". Most of what can be found in that book is going to be drawn from archive material, or even conjecture. It's not as if Mr Lycett actually sat down with Ian Fleming and sweated the answers out of him. There's plenty of other source material out there on The Making of Dr No - may I also suggest the excellent Cinema Retro 148-page Special Edition magazine which also has exclusives interviews with Ursula Andress and screenwriter Johanna Harwood - if you haven't seen it already? And you're wrong to assume Fleming didn't despise the original casting of Connery to start with, especially when he referred to him as QUOTE "that f***g lorry driver" UNQUOTE, which is certainly more than "a brief period of discomfort" as you so kindly put it. This so-called transitory "period of discomfort" lasted beyond Dr No and right up til the screening of FRWL. It was after the premiere of FRWL that Fleming changed his mind about Connery, and only then reluctantly. Let's not also forget that Fleming was a dyed-in-the-wool snob with a capital "S". The thought of a blue-collar actor playing his fictional character was not at all as well-received as you make out.
    Revelator wrote: »
    And as you say, "Fleming actually sat down at his typewriter in Jamaica whilst the first film in the Eon Productions series of films, Dr. No, was being filmed nearby." He was involved with the production and suggested screenwriters, locations, and actors and he visited the set on multiple occasions, met the stars, etc. Dr. No was very much on his mind when he wrote OHMSS--need I remind you that he even gave Ursula Andress a cameo in the book?
    I'm certainly not disputing his affection for Ursula Andress, nor her inclusion in his OHMSS book. Ursula had everything that Fleming loved in a woman.

    Indeed, Fleming did visit the set of Dr No on a number of occasions, but he wasn't at all involved in the production, like you suggest. As far as location scouting and musical input of local band suggestion goes, that was down to Chris Blackwell, the founder of Island Records, who subsequently bought Fleming's Goldeneye home after Fleming passed away.

    As I've already taken pains to point out, Fleming was not at all happy with the casting of Connery as his fictional hero to begin with, nor was he happy after he saw the final movie, either. Therefore, he's not very well going to change his character to suit an actor that he wasn't happy with to begin with, now is he? Your own argument hinges solely on the premise that Fleming loved Connery like a son on the few occasions he happened to be on the location shoot and wanted to endorse his own affection by giving Bond a Scottish ancestral background to match that of Connery's, even without having seen him fully immersed in the role. Not even a single frame of footage. Also, if Fleming had really wanted to tip a wink to Connery, why didn't he also give Bond an Irish-mixed ancestry to match that of Sean's? Then there'd have been no doubt. Not sure what Lycett has to say on the matter as you haven't included any of his conjecture for me to think otherwise.
    Revelator wrote: »
    No, but you seem to forget that before OHMSS Fleming consistently referred to Bond as English. If he was so keen on giving his character his own background, why didn't he do so in the nine previous books?
    No, I'm not forgetting it. Bond is still English, that didn't change in the books. What did change was that when Fleming decided to marry his character off and, at the same time chase Blofeld through the hereditary angle, he decided to give Bond a similar hereditary background that mirrored his own. Up until OHMSS, Fleming had always wanted to keep Bond's background sketchy.
    Revelator wrote: »
    Possibly. What would be the harm of it? If the Burton film was a success, then it would tied the properties together, if it was a failure, Bond at least would have a new and interesting background detail. But since Connery was Scottish, Fleming could tie the character both to himself and the actor--a win-win. I think the decision to make Bond Scottish was based on both Connery's and Fleming's backgrounds--both are intertwined.
    I was only joking. I could have said the same thing about if Patrick McGoohan had accepted the role and been cast in Dr No, that Fleming give Bond an American-Irish heritage in his OHMSS book. I was simply demonstrating how preposterous the notion was to begin with.

    Look, I speak as someone - that for many decades - also believed the myth. It's just there's too many authentic reports and archived incidences that place a huge question mark over Fleming having reappraised his character as a homage to Connery. It's a nice myth, though. If you want to continue to believe it, that's entirely up to you, and I mean no offence if you should do so.
  • Posts: 157
    A American actor to play Bond Josh Hartnett,?
    Andrew Lincoln from the Walking Dead would be my choice.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Josh Hartnett is just another Channing Tatum.
  • Posts: 19,339
    renno61 wrote: »
    A American actor to play Bond Josh Hartnett,?
    Andrew Lincoln from the Walking Dead would be my choice.

    Andrew Lincoln is English.

  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    barryt007 wrote: »
    renno61 wrote: »
    A American actor to play Bond Josh Hartnett,?
    Andrew Lincoln from the Walking Dead would be my choice.

    Andrew Lincoln is English.

