Who should/could be a Bond actor?

14924934954974981193

Comments

  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    edited February 2019 Posts: 7,988
    bondjames wrote: »
    I do remember you mentioning this fellow a while back, but I'm afraid he does nothing for me.

    If I may say, he comes across a bit sinister looking without being distinctive or likable enough to me. A bit ordinary too imho. I can see him as a skilled FSB type operative tasked with getting Bond, but not as Bond himself.
    Well that's sort of the idea of playing Lucifer, goes to show he radiates that role at least the way he should.

    And as for looking a bit ordinary, again for a secret agent I consider that a good thing. Mind you I've only seen him in Lucifer extensively and find he makes for a very convincing devil. It doesn't mean he makes a good Bond, as only a proper Bond-screentest or similar role (looking at you Daniel with La4er Cake) will give an idea about how well he's suited for the job.
    Univex wrote: »
    Then again I'm also not a big Dalton fan, as in him beeing Bond

    I see. Then, my friend, we probably won't agree on many subjects re. Bond, I'm afraid. But hey, that's the way the game's played when you're a fan, right? And that, we both are ;)
    Oh well, not on who should be the next one, but I guess there's plenty within the Bond-world to agree upon ;-)

    As for Tom Cullen, he definately looks wrong to me, far more a thug than Bond. I know nothing of his acting though.

    Aaron Johnson, finding the few pictures where he doesn't sport a beard he'd be ok if he'd look like he'd lived a little more. Lookwise, again, no idea about the acting.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Ludovico wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Madden looks nothing like Bond, let alone zero charisma. Next.

    The main problem is that he’s 5ft 7 in. Aka a midget.
    Well Keeley thinks he's got the goods.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/showbiz/celebrity-news/richard-madden-would-make-a-phenomenal-james-bond-says-keeley-hawes-a4054891.html
    --
    suavejmf wrote: »
    I’m actually warming to Poldark as Bond after so many other stupid suggestions in the press!!!
    He seems to be developing quite a fanbase here, slowly but surely. In fact, he may even be the forum favourite to take over.
    --
    bondjames wrote: »
    I'm about to start viewing Punisher Season 2.

    Someone who I'm keeping an eye on is Ben Barnes. 6ft 1, 37 years old and he looks good for his age. I first noticed him in Westworld. His name doesn't seem to come up on any lists. Perhaps that's a good thing.
    tcZq5gH.jpg
    8RLGVF9.jpg
    Having seen the 2nd season of Punisher, I'm scrapping Ben Barnes from my list. He doesn't have what it takes imho.

    He was good in Dorien Grey. Havent seen him recently. So I’ll reserve judgment until I do.

    He was awful in Dorian Gray. But the whole movie was truly awful.

    Nope.

    Yes. A desecration of a great novel.

    Nope. I still enjoyed the film and Ben Barne’s persona in the film despite deviating from the novel.....my opinion. You didn’t....great.

    Yes most definitely yes, it's a desecration. Cheap horror flick, based on a masterpiece. That has nothing to do with deviating from the novel, it has everything to do with not understanding a thing about it. Not a single character, not a single moment of it.

    Oh and it's Dorian Gray, not Dorien Grey.

    Nope. It’s to do with my personal opinion of enjoying a particular film. Period. I like it, you don’t. Brilliant.

    Thank you for the spelling correction too. Very much appreciated.
  • Posts: 6,677
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Madden looks nothing like Bond, let alone zero charisma. Next.

    The main problem is that he’s 5ft 7 in. Aka a midget.
    Well Keeley thinks he's got the goods.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/showbiz/celebrity-news/richard-madden-would-make-a-phenomenal-james-bond-says-keeley-hawes-a4054891.html
    --
    suavejmf wrote: »
    I’m actually warming to Poldark as Bond after so many other stupid suggestions in the press!!!
    He seems to be developing quite a fanbase here, slowly but surely. In fact, he may even be the forum favourite to take over.
    --
    bondjames wrote: »
    I'm about to start viewing Punisher Season 2.

