Who should/could be a Bond actor?

19369379399419421193

Comments

  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,502
    QsCat wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I'd be less surprised if Idr
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Just finished watching The Gray Man, I really don't want Rege Jean Page as Bond. He's not intimidating at all
    I think the creatives are really trying to figure out who James Bond is in the present day. This is a lot more difficult than saying “go back to Fleming”…. They have to define his relevancy. Then design a script based upon this concept that’s also commercial and exciting, that will bring in new fans, keep the older fans content, and usher in a new 007.

    One thing I really do NOT want is endless justification of how Bond is relevant, in the very film he is IN. Every film from Skyfall onwards suffered from this. From individual lines to whole plot points, where Bond's relevance in-film was mirrored by the desperation to prove to audiences why Bond is still relevant today. I just want Bond to be in his prime and for them to bloody well get on with it. Make a great film and that will be enough to prove Bond films are still worth making, without talking about it in the script.

    I think you misunderstood what I was saying, @QsCat ...

    Think about the period of time between LTK and GE... The producers crafted a script that was taking place in an almost new world (as in the Berlin Wall fell, and how would James Bond fit into this new time).

    James Bond is a "present day" man and the producers have to rediscover the "point" of James Bond in the post Craig, post-pandemic world. I mean, what is spy-craft today? Much different than back in 1962 (not saying that 007 has ever been an accurate portrayal of a spy, but the fantasy must at least feel believable); who are contemporary villains? What is the point of having a license to kill in the mid 2020s (once again grounding the fantasy into something that feels "believable")...

    When they discover this, a script will reflect a proper adventure that fits into the present day, and the appropriate actors to lead us into the new era will also rise.

    The chance of having period-set Bond adventures are slim to none when the producers have already shot down this concept. It's not commercially viable. And EoN is, after all, in the film "business". If they want new bums in seats, they will not capture the general audiences imagination by plucking James Bond out of "today" and dumping him in the past (and no recreation of the 50s/60s will ever feel as genuine and as real as the original Connery films).

    So this wasn't me saying write a script that's about James Bond's relevancy in present day, but find the relevancy as subtext to the new era: who is James Bond and why is he here? What's his point? His value as a hero? Once they can answer these questions, a proper, contemporary story and appropriate candidates to represent this, will emerge.
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    Posts: 1,318
    peter wrote: »
    QsCat wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I'd be less surprised if Idr
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Just finished watching The Gray Man, I really don't want Rege Jean Page as Bond. He's not intimidating at all
    I think the creatives are really trying to figure out who James Bond is in the present day. This is a lot more difficult than saying “go back to Fleming”…. They have to define his relevancy. Then design a script based upon this concept that’s also commercial and exciting, that will bring in new fans, keep the older fans content, and usher in a new 007.

    One thing I really do NOT want is endless justification of how Bond is relevant, in the very film he is IN. Every film from Skyfall onwards suffered from this. From individual lines to whole plot points, where Bond's relevance in-film was mirrored by the desperation to prove to audiences why Bond is still relevant today. I just want Bond to be in his prime and for them to bloody well get on with it. Make a great film and that will be enough to prove Bond films are still worth making, without talking about it in the script.

    I think you misunderstood what I was saying, @QsCat ...

    Think about the period of time between LTK and GE... The producers crafted a script that was taking place in an almost new world (as in the Berlin Wall fell, and how would James Bond fit into this new time).

    James Bond is a "present day" man and the producers have to rediscover the "point" of James Bond in the post Craig, post-pandemic world. I mean, what is spy-craft today? Much different than back in 1962 (not saying that 007 has ever been an accurate portrayal of a spy, but the fantasy must at least feel believable); who are contemporary villains? What is the point of having a license to kill in the mid 2020s (once again grounding the fantasy into something that feels "believable")...

    When they discover this, a script will reflect a proper adventure that fits into the present day, and the appropriate actors to lead us into the new era will also rise.

    The chance of having period-set Bond adventures are slim to none when the producers have already shot down this concept. It's not commercially viable. And EoN is, after all, in the film "business". If they want new bums in seats, they will not capture the general audiences imagination by plucking James Bond out of "today" and dumping him in the past (and no recreation of the 50s/60s will ever feel as genuine and as real as the original Connery films).

