Who should/could be a Bond actor?

16516526546566571195

Comments

  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    I think one major feature or hint we have to look out for in a Bond Candidate is, he needs to have a Peculiar face, not an Everyman face....Coz all the Bonds from Connery-Craig have faces we don't see often in a Bar, Restaurant, Office, etc. I think Bond's Peculiar face adds to the escapism, Coz it doesn't look Mundane.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,046
    Revelator wrote: »
    Bond cannot be a twink. Timmy has to wait at least a decade before he can be considered.

    I agree that he's unsuitable, but unless the meaning of that slang term has changed in the last few years, I don't think it's an accurate phrase to use considering who he is dating at the moment.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 15,071
    Denbigh wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Just take out the moustache...

    1818_PB5_17DEC18RV-b6a408a.jpg?quality=90&lb=940,626&background=white

    A more sensible suggestion certainly. I think worth a screen test.
    In 2006, Eon were very successful in getting those younger audiences interested. However, those who were 12-15 are now in their late 20's/early 30's. I know as i was one of them! They now need to get a new generation excited and changing the leading man is a great opportunity to do that.[/img]
    Well @Pierce2Daniel, I actually think my main four names fit with your description of what’s needed, but they also fit enough into what classic fans want, which is what I think EON need to do.

    They need to appeal to the younger audiences, but they also need to make sure they’re still representing the classic fandom. Craig was a new (controversial) choice, but eventually to the fans, he represented a Bond that was closer to the novels; maybe not in his look, but certainly in his characterisation.

    This time why not have actors that look the part, but have enough edge and popularity to appeal to younger audiences.

    These names could be what’s needed to appeal to younger audiences, with all of them appearing in some kind of popular modern entertainment. Skins, Hunger Games, Fantastic Beasts, and Avengers.

    1) Sam Claflin
    2) Callum Turner
    3) Aaron Taylor-Johnson
    4) Sean Teale

    I don't think they need to worry about the fans so much: compared to its popularity amongst the general audience the Bond fan community is tiny.
    GadgetMan wrote: »
    I think one major feature or hint we have to look out for in a Bond Candidate is, he needs to have a Peculiar face, not an Everyman face....Coz all the Bonds from Connery-Craig have faces we don't see often in a Bar, Restaurant, Office, etc. I think Bond's Peculiar face adds to the escapism, Coz it doesn't look Mundane.

    I think that's a good point. Brosnan is probably the closest to being 'blandly handsome', as some of the male model suggestions do become. Quite a few of the candidates in '86 were slightly boringly, coffee-advert handsome.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited June 2020 Posts: 5,869
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Just take out the moustache...

    1818_PB5_17DEC18RV-b6a408a.jpg?quality=90&lb=940,626&background=white

    A more sensible suggestion certainly. I think worth a screen test.
    In 2006, Eon were very successful in getting those younger audiences interested. However, those who were 12-15 are now in their late 20's/early 30's. I know as i was one of them! They now need to get a new generation excited and changing the leading man is a great opportunity to do that.[/img]
    Well @Pierce2Daniel, I actually think my main four names fit with your description of what’s needed, but they also fit enough into what classic fans want, which is what I think EON need to do.

    They need to appeal to the younger audiences, but they also need to make sure they’re still representing the classic fandom. Craig was a new (controversial) choice, but eventually to the fans, he represented a Bond that was closer to the novels; maybe not in his look, but certainly in his characterisation.

    This time why not have actors that look the part, but have enough edge and popularity to appeal to younger audiences.

    These names could be what’s needed to appeal to younger audiences, with all of them appearing in some kind of popular modern entertainment. Skins, Hunger Games, Fantastic Beasts, and Avengers.

    1) Sam Claflin
    2) Callum Turner
    3) Aaron Taylor-Johnson
    4) Sean Teale

    I don't think they need to worry about the fans so much: compared to its popularity amongst the general audience the Bond fan community is tiny.
    True but if they can get someone who appeals to both - why wouldn’t they?

