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
Images from Poldark and an upcoming Agatha Christie adaptation.
And that is why the next actor needs to come in with the same mind set, they need to own Bond rather than come in and deliver whats on a script. That would be going backwards. So when considering actors I think it will be important to EON and Barbs in particular to hear the ideas of what the actor wants to do with the role, which director they feel would be suited to Bond. It would be a mistake now to hire a director before the actor going forward in my opinion, Barbs should get her man and then plot it out together. This way you get your actor to buy right in and what happens on screen is natural. I think this is now more important than whether the actor looks like connery, the actor looks like Felmings vision or the actor is even British.
I expect a lighter Bond actor after Craig otherwise the franchise does not rejuvenate itself very well.
Towards the end of the Brosnan era the films had become rediculous again they were so far removed from Felmings Bond and Sean interpretation they were unrecognisable.
Moore split opinion he started in well in LALD however Cubby without Saltzman to hold beck the reigns turned Bond in to something of a Caricature again the films became more outlandish, rediculous and far removed.
Dalton brought back some of the seriousness, however Dalton got the gig at the last minute. With Brosnan due to be announced as Bond the network called on the evening before the announcement to day Remington Steel's pilot was picked up for a series and Brosnan was tied in to a contract. Dalton but again it was rushed problamatic casting.
The seriousness and real drama aspect brought back to Bond under Dan's tenure restored Bond back to be more in fitting with the most popular Bond films and actor Connery.
In my opinion the popularity and buzz around Bond globally has not been this great since Sean's tenure. People who had no interest in Moores, Dalton, Brosnans films took an interest and it has grown audience. Between Sean in Dan we have seen a few great moments but nothing as exciting or as gripping as FRMWL, GF, CR or SF. There has been countless casting errors whether rushed or recruiting for looks alone. The next Bond cast will either hold the current Bond wave of excitement or it will slip back to just the die hard fans at which point the big studio budgets stops and it goes backwards, and Bond wont last another 50 years. And thats why I think the next casting is more important than Seans.
Had Roger Moore failed to do his job as 007 we would not have any Dalton, Brosnan or Craig.
Brosnan and Craig both did pull the fans into the cinema and both are very different.
The next Bond actor will have to be less Craig and do something less moody, but still he has got an easier job as the 007 franchise is riding the waves.
When Roger started nobody knew what would happen and without Saltzman TSWLM was a huge gamble and it turned out to be the rejuvenation/reboot of the 007 franchise as well.
So DC's successor will most likely not copy his edgy take on the character or even be similar to Dan.
I say we'll either get a smooth alpha-male type bastard (à la SC) or a witty ladies man...
I think the fundamental problem with casting Bond is that you need an actor who can be charming and urbane but also a total bastard. Craig and Connery have it; arguably the other 4 don't. Names such like Dan Stevens, Tom Hiddleston or Aiden Turner don't cut it for me because they don't have that ferocious energy that say Tom Hardy or Idris Elba possess. No one wants a fey James Bond.
The other guy who I think has it is
I dont think its just "my own hang up" There has simply not been this big a global buzz and fixation with Bond since Connery. I am not rubbishing any actor who played Bond just that they were either not in the role long enough to make a true mark, stayed in too long. Or just went along with the script. See Connery and Craig on set they wouldnt go along with anything they felt was silly they had the guts to say no and for me they make better Bonds. Brosnan said he remembers Goldeneye then nothing after that, even he considers the rest of his tenure as unmemorable going back to my earlier post we need an actor after Bond with some guts and ideas, they have to paint the vision EON should not just cast and actor who just reads the script and nods along and takes the money.
Thats what Lazenby did he was in it for the women and the money..
Moore just turned up and applied his Simon Templar from charachter he had already created for the saint and went along with Cubby on everything.
Dalton apparently wanted more of say but was denied.
Brosnan has also said he wished he had been more vocal about what he wanted to do, and how he wanted to go about it.
God no!
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/sorry-damian-lewis-daniel-craig-5943149
I don't know if I can support anyone called "Kit"
Yeah saw this last month. I wish it was definitive proof of anything but it's not.
Jack O'Connell is a no from me. Wrong look and if people have a problem with Craig's height, then at 5'8", O'Connell would be an issue.
Kit Harrington, same height as O'Connell, and Kit...really. Name alone puts me off.
Dan Stevens is not the worst choice, but he sometimes seems a little to fey and metrosexual for me to see him as Ian Fleming's creation.
Rupert Friend has the height, and could probably pull the role off. He's not a bad actor.
Not sure if he would win audiences over though.
Best contender mentioned recently would be Aidan Turner. Right look, decent actor, and a good age to take over from Craig in a few years.
Jack O'Connell is kind of an interesting pick as he has dramatic credibility and has done on screen action in the 300 sequel, and as yet, has not gone the franchise/superhero route. I agree his look is not traditionally Bond, but...is there such a thing as a traditional Bond anymore? I would not rule him out at this point.
Have you seen The Guest? It's a great Layer Cake-like showcase for him as a potential Bond. He is a bit 'slight' physically compared to Craig, but I'm sure he'd be willing to do the DC workout if that was the deciding factor.
I would, er, not like to see this person in the role. I've seen Homeland and I have no idea what anyone is seeing there.
In that black and white image a few posts up, does anyone else think that Dan Stevens looks like a Frank Sinatra / Sean Connery hybrid?
Me neither, although I got slated for saying so the other day. The assumption seemed to be that you can't be tall, dark and handsome and a decent actor.
This right here looks like a young James Bond
Have to agree that he looks good there!
I also agree that Stevens looks too fey, but I suppose he could be made to beef up.
I am willing to bet that our next Bond has already or will make an appearance on GOT at some point.
I think Iain Glen would be fantastic, if he was 15 years younger. I see a lot of younger Roger Moore in him.
Also, I've seen a lot of people saying things to the extent of "[actor] would have to gain a lot more muscle for him to be considered." If you look back to every Bond actor with the exception of Craig, they were not ripped or muscle men. With some exceptions, each actor was relatively in shape in their prime and carried themselves well, but it was Craig who has brought this "big muscle" look. It is certainly possible the producers carry this look on with the next actor, but I don't think physically resembling Daniel Craig is a requirement to play Bond.