    Someone who I'm keeping an eye on is Ben Barnes. 6ft 1, 37 years old and he looks good for his age. I first noticed him in Westworld. His name doesn't seem to come up on any lists. Perhaps that's a good thing.
    tcZq5gH.jpg
    8RLGVF9.jpg
    Having seen the 2nd season of Punisher, I'm scrapping Ben Barnes from my list. He doesn't have what it takes imho.

    He was good in Dorien Grey. Havent seen him recently. So I’ll reserve judgment until I do.

    He was awful in Dorian Gray. But the whole movie was truly awful.

    Nope.

    Yes. A desecration of a great novel.

    Nope. I still enjoyed the film and Ben Barne’s persona in the film despite deviating from the novel.....my opinion. You didn’t....great.

    Yes most definitely yes, it's a desecration. Cheap horror flick, based on a masterpiece. That has nothing to do with deviating from the novel, it has everything to do with not understanding a thing about it. Not a single character, not a single moment of it.

    Oh and it's Dorian Gray, not Dorien Grey.

    Nope. It’s to do with my personal opinion of enjoying a particular film. Period. I like it, you don’t. Brilliant.

    Thank you for the spelling correction too. Very much appreciated.

    Surely you must understand that your personal opinion on something doesn't necessarily qualify as a good evaluation on its quality. I love many things which are awful. I'm not going around saying they're not. Dorian Gray is an awful film. Period. Some people like it, some people don't. That's the subjective part. Not the quality of it.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Different strokes for different folks,peeps !!
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,571
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Different strokes for different folks,peeps !!

    Yes, I agree.
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 6,677
    Wasn't that my point? Although there is no subjectivity for quality, only for taste. You can't say that 9 carat gold is better than 24 just because you like it better. You can, however, say that you like it better. Heck, you can say it 1000 times, at your free will. Still doesn't make it better than 24 carat gold. And no, Art is not that subjective as one thinks. There are many markers to evaluate art. And, as such, a film or a performance. And Dorian Gray is a bad film. Listen, I love many films that are bad films. Doesn't make them masterpieces. They're plain bad, and they serve my bad tastes and guilty pleasures. Now, if you think Dorian Gray is a good film, by all means, do share your evaluative markers. I'd love to know. But I guess that would be for another thread. Not this one. But listen, just to clarify:

    1) Not my discussion
    2) I respect that you like Dorian Gray, @suavejmf
    3) It's not a good film, by any standards
    4) The novel is a great novel, by any standards
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    edited February 2019 Posts: 7,571
    Univex wrote: »
    Wasn't that my point? Although there is no subjectivity for quality, only for taste. You can't say that 9 carat gold is better than 24 just because you like it better. You can, however, say that you like it better. Heck, you can say it 1000 times, at your free will. Still doesn't make it better than 24 carat gold. And no, Art is not that subjective as one thinks. There are many markers to evaluate art. And, as such, a film or a performance. And Dorian Gray is a bad film. Listen, I love many films that are bad films. Doesn't make them masterpieces. They're plain bad, and they serve my bad tastes and guilty pleasures. Now, if you think Dorian Gray is a good film, by all means, do share your evaluative markers. I'd love to know. But I guess that would be for another thread. Not this one. But listen, just to clarify:

    1) Not my discussion
    2) I respect that you like Dorian Gray, @suavejmf
    3) It's not a good film, by any standards
    4) The novel is a great novel, by any standards

    As you say @Univex this is for another thread.

    https://www.mi6community.com/discussion/82/the-horror-thread-ii-the-return#latest

    https://www.mi6community.com/discussion/63/last-movie-you-watched#latest
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 6,677
    NicNac wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Wasn't that my point? Although there is no subjectivity for quality, only for taste. You can't say that 9 carat gold is better than 24 just because you like it better. You can, however, say that you like it better. Heck, you can say it 1000 times, at your free will. Still doesn't make it better than 24 carat gold. And no, Art is not that subjective as one thinks. There are many markers to evaluate art. And, as such, a film or a performance. And Dorian Gray is a bad film. Listen, I love many films that are bad films. Doesn't make them masterpieces. They're plain bad, and they serve my bad tastes and guilty pleasures. Now, if you think Dorian Gray is a good film, by all means, do share your evaluative markers. I'd love to know. But I guess that would be for another thread. Not this one. But listen, just to clarify:

    1) Not my discussion
    2) I respect that you like Dorian Gray, @suavejmf
    3) It's not a good film, by any standards
    4) The novel is a great novel, by any standards

    As you say @Univex this is for another thread.

    https://www.mi6community.com/discussion/82/the-horror-thread-ii-the-return#latest

    https://www.mi6community.com/discussion/63/last-movie-you-watched#latest

    Thank you. But, and although I did chime in, it's not my discussion. If they take it there, I'll comment. I do think they were discussing the value of Ben Barnes as a Bond candidate, however. That may as well remain in doors, right? ;) Anyway, thanks @NicNac.