    He's very English in real life. Just a decent actor who can play the American Accent well.
  • edited October 2017 Posts: 1,661
    Having just seen The Dark Tower I can't see Idris Elba as Bond material. His performance was charmless, sullen and bland. To give him the benefit of the doubt, the role wasn't much like a Bond type character (apart from having Bond type shooting skills!) but overall, not much movie star potential on screen. He had the chance to shine but gave a muted performance. Very few actors get the chance to appear as the main lead in big blockbusters so you need to kick it out of the park and showcase your talent. Perhaps the role didn't suit his acting style? Based on his role in The Dark Tower I can't see why Elba has been hyped as a new star or worthy of Bond.

    Matthew McConaughey gave a far more interesting performance. He stood out compared to Elba. McConaughey's role was a tad cheesy but he looked like he was having fun with the part.

    I quite enjoyed the film itself although it got bad reviews and underperformed at the box office. I lowered my expectations before seeing it. Always helps!
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    I disagree. While I still don’t see Elba as Bond (for many reasons), his performance in the film was brilliant.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    I still don’t see Elba as Bond (for many reasons), the main being that he's black.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited October 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Idris Elba has far more Bond in him than a few of our six Bond actors imho.

    However, his colour (and age, these days) will always be an impediment to him getting that role.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,077
    I don't think the next Bond will have a tenure anywhere near as long as Danny's. It will be 3 films, or 4 max. That about ten years in the role, with three year gaps. There's really no reason they can't hire someone nearing 40 for this reason.
  • Posts: 14,816
    Is it me or a lot of actors burned their bridge to play Bond by giving lacklustre performances in lacklustre movies recently? Not counting Elba who never was a serious contender and is now too old, that guy from King Arthur proved himself incapable of playing a British icon, the 50 Shades guy is now Mr Beige and there must be some I forget.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Yes, they did.
  • Posts: 14,816
    Really glad Craig is making one last and I hope the pool of candidates is better in a few years.
  • edited October 2017 Posts: 1,661
    bondjames wrote: »
    Idris Elba has far more Bond in him than a few of our six Bond actors imho.

    However, his colour (and age, these days) will always be an impediment to him getting that role.

    Elba has all the charisma of a potato in The Dark Tower. Nothing there.

    People may rave about his role in Luther or The Wire but that's TV. Film acting requires a different set of acting skills.

    Also, this lame comment really didn't do him any favours:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/12021241/Luthers-Idris-Elba-Im-probably-the-most-famous-Bond-actor-in-the-world.html

    "I’m probably the most famous Bond actor in the world, and I’ve not even played the role."

    I'm pretty sure Daniel Craig is a more famous Bond than you, Idris, but don't let your deluded ego hit you on the way out of that interview!

    whatever-dude.jpg





  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited October 2017 Posts: 23,883
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    Elba has all the charisma of a potato in The Dark Tower. Nothing there.
    We can all pick films which actors have starred in that have not been successful or where they themselves have underperformed to make a point, as you have just done. Matthew McConaughey was in that stinker too, wasn't he, and he isn't lacking in charisma. I stand by my earlier comment that Idris Elba has more Bond in him than some of the six Bond actors we have had, in my humble opinion.

    Oh, and of course Craig is more famous. He's the incumbent Bond. Elba is actually rather well known for an actor who doesn't have a role of that nature to his name, and certainly more famous than Daniel Craig was prior to Bond.
  • zebrafishzebrafish <°)))< in Octopussy's garden in the shade
    Posts: 4,312
    Any actor who gives a lacklustre performance, no matter if it's in a lacklustre film or not, should not be given a chance for Bond. Craig was brilliant in Layer Cake and Brosnan (kind of) in Remington Steele. In every job you should give your best, every day, or just leave it. I have no doubt that Barbara Broccoli sees it the same way.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I knew nothing of Craig prior to his Bond selection but Brosnan certainly had given some poor performances prior to his stint as Bond, and I'm sure the same can be said of all the other actors. Nobody is perfect. Nobody. So that argument makes absolutely no sense to me.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    To this day, I still don't see what's so special about Layer Cake. Craig gave a better performance in Sword of Honour. Why isn't that celebrated?
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    To this day, I still don't see what's so special about Layer Cake. Craig gave a better performance in Sword of Honour. Why isn't that celebrated?
    To this day, I still don't see what's so special about Layer Cake. Craig gave a better performance in Sword of Honour. Why isn't that celebrated?

    Gave an even better one in Munich.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Idris Elba has far more Bond in him than a few of our six Bond actors imho.

    However, his colour (and age, these days) will always be an impediment to him getting that role.

    Elba has all the charisma of a potato in The Dark Tower. Nothing there.

    People may rave about his role in Luther or The Wire but that's TV. Film acting requires a different set of acting skills.

