Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1958959961963964997

Comments

  • Of the suggestions made in this thread so far, I think Timothy Dalton would make the best Bond.

    Off-topic: I can't be the only one who thinks The Phantom (1996) was totally legit and a deeply underrated 90s superhero/adventure flick...
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    Posts: 437
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Benny wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    All he needs is a trim, darkening of the hair (or not) and I think he looks fit for duty.
    At 76 I think he looks years younger than Connery in NSNA.

    Tim has said that one of the reasons he decided to not keep going as Bond after LTK was because he thought he was too old, and if he declined back in 1994 with 48, then there's NO WAY he's gonna accept to return with 76.

    I think it was a joke, old chap.

    Definitely a joke if even said. He certainly was looking towards B17 as late as autumn 1993/early '94. He just wanted to finish his three picture deal.

    Still, he looks 20 years younger in that picture.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,243
    Of the suggestions made in this thread so far, I think Timothy Dalton would make the best Bond.

    Off-topic: I can't be the only one who thinks The Phantom (1996) was totally legit and a deeply underrated 90s superhero/adventure flick...

    I think there is, at least, the most objective evidence to show that Dalton would be a good Bond.
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    Posts: 437
    Of the suggestions made in this thread so far, I think Timothy Dalton would make the best Bond.

    Off-topic: I can't be the only one who thinks The Phantom (1996) was totally legit and a deeply underrated 90s superhero/adventure flick...
    Of the suggestions made in this thread so far, I think Timothy Dalton would make the best Bond.

    Off-topic: I can't be the only one who thinks The Phantom (1996) was totally legit and a deeply underrated 90s superhero/adventure flick...

    I think there is, at least, the most objective evidence to show that Dalton would be a good Bond.

    Yeah, there is, and it's called "Framed".
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Moderator
    edited September 28 Posts: 12,968
    peter wrote: »
    @MajorDSmythe ... Wow!! That's a good shout out, even if you were being facetious! Driver would be weirdly fascinating as The Shadow.

    I want to see thist film (although I did love Alec Baldwin's version and hoped for sequels back in the day)!!!

    I was half joking. Being serious now, I see Adam Driver's name brought up regularly as a possible Cranston/Shadow. Personally, I know nothing about him, I don't think I have seen him in anything. He looks like he would be a good Shadow, standing at 6'2" he'd cut an imposing figure in the costume.
    Of the suggestions made in this thread so far, I think Timothy Dalton would make the best Bond.

    Off-topic: I can't be the only one who thinks The Phantom (1996) was totally legit and a deeply underrated 90s superhero/adventure flick...

    You aren't. I un-ironically like The Phantom, it goes well with The Shadow (1994) in a double bill.

    Also it's nice to see Tim looking well. I think he is signing the LTK dinner jacket for Christies.
  • edited September 28 Posts: 611
    I nominate this guy. By the time they start production he will be the right age.

  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited September 28 Posts: 1,695
    Thing is, it's true: none of the recent contenders have anything like the right qualities for Bond that Dalton had when he was in his 30s. There aren't even two or three stand-out candidates, let alone a solid second tier. It looks to be a pretty shallow talent pool this time around - and 'that's not gooood.'
  • Posts: 1,122
    Venutius wrote: »
    Thing is, it's true: none of the recent contenders have anything like the right qualities for Bond that Dalton had when he was in his 30s. There aren't even two or three stand-out candidates, let alone a solid second tier. It looks to be a pretty shallow talent pool this time around - and 'that's not gooood.'

    How can you or anyone on this forum (including me) possibly know that though? I know this forum is long and has had a large number of names brought up, but none of us as far as I know are casting agents or producers. Certainly not for EON anyway. There are probably dozens of contenders that haven't even been brought up in this forum yet, and I suspect a few that have been brought up/dismissed by some would probably do very well in the auditions. Hell, none of us even know who the contenders actually are.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 370
    Dalton had only done a few films of note before Bond (imo, that is). I know I didn't recognise his name or his face when he was announced, though I must have seen Flash Gordon by that point). Really it's his work after that, like his glamorous Nazi agent in The Rocketeer, where you can clearly see his Bond potential.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 11,637
    Really it's his work after that, like his glamorous Nazi agent in The Rocketeer, where you can clearly see his Bond potential.