    As to returning to topic, here, allow me: No, I don't really think Cullen is suitable. A bit thuggish, IMO.
  • Posts: 14,844
    Univex wrote: »
    Wasn't that my point? Although there is no subjectivity for quality, only for taste. You can't say that 9 carat gold is better than 24 just because you like it better. You can, however, say that you like it better. Heck, you can say it 1000 times, at your free will. Still doesn't make it better than 24 carat gold. And no, Art is not that subjective as one thinks. There are many markers to evaluate art. And, as such, a film or a performance. And Dorian Gray is a bad film. Listen, I love many films that are bad films. Doesn't make them masterpieces. They're plain bad, and they serve my bad tastes and guilty pleasures. Now, if you think Dorian Gray is a good film, by all means, do share your evaluative markers. I'd love to know. But I guess that would be for another thread. Not this one. But listen, just to clarify:

    1) Not my discussion
    2) I respect that you like Dorian Gray, @suavejmf
    3) It's not a good film, by any standards
    4) The novel is a great novel, by any standards

    And I will add @Univex that the people involved in the movie understood zilch about the source material.
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 6,677
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Wasn't that my point? Although there is no subjectivity for quality, only for taste. You can't say that 9 carat gold is better than 24 just because you like it better. You can, however, say that you like it better. Heck, you can say it 1000 times, at your free will. Still doesn't make it better than 24 carat gold. And no, Art is not that subjective as one thinks. There are many markers to evaluate art. And, as such, a film or a performance. And Dorian Gray is a bad film. Listen, I love many films that are bad films. Doesn't make them masterpieces. They're plain bad, and they serve my bad tastes and guilty pleasures. Now, if you think Dorian Gray is a good film, by all means, do share your evaluative markers. I'd love to know. But I guess that would be for another thread. Not this one. But listen, just to clarify:

    1) Not my discussion
    2) I respect that you like Dorian Gray, @suavejmf
    3) It's not a good film, by any standards
    4) The novel is a great novel, by any standards

    And I will add @Univex that the people involved in the movie understood zilch about the source material.

    Shame that Colin Firth had a part in it. But we should take this discussion elsewhere, @Ludovico ;)
  • Posts: 14,844
    Univex wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Wasn't that my point? Although there is no subjectivity for quality, only for taste. You can't say that 9 carat gold is better than 24 just because you like it better. You can, however, say that you like it better. Heck, you can say it 1000 times, at your free will. Still doesn't make it better than 24 carat gold. And no, Art is not that subjective as one thinks. There are many markers to evaluate art. And, as such, a film or a performance. And Dorian Gray is a bad film. Listen, I love many films that are bad films. Doesn't make them masterpieces. They're plain bad, and they serve my bad tastes and guilty pleasures. Now, if you think Dorian Gray is a good film, by all means, do share your evaluative markers. I'd love to know. But I guess that would be for another thread. Not this one. But listen, just to clarify:

    1) Not my discussion
    2) I respect that you like Dorian Gray, @suavejmf
    3) It's not a good film, by any standards
    4) The novel is a great novel, by any standards

    And I will add @Univex that the people involved in the movie understood zilch about the source material.

