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
Turner also has a great deep/ commanding voice. A very important point actually.
I think it's excessive masturbation and tight neck muscles (bad posture). If I recall correctly Connery had to deepen his in the voice over.
Any capable (voice) actor can lower their voice significantly.
Voice of experience?
I wouldn't know. I am only guessing of course 😁 ...on behalf of a friend
https://youtube.com/shorts/AXGx9hmLhwA?feature=share
I don't know what that word means. Excessive.
Yes I think he’s got one of the best Bond voices.
:))
News, we need news!
I remember a moment where he's with a woman who is wearing a cross around her neck. He asks if she prays for forgiveness. She replies "no, I pray for you".
Much like the bit with the last scene with Camille in Quantum.
Hamm would have been a great Bond too, but would we want an American as Bond? I think Craig fulfilled that Draper-esque potential with the role.. Somewhat ..
Pairing him with a younger Bond, as a quasi-mentor role could really work.
That could be a really nice dynamic….
You're right that Hamm would be an excellent Felix too. I wouldn't mind seeing it much!
Yes! I know he might be the wrong side of 40, but still worth screen testing. I would put him as my 4th preferred choice, behind Cavill, Turner and Hoult.
Yes, and the character should be bigger than any actor.
Like when I'm watching him, I'd liked to see the character himself not the actor.
Separate, and different.
That's the problem these days, when I'm watching movies, I'm keep seeing the actors, it's their name that keeps popping in my head, and not the character, their just acting it out without putting the essence of the character inside of them and let it show to us.
The character should be at the front, while the actor should be at the back, let the character do the work.
Now, it's different, actor at the front, character was just behind.
I should see the character, not the actor.
I don't care whoever plays the role, I don't even require them to have an Oscar-Esque acting, I just want them (don't take this literally), to become the vessel for the possession of the character.
Don't show me themselves, show me the character.
That's one of the reasons why Lazenby worked with me (though he's no means my favorite) but he put the character at the front, I see Bond, there aren't any moments where Lazenby's name pops in my head, I just keep seeing Bond the whole time, means the character was bigger than the man himself, the character overshadowed the actor.
And the same goes for Dalton, he'd let the character overshadowed him, that's why I'm keep seeing Bond the whole time and not Dalton himself.
Nowadays, it's rare, though you could see it in Timothee Chalamet as Paul Atreides in Dune and Elizabeth Olsen as Scarlet Witch, you'd never think of the actors/actresses themselves when playing the character, because you see the character on the screen.
The character should overshadow the actor.
https://variety.com/2022/film/global/james-bond-007-barbara-broccoli-michael-g-wilson-1235378239
Anybody know anything about this?
Not sure how you arrived there, but ok
“Both Wilson and Broccoli, who is a director of the U.K. chapter of women’s advocacy org Time’s Up, have left their mark on Bond, particularly in humanizing the once-womanizing spy and ensuring more fulfilling, meatier roles for the female stars of the franchise. These are qualities that will continue in the next films, says Broccoli.
“It’s an evolution,” she says. “Bond is evolving just as men are evolving. I don’t know who’s evolving at a faster pace.””
Key term being “once-womanizing.”
Fair enough, thanks for calling that out.
I think it's important to keep in mind those are Variety's words, not the producers'. Also I think when PWB was helping write NTTD, she went on record saying that you can sort of have both, with regards to keeping Bond's womanizing characteristics intact for the character, while also telling stories and developing other characters that have more respect for women than, say, Thunderball.
Variety either jumped to a conclusion or at least the producers didn’t correct them if the suggestion was brought up - but would it really come as a surprise to anyone at this point? There was no womanizing in NTTD, which is okay enough as a one-off, but there’s an expectation / integral part of Bond’s character in general to at least be somewhat promiscuous. Like, a very big part of the identity.
No one should be crying if Bond consensually sleeps with multiple women. Obviously certain things Bond says and does concerning women in the older movies don’t happen anymore, and that’s a reasonable and good thing for a modern interpretation to drop off. But I’ll never understand why some audiences always assume that the bad behaviors of a character in fiction are an endorsement of it. Have people lost the maturity to just take art for what it is? Anyway, I hope Bond retains being a ladies’ man as it is like a top 5 quality of his character in importance, otherwise we’ll just be straying too much from the character.
I'm not massively bothered either way to be honest. You can pretty much get the effect just with two women in a film (see Daylights).
Really, it should make for more drama if Bond retains this characteristic in a world/story where women have more agency and are portrayed as stronger, more independent characters.
Regardless, I do agree that this is one inextricable characteristic of Bond and should be kept.
I suspect it'll just mean they'll attempt to write Bond girls who are more interesting. And cut things like the barn scene from GF, or the part where Bond randomly kisses the nurse in TB (both of these sorts of things were unlikely to occur in a Bond film past 1980, probably even before, for what it's worth).
To be fair, as much as I criticise NTTD, I do like that the main plot focused on a backstory involving Madeline. I thought it worked and felt organic. Nomi was a bit hit or miss (from a script perspective anyway, nothing to do with the actress, and in essence Bond constantly gets the better of her before they reconcile). Most people seem to have enjoyed Paloma's scenes. I'm sure they can do better though in the sense that there are some genuinely interesting possibilities for a Bond girl or even a female villain going forward that a good actress can sink her teeth into. Doesn't have to be Bond's equal or someone with a tragic backstory (personally I'd like to see them try and adapt a Pussy Galore type from the GF novel but without the weird 'Bond turns her subplot, ie. a leader of female cat burgling organisation).
I know some people waffle on about the 'lack of sex' in NTTD, but it's nothing new. Bond in the Fleming novels often only slept with one or indeed no women at all, and definitely had a tendency to fall in love. I'm fine with Bond as a character sleeping around, having romantic moments with women, and I'm sure this will continue to be the case. That said I'm sure there's something interesting that can be explored in a future film about Bond's relationship with women (I dunno, you could have a similar set up to Fleming's TSWLM where the Bond girl is rescued by Bond in a chance encounter and years later happens to get embroiled with the same villains and seeks Bond's help. Much like in the novel, she could be infatuated with him at first, but by the end realises he's essentially a rather flawed, albeit brave man who is just as connected to danger as the villains are, and by the end they depart amiably).
Lol, that made my day.