    Also it’d be nice to have a Bond that is believably attractive to the Bond girls (as well as a good actor) as that’s something I never got with the Craig-era.
  • edited June 2020 Posts: 6,677
    mtm wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Just take out the moustache...

    1818_PB5_17DEC18RV-b6a408a.jpg?quality=90&lb=940,626&background=white

    A more sensible suggestion certainly. I think worth a screen test.

    This! This is the problem!

    Sensible does not work!!

    Yeah I don't think it helps to try and constantly shut every suggestion down by calling them not 'sensible' or 'limp wristed' or 'surreal' or whatever unpleasant language a small amount of folks are determined to keep using (whilst simultaneously insisting they're being 'polite and respectful'). Just say you don't agree and move on.

    I don't agree.

    Moving on.
  • Posts: 334
    If the people who disagree are expected to move on can the people who keep posting picture gallery's of the same actors move on too?
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,869
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    If the people who disagree are expected to move on can the people who keep posting picture gallery's of the same actors move on too?
    Could always suggest someone else? I’m open to discussing more people.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    Univex wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Just take out the moustache...

    1818_PB5_17DEC18RV-b6a408a.jpg?quality=90&lb=940,626&background=white

    A more sensible suggestion certainly. I think worth a screen test.

    This! This is the problem!

    Sensible does not work!!

    Yeah I don't think it helps to try and constantly shut every suggestion down by calling them not 'sensible' or 'limp wristed' or 'surreal' or whatever unpleasant language a small amount of folks are determined to keep using (whilst simultaneously insisting they're being 'polite and respectful'). Just say you don't agree and move on.

    I don't agree.

    Moving on.

    I see what you did there and i agree.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited June 2020 Posts: 5,131
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    If the people who disagree are expected to move on can the people who keep posting picture gallery's of the same actors move on too?

    Exactly, thank you. Do we really think casting agents/Eon are polite about actors....in public.....yes, in the boardroom.....no chance.

    Saying I don’t agree and moving on isn’t a discussion.

    But I’ll play along, I don’t agree that Chamelet should be Bond. He isn’t suitable in anyway. By sensible...I mean the actor fits the ‘mould’ of the Bond character. This suggestion isn’t commercially sensible in anyway.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Univex wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Just take out the moustache...

    1818_PB5_17DEC18RV-b6a408a.jpg?quality=90&lb=940,626&background=white

    A more sensible suggestion certainly. I think worth a screen test.

    This! This is the problem!

    Sensible does not work!!

    Yeah I don't think it helps to try and constantly shut every suggestion down by calling them not 'sensible' or 'limp wristed' or 'surreal' or whatever unpleasant language a small amount of folks are determined to keep using (whilst simultaneously insisting they're being 'polite and respectful'). Just say you don't agree and move on.

    I don't agree.

    Moving on.

    +1.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited June 2020 Posts: 15,071
    Denbigh wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Just take out the moustache...

    1818_PB5_17DEC18RV-b6a408a.jpg?quality=90&lb=940,626&background=white

    A more sensible suggestion certainly. I think worth a screen test.
    In 2006, Eon were very successful in getting those younger audiences interested. However, those who were 12-15 are now in their late 20's/early 30's. I know as i was one of them! They now need to get a new generation excited and changing the leading man is a great opportunity to do that.[/img]
    Well @Pierce2Daniel, I actually think my main four names fit with your description of what’s needed, but they also fit enough into what classic fans want, which is what I think EON need to do.

    They need to appeal to the younger audiences, but they also need to make sure they’re still representing the classic fandom. Craig was a new (controversial) choice, but eventually to the fans, he represented a Bond that was closer to the novels; maybe not in his look, but certainly in his characterisation.

    This time why not have actors that look the part, but have enough edge and popularity to appeal to younger audiences.

    These names could be what’s needed to appeal to younger audiences, with all of them appearing in some kind of popular modern entertainment. Skins, Hunger Games, Fantastic Beasts, and Avengers.