    Shame that Colin Firth had a part in it. But we should take this discussion elsewhere, @Ludovico ;)

    Yes maybe in its own thread.
  • Posts: 6,677
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Wasn't that my point? Although there is no subjectivity for quality, only for taste. You can't say that 9 carat gold is better than 24 just because you like it better. You can, however, say that you like it better. Heck, you can say it 1000 times, at your free will. Still doesn't make it better than 24 carat gold. And no, Art is not that subjective as one thinks. There are many markers to evaluate art. And, as such, a film or a performance. And Dorian Gray is a bad film. Listen, I love many films that are bad films. Doesn't make them masterpieces. They're plain bad, and they serve my bad tastes and guilty pleasures. Now, if you think Dorian Gray is a good film, by all means, do share your evaluative markers. I'd love to know. But I guess that would be for another thread. Not this one. But listen, just to clarify:

    1) Not my discussion
    2) I respect that you like Dorian Gray, @suavejmf
    3) It's not a good film, by any standards
    4) The novel is a great novel, by any standards

    And I will add @Univex that the people involved in the movie understood zilch about the source material.

    Shame that Colin Firth had a part in it. But we should take this discussion elsewhere, @Ludovico ;)

    Yes maybe in its own thread.

    The film is so bad, it doesn't deserve a thread. lol, sorry, had to do it. Back to Bond number 7 ;)
  • Posts: 334
    Denbigh wrote: »
    I think Aaron Taylor-Johnson would be good. He was the best thing about Outlaw King, as well as Florence Pugh, who should definitely be a Bond girl in the future.

    outlaw-king-aaron-taylor-johnson.jpg

    No he's very bland, and very forced.
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 6,677
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    I think Aaron Taylor-Johnson would be good. He was the best thing about Outlaw King, as well as Florence Pugh, who should definitely be a Bond girl in the future.

    outlaw-king-aaron-taylor-johnson.jpg

    No he's very bland, and very forced.

    Don't know why, but he's got an American face. What on earth is an American face, you ask me? I don't know. But he doesn't seem British to me. Don't know why.

    Wait, wait, just googled him. Nah, he's sort of a chameleon. Looks eastern european sometimes, even. Still, I don't see him as Bond.
    280full.jpg
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 6,677
    Just a monthly reminder of the next Bond best candidate ;)
    47694040_352122938956632_4678545787154856025_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&se=7&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTk4MjQ4MDA4NTk4Mw%3D%3D.2
    47585334_767439760284312_1402580887160360383_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTgxNjUwMzAwNTA3Mw%3D%3D.2
    51252532_332035077520222_6604170552692421835_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk3MDcwMjg5NjE2MjkyNzM2MQ%3D%3D.2
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,991
    Univex wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    I think Aaron Taylor-Johnson would be good. He was the best thing about Outlaw King, as well as Florence Pugh, who should definitely be a Bond girl in the future.

    outlaw-king-aaron-taylor-johnson.jpg

    No he's very bland, and very forced.

    Don't know why, but he's got an American face. What on earth is an American face, you ask me? I don't know. But he doesn't seem British to me. Don't know why.

    Wait, wait, just googled him. Nah, he's sort of a chameleon. Looks eastern european sometimes, even. Still, I don't see him as Bond.
    280full.jpg

    I’ve always found him to be a terribly non-charismatic actor. In Godzilla, as the “hero” he was wooden and unconvincing. Once Cranston’s character died the quality of the film plummeted.

  • edited February 2019 Posts: 6,677
    talos7 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    I think Aaron Taylor-Johnson would be good. He was the best thing about Outlaw King, as well as Florence Pugh, who should definitely be a Bond girl in the future.

    outlaw-king-aaron-taylor-johnson.jpg

    No he's very bland, and very forced.

    Don't know why, but he's got an American face. What on earth is an American face, you ask me? I don't know. But he doesn't seem British to me. Don't know why.

    Wait, wait, just googled him. Nah, he's sort of a chameleon. Looks eastern european sometimes, even. Still, I don't see him as Bond.
    280full.jpg

    I’ve always found him to be a terribly non-charismatic actor. In Godzilla, as the “hero” he was wooden and unconvincing. Once Cranston’s character died the quality of the film plummeted.
    Damn, I even forgot he was in Godzilla. As far as I'm concerned, the best bit of casting in that film died in the beginning. They had two monster actors on that film and they killed them off at the start - Cranston and Binoche. Godzilla didn't have a chance ;)
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited February 2019 Posts: 8,127
    Univex wrote: »
    Just a monthly reminder of the next Bond best candidate ;)
    47694040_352122938956632_4678545787154856025_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&se=7&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTk4MjQ4MDA4NTk4Mw%3D%3D.2
    47585334_767439760284312_1402580887160360383_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTgxNjUwMzAwNTA3Mw%3D%3D.2
    51252532_332035077520222_6604170552692421835_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk3MDcwMjg5NjE2MjkyNzM2MQ%3D%3D.2