    Also, this lame comment really didn't do him any favours:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/12021241/Luthers-Idris-Elba-Im-probably-the-most-famous-Bond-actor-in-the-world.html

    "I’m probably the most famous Bond actor in the world, and I’ve not even played the role."

    I'm pretty sure Daniel Craig is a more famous Bond than you, Idris, but don't let your deluded ego hit you on the way out of that interview!

    whatever-dude.jpg





    Why do we even discuss a black actor as Bond. It's totally pointless and will never happen.
  • Posts: 14,816
    If I'd say I should be Bond publicly we would be talking about me being Bond and how good or bad I would, however unlikely the possibility.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Ludovico wrote: »
    If I'd say I should be Bond publicly we would be talking about me being Bond and how good or bad I would, however unlikely the possibility.

    Eh ? I thought you were 1/4 odds on to be BOND number 7 ?!
    I've got a tenner bet on you !!
  • edited October 2017 Posts: 2,895
    bondsum wrote: »
    Sorry again, but how does a belated biography first published on 8 October 2015 be considered a "matter of fact". Most of what can be found in that book is going to be drawn from archive material, or even conjecture. It's not as if Mr Lycett actually sat down with Ian Fleming and sweated the answers out of him.

    You seem to be terribly confused. The Man With the Golden Typewriter is not a biography and is not by Andrew Lycett. It is a collection of Fleming's letters, and those letters show Fleming's approval of Connery, as well as his involvement with the film of Dr. No, which did extend to suggesting actors, etc. As a Fleming fan, you should have read the book before making some of your wilder assertions.
    This so-called transitory "period of discomfort" lasted beyond Dr No and right up til the screening of FRWL. It was after the premiere of FRWL that Fleming changed his mind about Connery, and only then reluctantly.

    And what evidence do you have for this? And have you seen the documentary on Fleming included with The Living Daylights, which includes first-hand evidence that Fleming changed his mind about Connery after seeing his effect on women? Ann Fleming herself, who hated the whole Bond business and always spoke her mind about it, told The Ladies Home Journal "He did feel that an unknown should play James Bond, and I know he liked Sean Connery, but they did not see much of each other."
    Your own argument hinges solely on the premise that Fleming loved Connery like a son on the few occasions he happened to be on the location shoot and wanted to endorse his own affection by giving Bond a Scottish ancestral background to match that of Connery's, even without having seen him fully immersed in the role.

    I will thank you not to put words in my mouth, especially not false ones. My argument is that Fleming decided to synch his hero to his upcoming screen incarnation, a decision prompted by the fact that he also had Scottish ancestry. Fleming could tie the character both to himself and the actor--a win-win, so even if the film was a flop, no harm would be done.
    Also, if Fleming had really wanted to tip a wink to Connery, why didn't he also give Bond an Irish-mixed ancestry to match that of Sean's?

    Because he wasn't a pedant. Connery was first and foremost Scottish. You could just as well argue that Bond's father might have had Irish-mixed ancestry, since many Scots do.
    Up until OHMSS, Fleming had always wanted to keep Bond's background sketchy.

    Up until OHMSS, Fleming continually referred to Bond as English, without a hint of Scottish ancestry. Just as he usually referred to himself as English ("although I am as lazy as most Englishmen are, I have a Puritanical dislike of idleness"). Post-Connery, both Bond and Fleming embraced their Scottish sides. I don't think this was 100% because of Connery. During the 60s regional accents (and regionally-accented actors) became much more prominent. Factor that into a situation where Fleming had plans to explore Bond's genealogy and where a Bond film was being made with an actor whose background reminded Fleming of his own, and it's easy to see how Bond went from being an Englishman to a Scot.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    Revelator wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »
    Sorry again, but how does a belated biography first published on 8 October 2015 be considered a "matter of fact". Most of what can be found in that book is going to be drawn from archive material, or even conjecture. It's not as if Mr Lycett actually sat down with Ian Fleming and sweated the answers out of him.

    You seem to be terribly confused. The Man With the Golden Typewriter is not a biography and is not by Andrew Lycett. It is a collection of Fleming's letters, and those letters show Fleming's approval of Connery, as well as his involvement with the film of Dr. No, which did extend to suggesting actors, etc. As a Fleming fan, you should have read the book before making some of your wilder assertions.
    This so-called transitory "period of discomfort" lasted beyond Dr No and right up til the screening of FRWL. It was after the premiere of FRWL that Fleming changed his mind about Connery, and only then reluctantly.