    1) Sam Claflin
    2) Callum Turner
    3) Aaron Taylor-Johnson
    4) Sean Teale

    I don't think they need to worry about the fans so much: compared to its popularity amongst the general audience the Bond fan community is tiny.
    True but if they can get someone who appeals to both - why wouldn’t they?

    I don't think they'd worry about it- they didn't with Craig.
    Look at this thread: folks find a fault with each one somehow.
    Univex wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Just take out the moustache...

    1818_PB5_17DEC18RV-b6a408a.jpg?quality=90&lb=940,626&background=white

    A more sensible suggestion certainly. I think worth a screen test.

    This! This is the problem!

    Sensible does not work!!

    Yeah I don't think it helps to try and constantly shut every suggestion down by calling them not 'sensible' or 'limp wristed' or 'surreal' or whatever unpleasant language a small amount of folks are determined to keep using (whilst simultaneously insisting they're being 'polite and respectful'). Just say you don't agree and move on.

    I don't agree.

    Moving on.

    You don't agree with the idea that being unpleasant doesn't help? How strange, I can't possibly agree with that.
    suavejmf wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    If the people who disagree are expected to move on can the people who keep posting picture gallery's of the same actors move on too?

    Exactly, thank you. Do we really think casting agents/Eon are polite about actors....in public.....yes, in the boardroom.....no chance.

    They would be polite to the people who suggested them. You yourself claimed you were being respectful and polite, now you're saying you don't have to be. I disagree.
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Saying I don’t agree and moving on isn’t a discussion.

    You won't have anything to discuss any more because you create an atmosphere which doesn't encourage anyone to share their ideas.
  • edited June 2020 Posts: 6,677
    mtm wrote: »
    You don't agree with the idea that being unpleasant doesn't help? How strange, I can't possibly agree with that.
    Sure.

    BTW, being passive agressive by saying “people” here do this or that, indirectly in reference to particular members, such as myself, isn’t being unpleasant at all, right?

    And if you think I want you to answer to this you couldn’t be more mistaken.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited June 2020 Posts: 5,869
    @mtm I suppose but considering they were going back to the source material, they probably knew they had fans in the bag haha :)
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 745

    Sensible does not work!! People said the same when Craig was cast, 'he looks more like a villain, etc'. In fact, even Debbie McWilliams in the 'Becoming Bond' documentary on the CR DVD said as much. It was Barbara who saw Craig's potential...that he had a rugged, masculine edgy.

    The new Bond can't be a retread. He would have to be different - the slightly more thoughtful, brooding leading man is what is striking a chord with younger audiences today.
    When Craig was cast the Bond films' main rival was Jason Bourne, who was played by Matt Damon. Damon was not from the model-slash-actor school of Hollywood casting, he was an actor's actor, someone who directors went to if the required someone who needed to do more more than look pretty and remember his lines. Damon was a hit in the part, and surprise, surprise, Eon chose a Bond that ticked many of the same boxes Damon did: an actor who fitted into supporting character roles as easily as leads, someone with a down-to-earth feel, attractive but not too pretty, someone willing to work out for the role... hell, they're even the same height.

    Also going into consideration was that Die Another Day, whilst a box-office hit, drew heavy criticism for being too silly and fantasy-based. Casino Royale was a reaction to that, and they needed a grittier lead to go with the grittier tone of CR.

    I think Eon are reactive rather than proactive, and until the new film comes out we won't know what they're reacting to. I don't think they're going to be scared of casting a Daniel Craig-type again if he's still getting good reviews and his style of film is still working. I think they'd be more than happy to take the safe choice, if they could only figure out what that is!

    At the moment Bond's biggest rival spy franchise are the Mission:Impossible movies. Those are big-budget stunt-based thrill-rides with an aging but still very active daredevil actor doing as many of his own stunts as possible. The John Wick films are also very successful, albeit on a smaller scale, with a modest budget and emphasis on their own style of gun-fu combat sequences, also featuring an aging lead actor. Marvel's Black Widow is on the horizon, with young female leads and colourful, fantasy-based action with gadgets and costumes and probably a range of tie-in toys, and that's sure to be a hit. Who's slipstream will the Bond franchise try to ride this time?