    So this wasn't me saying write a script that's about James Bond's relevancy in present day, but find the relevancy as subtext to the new era: who is James Bond and why is he here? What's his point? His value as a hero? Once they can answer these questions, a proper, contemporary story and appropriate candidates to represent this, will emerge.

    Sadly you are right, as I'd love period Bond back in action again. Solid post, Peter.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,980
    The main reason for not doing a period piece, no profitable product placement. Lol.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,880
    Cubby himself wasn’t a fan of looking back or a period piece.
    Bond has to live in the present day to stay relevant.
  • Posts: 15,818
    I'm torn on this, actually. Bond films have always been set in the modern day.

    However. I do think there will come a point when enough time has passed since Fleming that Bond will have to be done in a period setting. Similar to Sherlock Holmes, Zorro, Tarzan and Dracula. Especially with the longer gaps between films, it seems inevitable to me.
    For instance, the Dracula films made prior to Hammer's 1958 DRACULA, were set in the time they were made. By the time Hammer got around to The Count, the novel was more than 50 years old so it made sense to remake the story as a period piece.

    I do feel we're getting close to that point for Bond. One can try to keep reinventing Bond and the Scooby gang for the modern era, but essentially the filmmakers are just creating new characters. Fiennes M is not the same person in the books. Neither was Dench.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited July 2022 Posts: 7,980
    I will say that having recently watched “ The Americans” and about to wrap up “Mad Men” , the prospect of a period Bond is not without its appeal.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,502
    @ToTheRight when EoN is playing in the same sandbox as the M:I films or FF or whatever action/spy’ish films are to be released now and in the future, turning back the page on Bond is not how to be competitive in the action-thriller marketplace.

    We have also had Bond films made from that era (in and around), and;

    Think about the budget for re-creating the 50s/60s! It’s an extraordinary amount, which, if it guaranteed bums in seats would be worth it.

    But is the worldwide general audience clamouring for period James Bond? I don’t think so. The juice isn’t worth the squeeze.

    This is Bond, not Indiana Jones (which has always been set in yesteryear). The producers would rather take the budget of dressing 007 in period, and use it for a contemporary set-piece that will blow audiences away and be a competitor in its genre.

  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited July 2022 Posts: 2,928
    Remember how some people feared that Phoebe W-B would emasculate Bond on the altar of Woke? As it turned out, she actually said that not only is James Bond 'absolutely relevant now' but that Bond doesn't have to change because 'he needs to be true to his character.' I think she was spot-on with that and as long as EON keep it in mind, we'll be all right.
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    Posts: 1,318
    Venutius wrote: »
    Remember how some people feared that Phoebe W-B would emasculate Bond on the altar of Woke? As it turned out, she actually said that not only is Lames Bond 'absolutely relevant now' but that Bond doesn't have to change because 'he needs to be true to his character.' I think she was spot-on with that and as long as EON keep it in mind, we'll be all right.

    Well, that didn't really turn out well, did it? Lames(t) Bond died and seemed to be a shadow of himself.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Venutius wrote: »
    Remember how some people feared that Phoebe W-B would emasculate Bond on the altar of Woke? As it turned out, she actually said that not only is Lames Bond 'absolutely relevant now' but that Bond doesn't have to change because 'he needs to be true to his character.' I think she was spot-on with that and as long as EON keep it in mind, we'll be all right.

    Well, that didn't really turn out well, did it? Lames(t) Bond died and seemed to be a shadow of himself.

