› ›

Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1…922923925927928…1193

Comments

  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,980
    Top Gun : Maverick has illustrated the public’s hunger for a crowd pleaser that has an audience feeling good as the exit the theater. It also shows the value of a character remaining true to it’s origins, Maverick has not “ evolved “ to the point of where he’s unrecognizable as the way he was portrayed in the original. It was a film that remained true to it’s origins while at the same time was fresh and current.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,473
    talos7 wrote: »
    Top Gun : Maverick has illustrated the public’s hunger for a crowd pleaser that has an audience feeling good as the exit the theater. It also shows the value of a character remaining true to it’s origins, Maverick has not “ evolved “ to the point of where he’s unrecognizable as the way he was portrayed in the original. It was a film that remained true to it’s origins while at the same time was fresh and current.

    Totally agreed. I hope more blockbusters take similar shape in the next few years to come, Bond included. Leaving the theater opening weekend for the new Top Gun was so refreshing, I had such a feel good excitement as I left.
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    Posts: 1,318
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Top Gun : Maverick has illustrated the public’s hunger for a crowd pleaser that has an audience feeling good as the exit the theater. It also shows the value of a character remaining true to it’s origins, Maverick has not “ evolved “ to the point of where he’s unrecognizable as the way he was portrayed in the original. It was a film that remained true to it’s origins while at the same time was fresh and current.

    Totally agreed. I hope more blockbusters take similar shape in the next few years to come, Bond included. Leaving the theater opening weekend for the new Top Gun was so refreshing, I had such a feel good excitement as I left.

    A 100%. However, does Bond need to be a crowd pleaser? Mission Impossible fills that spot just fine, along with Kingsman et al. I see Bond doing what Bond does best. This time set in the 60s. I will up the ante with my right nut as well. I am that excited and convinced it's what should happen next. The best answer to Craig's dreariness of the last years. Yes, to more lightheartedness, yes to more dry wit and yes to Turner.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,473
    It wouldn't hurt every now and then. The Craig era was full of brooding doom and gloom, I'd like to see a return to some proper escapism in the next era.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited June 2022 Posts: 14,957
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    It wouldn't hurt every now and then. The Craig era was full of brooding doom and gloom, I'd like to see a return to some proper escapism in the next era.

    I think it was and it wasn't. For me, Skyfall got the balance pretty right: good dramatic bits mixed with good Bondy punch-the-air bits, and you left on a high. Tonally I'd say something like MI Fallout is probably on a par, and everyone loved that too. So you probably could stay at that level and it would work, but I expect they will want to shake it up a bit.
    Honestly, the more I think about it, the more I think Mendes just got Bond where Fukunaga didn't.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,980
    JeremyBondon wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Top Gun : Maverick has illustrated the public’s hunger for a crowd pleaser that has an audience feeling good as the exit the theater. It also shows the value of a character remaining true to it’s origins, Maverick has not “ evolved “ to the point of where he’s unrecognizable as the way he was portrayed in the original. It was a film that remained true to it’s origins while at the same time was fresh and current.

    Totally agreed. I hope more blockbusters take similar shape in the next few years to come, Bond included. Leaving the theater opening weekend for the new Top Gun was so refreshing, I had such a feel good excitement as I left.

    A 100%. However, does Bond need to be a crowd pleaser? Mission Impossible fills that spot just fine, along with Kingsman et al. I see Bond doing what Bond does best. This time set in the 60s. I will up the ante with my right nut as well. I am that excited and convinced it's what should happen next. The best answer to Craig's dreariness of the last years. Yes, to more lightheartedness, yes to more dry wit and yes to Turner.

    Because of the scope , budgets, and tentpole status, yes, it needs to be a crown pleaser to continue .

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,473
    mtm wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    It wouldn't hurt every now and then. The Craig era was full of brooding doom and gloom, I'd like to see a return to some proper escapism in the next era.

    I think it was and it wasn't. For me, Skyfall got the balance pretty right: good dramatic bits mixed with good Bondy punch-the-air bits, and you left on a high. Tonally I'd say something like MI Fallout is probably on a par, and everyone loved that too. So you probably could stay at that level and it would work, but I expect they will want to shake it up a bit.
    Honestly, the more I think about it, the more I think Mendes just got Bond where Fukunaga didn't.