    The Bond films usually get lost at some point chasing trends, and then they look to Fleming to bring them back into line with the core concept. They've got no unadapted novel to fall back on this time, though. They must be scared, and franchises this big don't like to have to make brave choices. I think if they could clone themselves a young Daniel Craig, they would. And though you are pushing for the slightly fey-looking Timothée Chamalet today, it was only a few weeks ago that you were suggesting Jack O'Connell for the part, and he is very much in the Daniel Craig mould, just a bit shorter and more working class. I don't think you're so sure what they're going to go for either.

    I think Eon will want an actor who can pull-off the physical stuff, but beyond that I'm not sure which way they'll jump.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,046

    Sensible does not work!! People said the same when Craig was cast, 'he looks more like a villain, etc'. In fact, even Debbie McWilliams in the 'Becoming Bond' documentary on the CR DVD said as much. It was Barbara who saw Craig's potential...that he had a rugged, masculine edgy.

    The new Bond can't be a retread. He would have to be different - the slightly more thoughtful, brooding leading man is what is striking a chord with younger audiences today.
    When Craig was cast the Bond films' main rival was Jason Bourne, who was played by Matt Damon. Damon was not from the model-slash-actor school of Hollywood casting, he was an actor's actor, someone who directors went to if the required someone who needed to do more more than look pretty and remember his lines. Damon was a hit in the part, and surprise, surprise, Eon chose a Bond that ticked many of the same boxes Damon did: an actor who fitted into supporting character roles as easily as leads, someone with a down-to-earth feel, attractive but not too pretty, someone willing to work out for the role... hell, they're even the same height.

    Also going into consideration was that Die Another Day, whilst a box-office hit, drew heavy criticism for being too silly and fantasy-based. Casino Royale was a reaction to that, and they needed a grittier lead to go with the grittier tone of CR.

    I think Eon are reactive rather than proactive, and until the new film comes out we won't know what they're reacting to. I don't think they're going to be scared of casting a Daniel Craig-type again if he's still getting good reviews and his style of film is still working. I think they'd be more than happy to take the safe choice, if they could only figure out what that is!

    At the moment Bond's biggest rival spy franchise are the Mission:Impossible movies. Those are big-budget stunt-based thrill-rides with an aging but still very active daredevil actor doing as many of his own stunts as possible. The John Wick films are also very successful, albeit on a smaller scale, with a modest budget and emphasis on their own style of gun-fu combat sequences, also featuring an aging lead actor. Marvel's Black Widow is on the horizon, with young female leads and colourful, fantasy-based action with gadgets and costumes and probably a range of tie-in toys, and that's sure to be a hit. Who's slipstream will the Bond franchise try to ride this time?


    The Bond films usually get lost at some point chasing trends, and then they look to Fleming to bring them back into line with the core concept. They've got no unadapted novel to fall back on this time, though. They must be scared, and franchises this big don't like to have to make brave choices. I think if they could clone themselves a young Daniel Craig, they would. And though you are pushing for the slightly fey-looking Timothée Chamalet today, it was only a few weeks ago that you were suggesting Jack O'Connell for the part, and he is very much in the Daniel Craig mould, just a bit shorter and more working class. I don't think you're so sure what they're going to go for either.

    I think Eon will want an actor who can pull-off the physical stuff, but beyond that I'm not sure which way they'll jump.

    Great post and I agree with you.
  • Posts: 9,781
    I still say Timothy Dalton should be given the opportunity to do one I mean with de-aging technology he should be fine
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited June 2020 Posts: 5,131
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Just take out the moustache...