    Good one.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 2,928
    Which bit of what she said do you actually disagree with, though? Have to say, I agree with all of it. It's hardly her fault if the script didn't fully bear it out - PWB didn't write it, after all, she only came in late in the day to jazz up the dialogue. She didn't have any say in Bond dying, either - Craig wouldn't have made the film at all if Bond hadn't died. I think she's right and that if EON keep in mind that the world's changed but that Bond doesn't have to, he just 'needs to be true to his character', that'll serve us well. Good spot with the 'Lames', though, JB - you could almost wonder if that was a Freudian slip if not for my clumsy, stubby fingers! ;)
  • QsCatQsCat London
    Posts: 251
    peter wrote: »
    QsCat wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I'd be less surprised if Idr
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Just finished watching The Gray Man, I really don't want Rege Jean Page as Bond. He's not intimidating at all
    I think the creatives are really trying to figure out who James Bond is in the present day. This is a lot more difficult than saying “go back to Fleming”…. They have to define his relevancy. Then design a script based upon this concept that’s also commercial and exciting, that will bring in new fans, keep the older fans content, and usher in a new 007.

    One thing I really do NOT want is endless justification of how Bond is relevant, in the very film he is IN. Every film from Skyfall onwards suffered from this. From individual lines to whole plot points, where Bond's relevance in-film was mirrored by the desperation to prove to audiences why Bond is still relevant today. I just want Bond to be in his prime and for them to bloody well get on with it. Make a great film and that will be enough to prove Bond films are still worth making, without talking about it in the script.

    I think you misunderstood what I was saying, @QsCat ...

    Think about the period of time between LTK and GE... The producers crafted a script that was taking place in an almost new world (as in the Berlin Wall fell, and how would James Bond fit into this new time).

    James Bond is a "present day" man and the producers have to rediscover the "point" of James Bond in the post Craig, post-pandemic world. I mean, what is spy-craft today? Much different than back in 1962 (not saying that 007 has ever been an accurate portrayal of a spy, but the fantasy must at least feel believable); who are contemporary villains? What is the point of having a license to kill in the mid 2020s (once again grounding the fantasy into something that feels "believable")...

    When they discover this, a script will reflect a proper adventure that fits into the present day, and the appropriate actors to lead us into the new era will also rise.

    The chance of having period-set Bond adventures are slim to none when the producers have already shot down this concept. It's not commercially viable. And EoN is, after all, in the film "business". If they want new bums in seats, they will not capture the general audiences imagination by plucking James Bond out of "today" and dumping him in the past (and no recreation of the 50s/60s will ever feel as genuine and as real as the original Connery films).

    So this wasn't me saying write a script that's about James Bond's relevancy in present day, but find the relevancy as subtext to the new era: who is James Bond and why is he here? What's his point? His value as a hero? Once they can answer these questions, a proper, contemporary story and appropriate candidates to represent this, will emerge.

    No no, I get what you’re saying. i’m just commenting on how this obsession for relevancy has been at the forefront for the last few films, and the films have suffered for it. Obviously think of relevancy when in pre-production but it doesn’t have to be signposted in the script…

    Yes, it’s going to very difficult to reinvent Bond. I don’t think the difficulty lies with addressing spy-craft though. I think the main issue is how to portray Bond as a man who lives in society today and lives the lifestyle he lives, but is also an action-man/secret agent. It’s easy if you’re going to play it as a joke, but to play it straight is very difficult. Certain tropes and habits of Bond have to be dropped, but if too many are dropped, is he still Bond?

    As much as I would like to see faithful period adaptations of the books, I think Bond ought to be a contemporary figure. Part of the appeal of the old films is that you’re watching a time capsule, you know it’s genuine. Newly-made films set in the past would just feel false, surely they’d lose some of the thrill? I want to feel that Bond could be out there currently.

    As you say, there’s no way the next film won’t be modern day, because of all of the merchandise, sponsors, sartorial elements.

    A period film seems to be easiest option, but EoN really need to just work on their ideas. If they can’t come up with an incredible film, is it really worth making them, just to keep the franchise going? Watching NTTD was largely very dull. I’m now fed up with the reused elements in every single film, I’m fed up with feeling I’ve been strung along again by a film which is just a fresh skin over an increasingly familiar and tired skeleton… I’m very conflicted on where the films should go next…
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,502
    I'm a very big fan of the Craig era, and fell in love with NTTD on first viewing... To me it was the perfect conclusion for this interpretation of the character.

    But where do they go from here? I wouldn't want that job, but I think a couple things are clear: the producers aren't suddenly going to jump back into the way things were done pre-Craig, and they're not going to try and cut and copy from the Craig era either.