    Tend to agree. He's better in that than he is in Bond, if you ask me. He blasts everyone else off the screen in Rocketeer, and it's not as if his Bond films were filled with massive stars.
  • QsCatQsCat London
    Posts: 230
    Of the suggestions made in this thread so far, I think Timothy Dalton would make the best Bond.

    Off-topic: I can't be the only one who thinks The Phantom (1996) was totally legit and a deeply underrated 90s superhero/adventure flick...
    Of the suggestions made in this thread so far, I think Timothy Dalton would make the best Bond.

    Off-topic: I can't be the only one who thinks The Phantom (1996) was totally legit and a deeply underrated 90s superhero/adventure flick...

    I think there is, at least, the most objective evidence to show that Dalton would be a good Bond.

    Yeah, there is, and it's called "Framed".

    Seen that. Brilliant.

    Where is your profile pic from??
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,191
    My top two choices are still Callum Turner and Sam Claflin.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 6,790
    I’m not high on C.Turner, but did see a glimmer of potential in Fantastic Beast. Sam Claflin is a solid candidate.
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    Posts: 437
    QsCat wrote: »
    Of the suggestions made in this thread so far, I think Timothy Dalton would make the best Bond.

    Off-topic: I can't be the only one who thinks The Phantom (1996) was totally legit and a deeply underrated 90s superhero/adventure flick...
    Of the suggestions made in this thread so far, I think Timothy Dalton would make the best Bond.

    Off-topic: I can't be the only one who thinks The Phantom (1996) was totally legit and a deeply underrated 90s superhero/adventure flick...

    I think there is, at least, the most objective evidence to show that Dalton would be a good Bond.

    Yeah, there is, and it's called "Framed".

    Seen that. Brilliant.

    Where is your profile pic from??

    That pic was from an AI deciption of Craigson Danny.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 1,695
    007HallY wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    Thing is, it's true: none of the recent contenders have anything like the right qualities for Bond that Dalton had when he was in his 30s. There aren't even two or three stand-out candidates, let alone a solid second tier. It looks to be a pretty shallow talent pool this time around - and 'that's not gooood.'

    How can you or anyone on this forum (including me) possibly know that though? I know this forum is long and has had a large number of names brought up, but none of us as far as I know are casting agents or producers. Certainly not for EON anyway. There are probably dozens of contenders that haven't even been brought up in this forum yet, and I suspect a few that have been brought up/dismissed by some would probably do very well in the auditions. Hell, none of us even know who the contenders actually are.

    Yeah, fair enough. By 'recent contenders' I was referring solely to the suggestions on here - not the whole gamut of British male actors in the appropriate age range. ;)
  • Posts: 1,122
    Venutius wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    Thing is, it's true: none of the recent contenders have anything like the right qualities for Bond that Dalton had when he was in his 30s. There aren't even two or three stand-out candidates, let alone a solid second tier. It looks to be a pretty shallow talent pool this time around - and 'that's not gooood.'

    How can you or anyone on this forum (including me) possibly know that though? I know this forum is long and has had a large number of names brought up, but none of us as far as I know are casting agents or producers. Certainly not for EON anyway. There are probably dozens of contenders that haven't even been brought up in this forum yet, and I suspect a few that have been brought up/dismissed by some would probably do very well in the auditions. Hell, none of us even know who the contenders actually are.

    Yeah, fair enough. By 'recent contenders' I was referring solely to the suggestions on here - not the whole gamut of British male actors in the appropriate age range. ;)

    Fair play. I think the rule of thumb applies just as much as it has usually done in the past - the most 'likely' actors to get the role won't. Maybe one of us will get lucky and have suggested the next Bond actor in the many pages of this thread, but it's unlikely.
  • Of the suggestions made in this thread so far, I think Timothy Dalton would make the best Bond.