    1818_PB5_17DEC18RV-b6a408a.jpg?quality=90&lb=940,626&background=white

    A more sensible suggestion certainly. I think worth a screen test.
    In 2006, Eon were very successful in getting those younger audiences interested. However, those who were 12-15 are now in their late 20's/early 30's. I know as i was one of them! They now need to get a new generation excited and changing the leading man is a great opportunity to do that.[/img]
    Well @Pierce2Daniel, I actually think my main four names fit with your description of what’s needed, but they also fit enough into what classic fans want, which is what I think EON need to do.

    They need to appeal to the younger audiences, but they also need to make sure they’re still representing the classic fandom. Craig was a new (controversial) choice, but eventually to the fans, he represented a Bond that was closer to the novels; maybe not in his look, but certainly in his characterisation.

    This time why not have actors that look the part, but have enough edge and popularity to appeal to younger audiences.

    These names could be what’s needed to appeal to younger audiences, with all of them appearing in some kind of popular modern entertainment. Skins, Hunger Games, Fantastic Beasts, and Avengers.

    1) Sam Claflin
    2) Callum Turner
    3) Aaron Taylor-Johnson
    4) Sean Teale

    I don't think they need to worry about the fans so much: compared to its popularity amongst the general audience the Bond fan community is tiny.
    True but if they can get someone who appeals to both - why wouldn’t they?

    I don't think they'd worry about it- they didn't with Craig.
    Look at this thread: folks find a fault with each one somehow.
    Univex wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Just take out the moustache...

    1818_PB5_17DEC18RV-b6a408a.jpg?quality=90&lb=940,626&background=white

    A more sensible suggestion certainly. I think worth a screen test.

    This! This is the problem!

    Sensible does not work!!

    Yeah I don't think it helps to try and constantly shut every suggestion down by calling them not 'sensible' or 'limp wristed' or 'surreal' or whatever unpleasant language a small amount of folks are determined to keep using (whilst simultaneously insisting they're being 'polite and respectful'). Just say you don't agree and move on.

    I don't agree.

    Moving on.

    You don't agree with the idea that being unpleasant doesn't help? How strange, I can't possibly agree with that.
    suavejmf wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    If the people who disagree are expected to move on can the people who keep posting picture gallery's of the same actors move on too?

    Exactly, thank you. Do we really think casting agents/Eon are polite about actors....in public.....yes, in the boardroom.....no chance.

    They would be polite to the people who suggested them. You yourself claimed you were being respectful and polite, now you're saying you don't have to be. I disagree.
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Saying I don’t agree and moving on isn’t a discussion.

    You won't have anything to discuss any more because you create an atmosphere which doesn't encourage anyone to share their ideas.

    I was impolite about the suggested actor. I agree.

    I quite like Tom Hiddleston for the part based on The Night Manager. Most members don’t agree and totally ‘shot this down.’ I’m not bothered though....it’s a forum.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited June 2020 Posts: 5,131

    Sensible does not work!! People said the same when Craig was cast, 'he looks more like a villain, etc'. In fact, even Debbie McWilliams in the 'Becoming Bond' documentary on the CR DVD said as much. It was Barbara who saw Craig's potential...that he had a rugged, masculine edgy.

    The new Bond can't be a retread. He would have to be different - the slightly more thoughtful, brooding leading man is what is striking a chord with younger audiences today.
    When Craig was cast the Bond films' main rival was Jason Bourne, who was played by Matt Damon. Damon was not from the model-slash-actor school of Hollywood casting, he was an actor's actor, someone who directors went to if the required someone who needed to do more more than look pretty and remember his lines. Damon was a hit in the part, and surprise, surprise, Eon chose a Bond that ticked many of the same boxes Damon did: an actor who fitted into supporting character roles as easily as leads, someone with a down-to-earth feel, attractive but not too pretty, someone willing to work out for the role... hell, they're even the same height.

    Also going into consideration was that Die Another Day, whilst a box-office hit, drew heavy criticism for being too silly and fantasy-based. Casino Royale was a reaction to that, and they needed a grittier lead to go with the grittier tone of CR.