    They will be going for bold and fresh to stand out in a crowded market, and I think they will do this through casting. I'd take the gamble that whoever gets cast as the next James Bond will be their most daring to date. If this is the case, my only hope is that the best man gets the job-- someone who captures the essence of who James Bond is, while ushering in his own interpretation that feels fresh and connects with the global box office....
  • Posts: 1,571
    A while ago I proposed a pair of films - perhaps three - produced all at once, a la the last two LOTR films, set in period NOT in the 60s, but in the 50s, at the times the stories were themselves set, for LALD and DN with Idris Elba. Have music of the day, etc. Ironies would abound, since imperialistic colonialism would have lead to him being a British man, and he'd be an agent of the waning Empire. Anyway, I thought it would fit for those two stories, in particular. Could wind it up with TMWTGG though it - like the book - would be such a comparatively simple, non-spectacular story after the other two. So do what they've done since the 60s - kick it up. After those two or three films, switch back to Bond in his own day. Indeed, though, without product placement deals, these films might not be financeable !
  • Posts: 693
    Dude 😂 "like a champ"
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited July 2022 Posts: 2,928
    Since62 wrote: »
    set in period NOT in the 60s, but in the 50s, at the times the stories were themselves set, for LALD and DN with Idris Elba. Have music of the day, etc. Ironies would abound, since imperialistic colonialism would have lead to him being a British man, and he'd be an agent of the waning Empire.
    I can see the dramatic potential in that - plenty of scope for tension, conflict, divided loyalties, struggling not only against your enemies but sometimes also against the system you're supposedly part of, etc.
    Thing is, though, the British Establishment of the 1950s wasn't a colourblind or classless meritocracy. Realistically, in the '50s, Elba wouldn't be a British citizen, he'd be a first-generation immigrant in a country where his very presence was resented by the authorities because a single-term, post-War socialist government had introduced Commonwealth immigration against the wishes of the Establishment. Again, there's dramatic potential there, too. But, in reality, no matter what his abilities, they wouldn't even have given him a chance to show what he could do: he'd've been blocked at every turn by the racist elites who ran the system. 'Not one of us' and all that. I fear that Elba literally wouldn't have got through the door of MI6 in the '50s, let alone have achieved 00 status.
    On the other hand, I wonder how many younger people are actually aware of just how hidebound and restrictive Britain really was back then? Probably not many, actually, so the dramatic potential could well override any sense of 'hang on a minute, that just wouldn't happen...'. It wouldn't be a documentary, after all. Hmm. I don't think I'd want it for Bond, tbh, but there could well be potential in this. If the BBC ever run anything like it, I'll remember where I heard it first, Since!
  • Posts: 1,571
    Venutius wrote: »
    Since62 wrote: »
    set in period NOT in the 60s, but in the 50s, at the times the stories were themselves set, for LALD and DN with Idris Elba. Have music of the day, etc. Ironies would abound, since imperialistic colonialism would have lead to him being a British man, and he'd be an agent of the waning Empire.
    I can see the dramatic potential in that - plenty of scope for tension, conflict, divided loyalties, struggling not only against your enemies but sometimes also against the system you're supposedly part of, etc.
    Thing is, though, the British Establishment of the 1950s wasn't a colourblind or classless meritocracy. Realistically, in the '50s, Elba wouldn't be a British citizen, he'd be a first-generation immigrant in a country where his very presence was resented by the authorities because a single-term, post-War socialist government had introduced Commonwealth immigration against the wishes of the Establishment. Again, there's dramatic potential there, too. But, in reality, no matter what his abilities, they wouldn't even have given him a chance to show what he could do: he'd've been blocked at every turn by the racist elites who ran the system. 'Not one of us' and all that. I fear that Elba literally wouldn't have got through the door of MI6 in the '50s, let alone have achieved 00 status.
    On the other hand, I wonder how many younger people are actually aware of just how hidebound and restrictive Britain really was back then? Probably not many, actually, so the dramatic potential could well override any sense of 'hang on a minute, that just wouldn't happen...'. It wouldn't be a documentary, after all. Hmm. I don't think I'd want it for Bond, tbh, but there could well be potential in this. If the BBC ever run anything like it, I'll remember where I heard it first, Since!