    I just didn't feel that with SF. The villain wins, M dies, though the classic ending (that sadly isn't at all utilized come SP) was pretty great. It's just not a fun or escapist installment for me at all, but I always accept I'm in the minority with my feelings regarding that film.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,957
    Yeah I can't agree with that, I think it's lots of fun.
  • ByRoyalDecreeByRoyalDecree
    edited June 2022 Posts: 784
    I wouldn’t choose a light-hearted humorous action flick at the expense of an elegant, mysterious, cerebral, ruthless, cool, witty espionage suspense thriller.

    SF and NTTD are shallow dramas. More of those and I will be very disappointed.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited June 2022 Posts: 40,473
    mtm wrote: »
    Yeah I can't agree with that, I think it's lots of fun.

    And as my last sentence notes, I accept I'm in the minority there and am glad most can love it. I tried, at least, and paid to see it five times in cinemas but I just wasn't seeing what everybody else was and haven't to this day.

    Just a little shake-up and something fresh for the next era is all I'm after.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited June 2022 Posts: 14,957
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    I wouldn’t choose a light-hearted humorous action flick at the expense of an elegant, mysterious, cerebral, ruthless, cool, witty espionage suspense thriller.

    Are you talking about Bond films with that second description? I love em all, but I wouldn't call any of them that; they're mostly just silly fun :)

    Anyway, here's a fun bit of baiting from some ad or other that Cavill's done :)

  • ByRoyalDecreeByRoyalDecree
    edited June 2022 Posts: 784
    mtm wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    I wouldn’t choose a light-hearted humorous action flick at the expense of an elegant, mysterious, cerebral, ruthless, cool, witty espionage suspense thriller.

    Are you talking about Bond films with that second description? I love em all, but I wouldn't call any of them that; they're mostly just silly fun :)

    I would put FRWL, GF, CR, QoS in that category.
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    edited June 2022 Posts: 1,318
    mtm wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    I wouldn’t choose a light-hearted humorous action flick at the expense of an elegant, mysterious, cerebral, ruthless, cool, witty espionage suspense thriller.

    Are you talking about Bond films with that second description? I love em all, but I wouldn't call any of them that; they're mostly just silly fun :)

    Anyway, here's a fun bit of baiting from some ad or other that Cavill's done :)


    Well there go his "chances", or whatever was left of it. The guy remains a knob.

    See the difference between him and Turner? From 40 seconds on

  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,831
    If they make a live action movie of Action Man (now there's an idea!), I'm all for Henry Cavill playing the title role.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited June 2022 Posts: 14,957
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    I wouldn’t choose a light-hearted humorous action flick at the expense of an elegant, mysterious, cerebral, ruthless, cool, witty espionage suspense thriller.

    Are you talking about Bond films with that second description? I love em all, but I wouldn't call any of them that; they're mostly just silly fun :)

    I would put FRWL, GF, CR, QoS in that category.

    Fair enough, I certainly wouldn't call Goldfinger 'mysterious' or 'cerebral', probably none of the others either, but you do you :)
    I'd say all of those are fairly silly, fun adventure films to be honest. And nothing wrong with that either!
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    Posts: 1,318
    mtm wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    I wouldn’t choose a light-hearted humorous action flick at the expense of an elegant, mysterious, cerebral, ruthless, cool, witty espionage suspense thriller.

    Are you talking about Bond films with that second description? I love em all, but I wouldn't call any of them that; they're mostly just silly fun :)

    I would put FRWL, GF, CR, QoS in that category.

    Fair enough, I certainly wouldn't call Goldfinger 'mysterious' or 'cerebral', probably none of the others either, but you do you :)
    I'd say all of those are fairly silly, fun adventure films to be honest. And nothing wrong with that either!

    Ha. I'd only classify Spectre as those two qualifications.
  • Agent_Zero_OneAgent_Zero_One Ireland
    Posts: 554
    mtm wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    I wouldn’t choose a light-hearted humorous action flick at the expense of an elegant, mysterious, cerebral, ruthless, cool, witty espionage suspense thriller.

    Are you talking about Bond films with that second description? I love em all, but I wouldn't call any of them that; they're mostly just silly fun :)

    I would put FRWL, GF, CR, QoS in that category.