    I think Eon are reactive rather than proactive, and until the new film comes out we won't know what they're reacting to. I don't think they're going to be scared of casting a Daniel Craig-type again if he's still getting good reviews and his style of film is still working. I think they'd be more than happy to take the safe choice, if they could only figure out what that is!

    At the moment Bond's biggest rival spy franchise are the Mission:Impossible movies. Those are big-budget stunt-based thrill-rides with an aging but still very active daredevil actor doing as many of his own stunts as possible. The John Wick films are also very successful, albeit on a smaller scale, with a modest budget and emphasis on their own style of gun-fu combat sequences, also featuring an aging lead actor. Marvel's Black Widow is on the horizon, with young female leads and colourful, fantasy-based action with gadgets and costumes and probably a range of tie-in toys, and that's sure to be a hit. Who's slipstream will the Bond franchise try to ride this time?


    The Bond films usually get lost at some point chasing trends, and then they look to Fleming to bring them back into line with the core concept. They've got no unadapted novel to fall back on this time, though. They must be scared, and franchises this big don't like to have to make brave choices. I think if they could clone themselves a young Daniel Craig, they would. And though you are pushing for the slightly fey-looking Timothée Chamalet today, it was only a few weeks ago that you were suggesting Jack O'Connell for the part, and he is very much in the Daniel Craig mould, just a bit shorter and more working class. I don't think you're so sure what they're going to go for either.

    I think Eon will want an actor who can pull-off the physical stuff, but beyond that I'm not sure which way they'll jump.


    Good post. Albeit I maintain O’Connell is impossible due to his tiny stature (height).

    Although, I mean this in a tongue in cheek way, I’m hoping they don’t copy Marvel.......otherwise we may end up down the ‘Die Another Day’ route!
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,006
    Ok, the next Bond will begin filming within 2 years following the release of NTTD, you can choose 5 actors to Screentest, at this moment who would your 5 be?
    In no particular order mine are
    A. Turner
    N. Hoult
    S. Claflin
    C. Hemsworth
    And my “left field” pick, Gandy, the model. Why not?
  • Posts: 15,845
    talos7 wrote: »
    Ok, the next Bond will begin filming within 2 years following the release of NTTD, you can choose 5 actors to Screentest, at this moment who would your 5 be?
    In no particular order mine are
    A. Turner
    N. Hoult
    S. Claflin
    C. Hemsworth
    And my “left field” pick, Gandy, the model. Why not?

    1. Turner
    2. Cavill
    3. Dalton
    4. Brosnan
    5. Lazenby.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited June 2020 Posts: 7,527
    Nice idea, @talos7.

    1. Luke Evans - Might only work for one or two films at his age (if that), but I still need to see him on screen as Bond.
    2. Aidan Turner - Not my favourite, for sure, but he has qualities that are good for Bond and it'd be interesting to see him try the role on screen.
    3. Richard Madden - One of the only mainstream frontrunners I liked.
    4. David Gandy - Yes he's a model and has very little acting experience, but on the very small chance he could shine as Bond... it'd be too good to pass up.
    5. NickTwentyTwo - F*** it, this may be my only chance to play Bond!!!
  • Posts: 6,677
    Nice idea, @talos7.

    1. Luke Evans - Might only work for one or two films at his age (if that), but I still need to see him on screen as Bond.
    2. Aidan Turner - Not my favourite, for sure, but he has qualities that are good for Bond and it'd be interesting to see him try the role on screen.
    3. Richard Madden - One of the only mainstream frontrunners I liked.
    4. David Gandy - Yes he's a model and has very little acting experience, but on the very small chance he could shine as Bond... it'd be too good to pass up.
    5. NickTwentyTwo - F*** it, this may be my only chance to play Bond!!!