    Perhaps the way to do it would be that M and his close circle knew the man they wanted for the missions and selected him, elitists be damned. Thank you for clarifying - I did not know the historical state of Britain in that time period. I do think, though, that someone like M would have wanted to put the right person on a given job. Lady, gent, Indian, African, European, American, Scot, Irishman, Welshman, Englishman - whatever. The agent might not be welcome at Blades, but imagine M bringing a Bond of color to his club ! I have another idea for the LALD storyline, since American Felix Leiter would be part of it. In the middle of their time together in the US, Felix asks Bond if Bond would help Felix with a separate matter he would like to attend to, on the side. Felix is supposed to work on international matters, as a CIA guy, but Felix also has a conscience. They're in the deep US South in the early 50s for LALD at one point, a place where "strange fruit" would hang from the trees. Felix has inside info from a friend in the FBI, and Bond and he apprehend some racist murderers and hang THEM from the trees, though not dead. Tarred and feathered, with evidence tying them to crimes up in the tree, too, and set up for apprehension and unavoidable prosecution. M later tells Bond about it, and asks Bond whether he was aware of it, as in went on during Bond's visit with Felix. Bond says "No" and M says, "I see, well, certainly a job well done by whoever did it !"
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 2,928
    Since62 wrote: »
    Perhaps the way to do it would be that M and his close circle knew the man they wanted for the missions and selected him, elitists be damned.
    You know what, that might well work as the key into it, actually - if M personally brought him in, under his direct patronage, so to speak. Lots of scope for more than one layer of dramatic conflict in that: conflict with initially resentful colleagues, with the system he's actually working to protect, with the elites who run it, with the British cultural mores of the time and conflict with the villain(s). If you wrote this as a non-Bond series, the BBC might well snap it up, mate! You should give it a go, Since - really.
  • Posts: 1,571
    Venutius wrote: »
    Since62 wrote: »
    Perhaps the way to do it would be that M and his close circle knew the man they wanted for the missions and selected him, elitists be damned.
    You know what, that might well work as the key into it, actually - if M personally brought him in, under his direct patronage, so to speak. Lots of scope for more than one layer of dramatic conflict in that: conflict with initially resentful colleagues, with the system he's actually working to protect, with the elites who run it, with the British cultural mores of the time and conflict with the villain(s). If you wrote this as a non-Bond series, the BBC might well snap it up, mate! You should give it a go, Since - really.

    Quite right ! As a non-Bond it would be less restricted and more accepted, right ? They ARE a Secret Service, so surely some things were done in secret. Realistically, there would have been Secret Agents in Africa, the Middle East, India, Asia - all natives to the area who would not stick out like sore thumbs.

    One things is for sure, though, no matter what happens in such a story or in a Bond story - Canada and Australia will not be settings ! There's a law, right ?
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,502
    https://deadline.com/2022/07/the-russo-brothers-believe-british-actor-1235078614/

    The Gray Man was, without a doubt one of the silliest films I've seen and a waste of $200 million.... And what the Russo Bros did with poor Ana!!

    By far the weakest actor in the film, by a long shot, is now their suggestion to be the next James Bond! They should just focus on making a good film next time, without CGI they borrowed from 1999, and leave James Bond to the professionals!
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,513
    The only good thing that's come from The Gray Man, is that in demonstrates why Page would be a terrible fit for Bond #7. Ana was wasted in the film as well
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,502
    Quite right @Jordo007 ... I can't believe how dull and frumpy Ana was.

    The original script has been kicking around Hollywood since 2009. As I told a reader of these boards, it was highly acclaimed, based on a series of books I believe, but it was trapped in Development Hell (Ive been there myself, but, as was the case with me, the original writers were paid for all those options!).

    The original script made the prestigious Black List of 2010 and continued being passed from studio to studio until 2020; that's when Netflix made a deal with the Russo's (basically offering a blank check); they chose The Gray Man; brought on one of their Marvel writers and; did an unnecessary page one rewrite.