    Fair enough, I certainly wouldn't call Goldfinger 'mysterious' or 'cerebral', probably none of the others either, but you do you :)
    I'd say all of those are fairly silly, fun adventure films to be honest. And nothing wrong with that either!
    FRWL is the only one I think fits the 'mysterious' description. DN could work too, maybe.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,957
    Given that we see the villains formulating the plan against Bond right from the start, I'd say FRWL isn't hugely mysterious. Tense, when we get to the train, maybe.
    DN, yeah, that's a bit more mysterious.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,980
    Not commenting on Bond is Smart on Turner ‘s part.
  • Agent_Zero_OneAgent_Zero_One Ireland
    edited June 2022 Posts: 554
    mtm wrote: »
    Given that we see the villains formulating the plan against Bond right from the start, I'd say FRWL isn't hugely mysterious. Tense, when we get to the train, maybe.
    DN, yeah, that's a bit more mysterious.
    We see the plot, true, but I still think there's that thriller like atmosphere in it that makes it feel mysterious. I did recently rewatch it at night time in the dark though so that probably inflated it (good way to watch it tbh, I'd recommend it).

    I wish we had more Bond films like that honestly, I love those kind of films.
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    Posts: 1,318
    talos7 wrote: »
    Not commenting on Bond is Smart on Turner ‘s part.

    He knows how it works, thankfully.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,831
    mtm wrote: »
    Given that we see the villains formulating the plan against Bond right from the start, I'd say FRWL isn't hugely mysterious. Tense, when we get to the train, maybe.
    DN, yeah, that's a bit more mysterious.

    Off topic, but it's something I hope we come back to in future Bond films. Not the gadgets, the silliness or the extravaganza, but plots without big mysteries or big plot twists and reveals. We know what's happening, who'se involved, what's at stake, etc.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,980
    Ludovico wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Given that we see the villains formulating the plan against Bond right from the start, I'd say FRWL isn't hugely mysterious. Tense, when we get to the train, maybe.
    DN, yeah, that's a bit more mysterious.

    Off topic, but it's something I hope we come back to in future Bond films. Not the gadgets, the silliness or the extravaganza, but plots without big mysteries or big plot twists and reveals. We know what's happening, who'se involved, what's at stake, etc.

    So, Casino Royale.

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,957
    Ludovico wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Given that we see the villains formulating the plan against Bond right from the start, I'd say FRWL isn't hugely mysterious. Tense, when we get to the train, maybe.
    DN, yeah, that's a bit more mysterious.

    Off topic, but it's something I hope we come back to in future Bond films. Not the gadgets, the silliness or the extravaganza, but plots without big mysteries or big plot twists and reveals. We know what's happening, who'se involved, what's at stake, etc.

    If you like. Can't say I really have a preference, both ways have been handled well, I'd say.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,473
    Ludovico wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Given that we see the villains formulating the plan against Bond right from the start, I'd say FRWL isn't hugely mysterious. Tense, when we get to the train, maybe.
    DN, yeah, that's a bit more mysterious.

    Off topic, but it's something I hope we come back to in future Bond films. Not the gadgets, the silliness or the extravaganza, but plots without big mysteries or big plot twists and reveals. We know what's happening, who'se involved, what's at stake, etc.

    Or stop adding traitor characters that are either painfully obvious or spoiled in the marketing. Just a thought.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,831
    talos7 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Given that we see the villains formulating the plan against Bond right from the start, I'd say FRWL isn't hugely mysterious. Tense, when we get to the train, maybe.
    DN, yeah, that's a bit more mysterious.

    Off topic, but it's something I hope we come back to in future Bond films. Not the gadgets, the silliness or the extravaganza, but plots without big mysteries or big plot twists and reveals. We know what's happening, who'se involved, what's at stake, etc.

    So, Casino Royale.
    That's one reveal that works. But for the fans it was a Jekyll and Hyde twist.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,980
    While I had problems with certain specifics, in tone, NTTD was a nice blend of serious and fantastic.
  • ByRoyalDecreeByRoyalDecree
    edited June 2022 Posts: 784
    Less daytime scenes, less camp and more luxury would be a step in the right direction.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,879
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    Less daytime scenes, less camp and more luxury would be a step in the right direction.

    So you want Bond to be more like Batman?
  • ByRoyalDecreeByRoyalDecree
    edited June 2022 Posts: 784
    I want it to be less like American Beauty.
Sign In or Register to comment.