    Superb list, @NickTwentyTwo.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,527
    Thanks @Univex!
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited June 2020 Posts: 5,131
    My 5 only screen test group:
    1. Aidan Turner
    2. Tom Hiddleston
    3. Sam Claffin - @Denbigh has convinced me.
    4. Richard Madden
    5. Luke Evans

    Good idea @talos7.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Just give it to this guy.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited June 2020 Posts: 5,131
    Univex wrote: »
    Nice idea, @talos7.

    1. Luke Evans - Might only work for one or two films at his age (if that), but I still need to see him on screen as Bond.
    2. Aidan Turner - Not my favourite, for sure, but he has qualities that are good for Bond and it'd be interesting to see him try the role on screen.
    3. Richard Madden - One of the only mainstream frontrunners I liked.
    4. David Gandy - Yes he's a model and has very little acting experience, but on the very small chance he could shine as Bond... it'd be too good to pass up.
    5. NickTwentyTwo - F*** it, this may be my only chance to play Bond!!!

    Superb list, @NickTwentyTwo.

    @NickTwentyTwo what’s your English/ British accent like? Ha ha ha! ;)

    Good list, apart from the model you picked!
  • edited June 2020 Posts: 6,677
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Nice idea, @talos7.

    1. Luke Evans - Might only work for one or two films at his age (if that), but I still need to see him on screen as Bond.
    2. Aidan Turner - Not my favourite, for sure, but he has qualities that are good for Bond and it'd be interesting to see him try the role on screen.
    3. Richard Madden - One of the only mainstream frontrunners I liked.
    4. David Gandy - Yes he's a model and has very little acting experience, but on the very small chance he could shine as Bond... it'd be too good to pass up.
    5. NickTwentyTwo - F*** it, this may be my only chance to play Bond!!!

    Superb list, @NickTwentyTwo.

    @NickTwentyTwo what’s your English/ British accent like? Ha ha ha! ;)

    Good list, apart from the model you picked!

    No no no, Gandy's cool. We've had a car salesman and a milkman and lorry driver, for Pete's sake. He'd make for an iconic Bond. Too late for that, though.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,527
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Nice idea, @talos7.

    1. Luke Evans - Might only work for one or two films at his age (if that), but I still need to see him on screen as Bond.
    2. Aidan Turner - Not my favourite, for sure, but he has qualities that are good for Bond and it'd be interesting to see him try the role on screen.
    3. Richard Madden - One of the only mainstream frontrunners I liked.
    4. David Gandy - Yes he's a model and has very little acting experience, but on the very small chance he could shine as Bond... it'd be too good to pass up.
    5. NickTwentyTwo - F*** it, this may be my only chance to play Bond!!!

    Superb list, @NickTwentyTwo.

    @NickTwentyTwo what’s your English/ British accent like? Ha ha ha! ;)

    Good list, apart from the model you picked!

    Yeah you're right, OHMSS was trash. ;)
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Univex wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Nice idea, @talos7.

    1. Luke Evans - Might only work for one or two films at his age (if that), but I still need to see him on screen as Bond.
    2. Aidan Turner - Not my favourite, for sure, but he has qualities that are good for Bond and it'd be interesting to see him try the role on screen.
    3. Richard Madden - One of the only mainstream frontrunners I liked.
    4. David Gandy - Yes he's a model and has very little acting experience, but on the very small chance he could shine as Bond... it'd be too good to pass up.
    5. NickTwentyTwo - F*** it, this may be my only chance to play Bond!!!

    Superb list, @NickTwentyTwo.

    @NickTwentyTwo what’s your English/ British accent like? Ha ha ha! ;)

    Good list, apart from the model you picked!

    No no no, Gandy's cool. He'd make for an iconic Bond. Too late for that, though.

    @Univex. Yes, he’s cool, yes he looks like a Bond. But can he act? If he can, why hasn’t he done it? It would be a ‘Licence to print money’ for him. I’m dubious mate.
  • edited June 2020 Posts: 9,781
    Dalton as bond for one final film de age him And give us 1991's The Property of a lady

    and if anyone is wondering if Dalton could play 007
Sign In or Register to comment.