    Off-topic: I can't be the only one who thinks The Phantom (1996) was totally legit and a deeply underrated 90s superhero/adventure flick...

    You aren't. I un-ironically like The Phantom, it goes well with The Shadow (1994) in a double bill.

    Also it's nice to see Tim looking well. I think he is signing the LTK dinner jacket for Christies.

    Cheers! Yes, The Shadow is another great one.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Brosmas is coming
    edited September 29 Posts: 5,813
    Off-topic: I can't be the only one who thinks The Phantom (1996) was totally legit and a deeply underrated 90s superhero/adventure flick...
    Yeah, I enjoy it too. In fact I think we discussed it some time ago. And I love The Phantom's costume.

    You aren't. I un-ironically like The Phantom
    Speaking of which, I do hope nobody looks at The Phantom in a so-bad-it's-good kind of way. It doesn't deserve it.

    I'm hoping for a film renaissance of these types of heroes, rather than the ones we've been seeing in recent decades.
  • mattjoes wrote: »
    Off-topic: I can't be the only one who thinks The Phantom (1996) was totally legit and a deeply underrated 90s superhero/adventure flick...
    Yeah, I enjoy it too. In fact I think we discussed it some time ago. And I love The Phantom's costume.

    You aren't. I un-ironically like The Phantom
    Speaking of which, I do hope nobody looks at The Phantom in a so-bad-it's-good kind of way. It doesn't deserve it.

    I'm hoping for a film renaissance of these types of heroes, rather than the ones we've been seeing in recent decades.

    If I was part of the discussion, it escapes my memory at the moment, but any praise of The Phantom is a good thing. I agree, it's not worthy of "so bad it's good"—it's just good and deserving of a much better assessment than it received. I too would love to see good pulpy adventure flicks return to the cinemas.

    And regarding who should be Bond, if we're looking at Americans, Billy Zane totally could have made a good Bond in the 90s/00s.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited September 29 Posts: 1,695
    007HallY wrote: »
    Fair play. I think the rule of thumb applies just as much as it has usually done in the past - the most 'likely' actors to get the role won't. Maybe one of us will get lucky and have suggested the next Bond actor in the many pages of this thread, but it's unlikely.
    Yes, true - wonder how many Bond fans would've even contemplated Craig for the role before 2005? I didn't and I'd seen him in a fair few things by that point. This time around, I'd say that A*d*n T*rn*r most looks the part - but that doesn't mean he'll be a candidate, because Adrian Paul most looked the part last time and it turns out that he wasn't even on the field, let alone in the running. Craig's probably broken the mould as far as someone's looks making them a likely contender. That must've opened it up to a lot of people who, as you say, we wouldn't expect. We could well get another left field choice as a result. Interesting times, these.
  • I think it’s particularly important not make a shitty film if they cast a minority.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 6,445
    Isn’t it the goal of all films? Whether there’s a minority in the lead or not? It’s called the film industry or film business. No one sets out to make a s*itty film.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,243
    peter wrote: »
    Isn’t it the goal of all films? Whether there’s a minority in the lead or not? It’s called the film industry or film business. No one sets out to make a s*itty film.

    True but I think they mean there's higher pressure put on a person of a marginalized group then there is your average Tom Dick or Martin Campbell.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 6,445
    EoN knows how to make a Bond film, whether there is a man of colour in the lead, or not.

    It’ll be the media who will make a big deal out of this.

    EoN and their partners always want to make the best film, with worldwide box office success in mind. The skin colour of the actor won’t change that.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,243
    peter wrote: »
    EoN knows how to make a Bond film, whether there is a man of colour in the lead, or not.

    It’ll be the media who will make a big deal out of this.

    EoN and their partners always want to make the best film, with worldwide box office success in mind. The skin colour of the actor won’t change that.