    Brilliant! =D>
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,869
    talos7 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    I think Aaron Taylor-Johnson would be good. He was the best thing about Outlaw King, as well as Florence Pugh, who should definitely be a Bond girl in the future.

    outlaw-king-aaron-taylor-johnson.jpg

    No he's very bland, and very forced.

    Don't know why, but he's got an American face. What on earth is an American face, you ask me? I don't know. But he doesn't seem British to me. Don't know why.

    Wait, wait, just googled him. Nah, he's sort of a chameleon. Looks eastern european sometimes, even. Still, I don't see him as Bond.
    280full.jpg

    I’ve always found him to be a terribly non-charismatic actor. In Godzilla, as the “hero” he was wooden and unconvincing. Once Cranston’s character died the quality of the film plummeted.

    You guys should really check out Outlaw King. He's the best thing about that film, and stars an actress who I think would be a great future Bond girl, Florence Pugh, who also just starred in The Little Drummer Girl.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,991
    Univex wrote: »
    Just a monthly reminder of the next Bond best candidate ;)
    47694040_352122938956632_4678545787154856025_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&se=7&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTk4MjQ4MDA4NTk4Mw%3D%3D.2
    47585334_767439760284312_1402580887160360383_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTgxNjUwMzAwNTA3Mw%3D%3D.2
    51252532_332035077520222_6604170552692421835_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk3MDcwMjg5NjE2MjkyNzM2MQ%3D%3D.2

    Brilliant! =D>

    Very Dalton in those top two shots.

  • Posts: 6,677
    talos7 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Just a monthly reminder of the next Bond best candidate ;)
    47694040_352122938956632_4678545787154856025_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&se=7&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTk4MjQ4MDA4NTk4Mw%3D%3D.2
    47585334_767439760284312_1402580887160360383_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTgxNjUwMzAwNTA3Mw%3D%3D.2
    51252532_332035077520222_6604170552692421835_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk3MDcwMjg5NjE2MjkyNzM2MQ%3D%3D.2

    Brilliant! =D>

    Very Dalton in those top two shots.

    Right? ;)
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    Posts: 1,318
    Univex wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Just a monthly reminder of the next Bond best candidate ;)
    47694040_352122938956632_4678545787154856025_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&se=7&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTk4MjQ4MDA4NTk4Mw%3D%3D.2
    47585334_767439760284312_1402580887160360383_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTgxNjUwMzAwNTA3Mw%3D%3D.2
    51252532_332035077520222_6604170552692421835_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk3MDcwMjg5NjE2MjkyNzM2MQ%3D%3D.2

    Brilliant! =D>

    Very Dalton in those top two shots.

    Right? ;)

    Agreed, that's Bond right there. Also agree regarding your views about Barnes and Gray. You the man, @Univex
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 15,843
    Univex wrote: »
    Just a monthly reminder of the next Bond best candidate ;)
    47694040_352122938956632_4678545787154856025_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&se=7&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTk4MjQ4MDA4NTk4Mw%3D%3D.2
    47585334_767439760284312_1402580887160360383_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTgxNjUwMzAwNTA3Mw%3D%3D.2
    51252532_332035077520222_6604170552692421835_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk3MDcwMjg5NjE2MjkyNzM2MQ%3D%3D.2

    I'm now officially sold on Turner.
  • Posts: 6,677
    Univex wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Just a monthly reminder of the next Bond best candidate ;)
    47694040_352122938956632_4678545787154856025_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&se=7&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTk4MjQ4MDA4NTk4Mw%3D%3D.2
    47585334_767439760284312_1402580887160360383_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTgxNjUwMzAwNTA3Mw%3D%3D.2
    51252532_332035077520222_6604170552692421835_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk3MDcwMjg5NjE2MjkyNzM2MQ%3D%3D.2

    Brilliant! =D>

    Very Dalton in those top two shots.

