It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Suppose this is not an automatic exclusion criterion, one's can assume that this would be a way of rule out one of two actors who could be neck and neck for the role. The jurisprudence established by Tom Cruise may suggest that a profile like O'Connell may be initially selected alongside other candidates. On the other hand, if one of the other candidates presents as many qualities as him and, in addition, stood taller, O'Connell's size would then be an unfavorable factor for him.
Apologies, I’m not sure what went on above and I can’t delete.
For me, the actors height is important as it was with all past actors in the role. The role is a ‘brand’ off screen as well as on. Hence, ‘Nick nack’ or ‘Willow’ in a tux doesn’t cut it IMO. But that’s just my personal view.
That seems fair.
Unless he is twice as tall. Then it isn t really a plus, is it?
No, it wouldn't be.
But O’Connell is very small. He’s not borderline like Craig. He is literally short. If you were describing him to the Police you would literally say ‘the short guy’. That isn’t suitable for Bond IMO. It ruins the illusion that Fleming created, I.e. the man people aspire to be.
Yes, again, I agree that he is on the short side. I wouldn't describe Fleming's Bond as someone I'd "aspire to be", though. I never get that when reading them. I spend a lot of time feeling sorry for him. The films are a different story, however.
I think someones height is something that can be just as forgotten as someones hair colour, Also, nothing about Bond as a character, despite Fleming's description, is defined by his height. Also 5"8 isn't even short to me anyway. He's below average, not a dwarf.
And you know I didn't mean growing like that @GeneralGogol haha :D
Also got bored and made this
Tattoos can be rather easily removed. Which is the incredulous part. It seems you know it too. Which makes it all the more baffling..
Plus he is supposedly in Tenet and The King's Man. If we can't get Rob and Jack O'Connell as people suggest is too 'short' for the producers, why not Aaron Taylor-Johnson?
He's 5"11, taller than Craig, and 29 years old. Plus he's an actor who could definitely handle and push himself with the fight choreography due to his dance and acrobatic skills.
So to expand on the above. For example, Roger Moore is a star.....tall, suave, handsome and cool. Someone many people would aspire to be like.
O’Connell, IMO looks like an short average looking man. Not Bond material in that sense, despite being a good actor.
Bond is a ‘larger than life’ aspirational character. Not an average short man from a local Council Estate (looks wise).
The odd tattoo, fine. But if an actor is ‘covered’ in tattoos they won’t suit the brand on the red carpet. Unless the tattoos are covered up. Yes, this is being snobby. But the character is a snob after all.
The said actor in this instance looks Chinese, so won’t get the part of Bond anyhow. Again, because he doesn’t look the part.
I was actually to saying to someone on here, and on another site that I'm actually quite into the idea of a younger Bond this time around. When I say younger, I mean 30s as opposed to 40s. I think it'll offer a new dynamic for the era and then leaves the more familiar 40 year old Bond for the future with the same actor. It'd be an interesting aspect to see such growth of the character physically and mentally, even if they didn't approach those things too much narratively.
I'm also into the idea of seeing this younger Bond with maybe an older Felix Leiter, and if they decide to keep Q young as well, what would that dynamic be? And I don't mean in the way of an origin story. That doesn't have to be the case even with a "younger" Bond, I just think it would offer something new as well as keeping the traditional elements.
...and after today I'm leaning towards Jack and Aaron, as well as Callum Turner and Oliver Jackson-Cohen
Right height, looks, age. Decent actor. Turner is a sensible suggestion. +1.
I understand your point of view. But it’s not something I’m interested in personally. I’m happy to remain with tradition.
But he is a Clondalkin man, so he can't be all bad.
He's fine. I find him a bit vanilla, personally. The two films I did quite like him were Savages and Nocturnal Animals, but neither of those were particularly Bondian.
Regarding Turner, check out And Then There Were None and while you're at The Man Who Killer and Then the Bigfoot. Both great.
For my part, this is something that would interest me. I never thought of Craig as a young Bond, whether in Casino Royale or even less in the last two installments. In fact, after three films dedicated to an aging character, it would be with great joy that I would a thirty-something 007. It also doesn't seem like a particularly younger representation of the character as Connery was 32 in Dr. No.
Meanwhile, Turner continues to be my favorite contender. Unfortunately, as the production time between each movie has lengthened, I am more and more afraid that he is too old when it will be the time to announce a new actor. At best, he will be forty when he would play Bond for the first time, meaning he would star in three movies before being 50. This would be a pretty short run. Sure, he could always star in a fourth installment, but he might already be almost too old.
Which actually implies they should get a move on at EoN HQ. No Time to Sit Still!
I imagine their hands are tied until they actually make any money from the film, and see how well it does.
In a way sure. But that doesn't mean they cannot do any prep for the next film. There are tons of things they could actually already do.
But yeah also, that gosh dang Corona virus... I'm sure that flippin Carol Baskin is responsible for it.
I don't know how you feel about it, but I don't think we will have a Bond 26 before 2024 at best.
I haven’t seen enough of him to form an opinion TBH. However, I’ve had a further look at O’Connell. He looks ‘common’ to me....definitely not Bond material.