    I thought we were talking about the director? Either way, I know you’re right.
  • Posts: 1,122
    Venutius wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Fair play. I think the rule of thumb applies just as much as it has usually done in the past - the most 'likely' actors to get the role won't. Maybe one of us will get lucky and have suggested the next Bond actor in the many pages of this thread, but it's unlikely.
    Yes, true - wonder how many Bond fans would've even contemplated Craig for the role before 2005? I didn't and I'd seen him in a fair few things by that point. This time around, I'd say that A*d*n T*rn*r most looks the part - but that doesn't mean he'll be a candidate, because Adrian Paul most looked the part last time and it turns out that he wasn't even on the field, let alone in the running. Craig's probably broken the mould as far as someone's looks making them a likely contender. That must've opened it up to a lot of people who, as you say, we wouldn't expect. We could well get another left field choice as a result. Interesting times, these.

    My issue with Turner is that while he looks reasonably Bondian, I've seen nothing from him that tells me he'd bring anything unique to the role. In that sense he reminds me a lot of Clive Owen. While I was quite young at the time I remember there was a bit of online buzz around his name for the role. Even then it struck me as unlikely.

    I wouldn't say Craig's broken the mould as such, but rather he's carried on what was already the case to begin with - with a role like Bond it's not just a case of having black hair and looking good in a tuxedo. Connery wasn't exactly a conventional candidate either. I'd say it's opened up the possibilities of who could be Bond, but there's also a case to be made that the producers will ask themselves specifically 'what do we want from this next Bond' and consider actors accordingly based on this.

    But yes, I suspect we'll get a 'left field' candidate in the sense that few here or in the press would have considered them. But I think this is usually the case with these types of roles anyway. I don't know whether the next actor will be non-white (certainly in big films nowadays casting someone of a different race too the main character is actually pretty rare in practice, but we'll almost certainly get a more 'diverse' film regardless) but I think they'll be different to Craig in one way or another.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 6,445
    peter wrote: »
    Isn’t it the goal of all films? Whether there’s a minority in the lead or not? It’s called the film industry or film business. No one sets out to make a s*itty film.

    True but I think they mean there's higher pressure put on a person of a marginalized group then there is your average Tom Dick or Martin Campbell.

    Dunno if I’m right @NickTwentyTwo ( 🤷‍♂️), but @ByRoyalDecree was saying they better not make a s*itty film if they cast a man of colour.

    I think the stakes are always high while making a Bond picture. It’s a pressure cooker whether they cast Brosnan (so many expectations on his shoulders when cast, what if he didn’t live up to the hype and faltered?), or Craig (blond, short, ugly).

    But it’s mainly the media that hype this stuff.

    Audiences will always go and see the latest James Bond film. It’s up to the producers to make sure they make the films well enough so that audiences keep returning for further adventures.
  • edited September 30 Posts: 611
    Considering the political climate I’d say you wouldn't want give the anti woke mob even more ammunition. The initial controversy is good PR but if the film doesn't put the critics to sleep, there is a problem.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,243
    peter wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    Isn’t it the goal of all films? Whether there’s a minority in the lead or not? It’s called the film industry or film business. No one sets out to make a s*itty film.

    True but I think they mean there's higher pressure put on a person of a marginalized group then there is your average Tom Dick or Martin Campbell.

    Dunno if I’m right @NickTwentyTwo ( 🤷‍♂️), but @ByRoyalDecree was saying they better not make a s*itty film if they cast a man of colour.

    I think the stakes are always high while making a Bond picture. It’s a pressure cooker whether they cast Brosnan (so many expectations on his shoulders when cast, what if he didn’t live up to the hype and faltered?), or Craig (blond, short, ugly).

    But it’s mainly the media that hype this stuff.

    Audiences will always go and see the latest James Bond film. It’s up to the producers to make sure they make the films well enough so that audiences keep returning for further adventures.

    All true.
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    Posts: 437
    I think it’s particularly important not make a shitty film if they cast a minority.

    Believe me, once Bond gets into the public domain, we're gonna have a black, LGBTQ+ and trans Bond everywhere, not saying that it would be bad, but...
Sign In or Register to comment.