    Right? ;)

    Agreed, that's Bond right there. Also agree regarding your views about Barnes and Gray. You the man, @Univex
    No, you the man, @JeremyBondon.
    Genius minds think alike.
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 11,425
    Univex wrote: »
    Just a monthly reminder of the next Bond best candidate ;)
    47694040_352122938956632_4678545787154856025_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&se=7&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTk4MjQ4MDA4NTk4Mw%3D%3D.2
    47585334_767439760284312_1402580887160360383_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTgxNjUwMzAwNTA3Mw%3D%3D.2
    51252532_332035077520222_6604170552692421835_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk3MDcwMjg5NjE2MjkyNzM2MQ%3D%3D.2

    Brilliant! =D>

    I've never actually seen him act but am not sure these pics do him that many favours. Good looking chap obvs but can't say he really looks Bondian here. Looks like an Italian playboy . Unless of course you think anyone in a dinner jacket looks like Bond, which I know some people do.

    That's not to say he's not a contender- just these look like fairly standard fashion shoot photos with a male model.
  • Posts: 334
    Denbigh wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    I think Aaron Taylor-Johnson would be good. He was the best thing about Outlaw King, as well as Florence Pugh, who should definitely be a Bond girl in the future.

    outlaw-king-aaron-taylor-johnson.jpg

    No he's very bland, and very forced.

    Don't know why, but he's got an American face. What on earth is an American face, you ask me? I don't know. But he doesn't seem British to me. Don't know why.

    Wait, wait, just googled him. Nah, he's sort of a chameleon. Looks eastern european sometimes, even. Still, I don't see him as Bond.
    280full.jpg

    I’ve always found him to be a terribly non-charismatic actor. In Godzilla, as the “hero” he was wooden and unconvincing. Once Cranston’s character died the quality of the film plummeted.

    You guys should really check out Outlaw King. He's the best thing about that film, and stars an actress who I think would be a great future Bond girl, Florence Pugh, who also just starred in The Little Drummer Girl.

    I've seen it. It doesn't help.
  • edited February 2019 Posts: 6,677
    Getafix wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Just a monthly reminder of the next Bond best candidate ;)
    47694040_352122938956632_4678545787154856025_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&se=7&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTk4MjQ4MDA4NTk4Mw%3D%3D.2
    47585334_767439760284312_1402580887160360383_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTgxNjUwMzAwNTA3Mw%3D%3D.2
    51252532_332035077520222_6604170552692421835_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk3MDcwMjg5NjE2MjkyNzM2MQ%3D%3D.2

    Brilliant! =D>

    I've never actually seen him act but am not sure these pics do him that many favours. Good looking chap obvs but can't say he really looks Bondian here. Looks like an Italian playboy . Unless of course you think anyone in a dinner jacket looks like Bond, which I know some people do.

    That's not to say he's not a contender- just these look like fairly standard fashion shoot photos with a male model.

    Those of us who like the pics have seen him act, @Getafix. Someone advocated that pics don't do justice to any actor. They're right. Now, if we put together his acting, voice, presence and then the pics, that's a different matter altogether.
  • I could see it in him before, but not anymore. Something about the hair length, eyebrows and brown eyes. Now I picture him as a ponytailed playboy villain.
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    Posts: 1,318
    I could see it in him before, but not anymore. Something about the hair length, eyebrows and brown eyes. Now I picture him as a ponytailed playboy villain.

    Ahhh, you fantasize about A. Banderas in Desperado. Carry on.
  • Posts: 9,779
    Univex wrote: »
    Just a monthly reminder of the next Bond best candidate ;)
    47694040_352122938956632_4678545787154856025_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&se=7&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTk4MjQ4MDA4NTk4Mw%3D%3D.2
    47585334_767439760284312_1402580887160360383_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk0OTYwMTgxNjUwMzAwNTA3Mw%3D%3D.2
    51252532_332035077520222_6604170552692421835_n.jpg?_nc_ht=scontent-frx5-1.cdninstagram.com&ig_cache_key=MTk3MDcwMjg5NjE2MjkyNzM2MQ%3D%3D.2

    Those aren’t pictures of Tom hardy
Sign In or Register to comment.