    I kid you not when I say the only things remaining from the original script, and the one you watched, are the title and one character name.

    That's it.

    And the finished product is far worse than a script that got on the Black List and had many suitors (while it rode Development Hell).

    The biggest sin: by changing everything about the script, including character names, the original writers weren't awarded any credit, therefore they didn't get a production fee, meaning the Russo Bros screwed the original writers in the most terrible way (basically they didn't want to share credit, or fee).

    And that's unforgivable.
  • Posts: 12,837
    Yeah I was open to giving Page a chance, because I think he does have something suave and charming about him, but seeing him try to play a harder type in The Gray Man put me right off the idea. I think you’ve got to be able to appear convincingly dangerous in some way to play Bond. Even Moore had that side to him (not so much in the fights, but he played his coldest moments to perfection), it was just buried beneath even more charm than usual. Page doesn’t seem like he has that in him.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,513
    @peter that's unbelievable isn't it. I take it that must happen a lot in the industry though? Makes you wonder why they wanted the script, only to completely overhaul it

    Yeah I'm not sold on a few potential actors in the running. Nothing against Page, he's just not got that edge to him, that you need to be Bond. Didn't the producers once compare Bond to a coiled spring? That's what I think of when I judge most of candidates and I don't see that in most of them
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,502
    @Jordo007 … yes, it’s confusing when producers take a script and change everything about the story. It’s understandable to keep the title (since it’s IP (in this case based on a series of books)).

    I’ve backed out of guessing about potential candidates and was only heard-heartedly throwing my two cents into the ring. But I do know my feelings on Page are a hard no!

    No one genuinely excites me, though.

    I do believe that once EoN have a script, we will see the true potentials rise (since the producers at EoN and Amazon/MGM will have a defined “type” they will be seeking based on the new direction and script; now it’s just guess work, and no one is genuinely standing out).
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,473
    peter wrote: »
    https://deadline.com/2022/07/the-russo-brothers-believe-british-actor-1235078614/

    The Gray Man was, without a doubt one of the silliest films I've seen and a waste of $200 million.... And what the Russo Bros did with poor Ana!!

    By far the weakest actor in the film, by a long shot, is now their suggestion to be the next James Bond! They should just focus on making a good film next time, without CGI they borrowed from 1999, and leave James Bond to the professionals!

    It was an awfully generic film...so of course Netflix is moving forward with a sequel and spinoff. What a world.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited July 2022 Posts: 2,928
    Since62 wrote: »
    Realistically, there would have been Secret Agents in Africa, the Middle East, India, Asia - all natives to the area who would not stick out like sore thumbs.
    Yes, I see what you mean - there'd be places and cases where a black agent would be the only realistic guy for the job. The M-figure could've handled him on a few previous cases in, say, a colonial context. Then, a few years on, when he's got the top job back in the UK, he could maybe use his own authority to bring your guy over here to deal with a case among, say, first-generation immigrants from whatever colony, who're now in London. Maybe an anti-British cell who're working to free their country from colonial rule through terrorism, political/financial scheming (or all of them). Something like that.
    Bringing your guy over to infiltrate that community would by-pass the initial Establishment barriers - and there's your man, right in the game where you want him. All the juicy dramatic conflict we mentioned earlier could then unfold as the story went on. At the end, he's proved his worth in a British context and gets asked to stay and carry on - despite the ongoing resentment in certain quarters. And from there, you could come up with further storylines. That actually does sound pretty feasible to me. I really do think you could be onto something here, Since - go for it!
  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited July 2022 Posts: 8,502
    There must be a better way of spending $200 plus, eh @Creasy47 ?… I hope Ana and her reps get her out of any future films. They made a dynamic actor into a frumpy, bored-looking, monotone in delivery, character…
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited July 2022 Posts: 2,928
    I know Mendes said that, prior to seeing CR, he just couldn't envisage Daniel Craig as James Bond - so it's possible that Rege-Jean Page could surprise everybody. Then again, Page is no Craig, tbf. So it's a no from me too.
Sign In or Register to comment.