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
Also, though I do acknowledge is a little more 'out there' but Harry Styles has become a very buzzworthy actor. He's booked two big projects for next year. He's probably too big a name to be Bond. But he was considered for Han Solo. So perhaps it's not that crazy a suggestion. He's filming a Bond-esque music video in Italy at the moment....He has a look of a young Leonardo DiCaprio.
Paul is really good in Normal People, but is only just getting his foot in the door acting wise, and is and looks really young. I mean I'm only older than Paul by a few of months and I really can't see EON going for anyone our age.
No thanks - Harry Styles is overrated.
At this rate they might have the right age when a new Bond is cast.
He's young looking. But people look younger these days. If we want Bond to look like he's got some age to him, then we are going to have to accept that it's only likely to be actors in their forties that can do that.
It was The Kelly Gang film that swing it for me, because in that he is cold and arrogant and doesn't come across as young. There is a manly maturity about him.
He's the one I'd possibly say is the most likely, yes, mostly because of his film experience.
I'd say he's the best candidate from the under-30 bunch, and should be considered for Bond 26, unless of course some other big franchise grabs him for a leading role in the next few years.
Although not actually under 30, but 30, which for me is actually the minimal acceptable age considering the film won't be happening anytime soon, but probably not that distant that we should look at under-30s. One really important aspect, that Craig doesn't have and that's ok because he's Craig, is eyebrows, and Hoult has them in spades. And he has a good voice as well, as long as he's not singing Killing me Softly.
I suppose Craig does not tick all the boxes!
Considering we know he's a very good actor who can easily hold his own in big movies, I think he's got to be right up towards the top of the list.
Thing is, he doesn't have to. Charisma trumps it. Although that particular verb just doesn't sound right these days, does it? To "trump" something. Quite the opposite in fact. But I digress :D
And he's got a brilliantly low voice. And good eyebrows ;) But somehow he reminds me of Rupert Everett. Must be the long face. Still, not a bad choice.
+1.
But not the best either.
i dont care he is in i guess 60's 70's the man needs to be bond in one film dam it!
Not really that problematic. If they were, he wouldn't still be leading mid-budget actioners.
well it happened :D
I was watching a 1991 film of his last week where he plays a 50's Brighton private eye (Under Suspicion) which was pretty fun, and I did think about whether he should have done Bond at the time. He's a pretty good star so I think he'd have been very decent at it.
What statements?
Congrats to Liam for getting the role.
Irish eyes are smiling............. :)>-
I feel modern era Neeson could easily annihilate Timothee Chalamet .
No doubt. It would be like Connery taking on Truman-Lodge.
Neeson is a big dude. 6' 4" (1.93 m) according to imdb.
We've already got a film with an older Bond out for one more outing. It's just that we haven't seen it yet.
That's right!
I think after a full era of novice to retired Bond, I'd like the next era to simply be Bond in his prime. Have him start mid to late thirties and continue for a decade with a new film every 2 years.