    And what evidence do you have for this? And have you seen the documentary on Fleming included with The Living Daylights, which includes first-hand evidence that Fleming changed his mind about Connery after seeing his effect on women? Ann Fleming herself, who hated the whole Bond business and always spoke her mind about it, told The Ladies Home Journal "He did feel that an unknown should play James Bond, and I know he liked Sean Connery, but they did not see much of each other."
    Your own argument hinges solely on the premise that Fleming loved Connery like a son on the few occasions he happened to be on the location shoot and wanted to endorse his own affection by giving Bond a Scottish ancestral background to match that of Connery's, even without having seen him fully immersed in the role.

    I will thank you not to put words in my mouth, especially not false ones. My argument is that Fleming decided to synch his hero to his upcoming screen incarnation, a decision prompted by the fact that he also had Scottish ancestry. Fleming could tie the character both to himself and the actor--a win-win, so even if the film was a flop, no harm would be done.
    Also, if Fleming had really wanted to tip a wink to Connery, why didn't he also give Bond an Irish-mixed ancestry to match that of Sean's?

    Because he wasn't a pedant. Connery was first and foremost Scottish. You could just as well argue that Bond's father might have had Irish-mixed ancestry, since many Scots do.
    Up until OHMSS, Fleming had always wanted to keep Bond's background sketchy.

    Up until OHMSS, Fleming continually referred to Bond as English, without a hint of Scottish ancestry. Just as he usually referred to himself as English ("although I am as lazy as most Englishmen are, I have a Puritanical dislike of idleness"). Post-Connery, both Bond and Fleming embraced their Scottish sides. I don't think this was 100% because of Connery. During the 60s regional accents (and regionally-accented actors) became much more prominent. Factor that into a situation where Fleming had plans to explore Bond's genealogy and where a Bond film was being made with an actor whose background reminded Fleming of his own, and it's easy to see how Bond went from being an Englishman to a Scot.

    When he's Infact German lol!
  • Posts: 14,816
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    If I'd say I should be Bond publicly we would be talking about me being Bond and how good or bad I would, however unlikely the possibility.

    Eh ? I thought you were 1/4 odds on to be BOND number 7 ?!
    I've got a tenner bet on you !!

    Bet on my son: he's only one, but he's very active, he can hit and kick like a pro and he's a catch with the ladies. And there's actors in the family.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    If I'd say I should be Bond publicly we would be talking about me being Bond and how good or bad I would, however unlikely the possibility.

    Eh ? I thought you were 1/4 odds on to be BOND number 7 ?!
    I've got a tenner bet on you !!

    Bet on my son: he's only one, but he's very active, he can hit and kick like a pro and he's a catch with the ladies. And there's actors in the family.

    I'm not betting on a 3 year old in 2018 becoming Bond matey !! ;)
  • edited October 2017 Posts: 12,837
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    If I'd say I should be Bond publicly we would be talking about me being Bond and how good or bad I would, however unlikely the possibility.

    Eh ? I thought you were 1/4 odds on to be BOND number 7 ?!
    I've got a tenner bet on you !!

    Bet on my son: he's only one, but he's very active, he can hit and kick like a pro and he's a catch with the ladies. And there's actors in the family.

    I'm not betting on a 3 year old in 2018 becoming Bond matey !! ;)

    Give him a few more years though and he'll be ready for MGW's life's work: the live action James Bond Jr reboot (seriously I still can't believe the guy who wrote LTK was appparently involved in that trainwreck, even as a kid I knew it was crap).
  • Posts: 19,339
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    If I'd say I should be Bond publicly we would be talking about me being Bond and how good or bad I would, however unlikely the possibility.

    Eh ? I thought you were 1/4 odds on to be BOND number 7 ?!
    I've got a tenner bet on you !!

    Bet on my son: he's only one, but he's very active, he can hit and kick like a pro and he's a catch with the ladies. And there's actors in the family.

    I'm not betting on a 3 year old in 2018 becoming Bond matey !! ;)

    Give him a few more years though and he'll be ready for MGW's life's work: the live action James Bond Jr reboot (seriously I still can't believe the guy who wrote LTK was appparently involved in that trainwreck, even as a kid I knew it was crap).

    I didnt actually know that....From that rubbish to writing the brilliant LTK ?
    Well well well.
  • Posts: 14,816
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    If I'd say I should be Bond publicly we would be talking about me being Bond and how good or bad I would, however unlikely the possibility.

    Eh ? I thought you were 1/4 odds on to be BOND number 7 ?!
    I've got a tenner bet on you !!

    Bet on my son: he's only one, but he's very active, he can hit and kick like a pro and he's a catch with the ladies. And there's actors in the family.

    I'm not betting on a 3 year old in 2018 becoming Bond matey !! ;)

    Some of the names mentioned here have baby faces anyway!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    There's bound to be some adjusting required when Bond #007 is eventually hired, just as there was with some when the unconventional Craig got the role. It's inevitable. Most actors will look baby faced in comparison to the incumbent anyway.
Sign In or Register to comment.