Where does Bond go after Craig?

1482483485487488538

Comments

  • edited February 29 Posts: 3,024
    I might be in the minority here, but I actually don’t think Harry Styles is a very good actor at all. Or at least not a natural one. He’s fine in Dunkirk, and I suspect if he gets a director adept at working closely with actors they can work with his limitations, but I really didn’t like him in DWD, and I’ve heard from others his performance in My Policeman is flat (not seen it myself beyond clips, but I can see what they mean just based on this).

    I do agree he’s got charisma in real life, but I’ve not found that translates into his film work. It’s unlikely he’ll be the next Bond (celebrities of his level have never gotten the role, and even if they felt the need to go with him to gain an under 30 audience it’d be utterly pointless. I suspect not an awful lot of his fanbase would be Bond fans anyway, and it’s not as though any of his films with him on top billing have been massive hits).
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,047
    007HallY wrote: »
    I might be in the minority here, but I actually don’t think Harry Styles is a very good actor at all. Or at least not a natural one. He’s fine in Dunkirk, and I suspect if he gets a director adept at working closely with actors they can work with his limitations, but I really didn’t like him in DWD, and I’ve heard from others his performance in My Policeman is flat (not seen it myself beyond clips, but I can see what they mean just based on this).

    I do agree he’s got charisma in real life, but I’ve not found that translates into his film work. It’s unlikely he’ll be the next Bond (celebrities of his level have never gotten the role, and even if they felt the need to go with him to gain an under 30 audience it’d be utterly pointless. I suspect not an awful lot of his fanbase would be Bond fans anyway, and it’s not as though any of his films with him on top billing have been massive hits).

    I would tend to agree. He's a charismatic person but he has a long, long way to go before I'd even think of him as a decent actor. He needs to lose that self-awareness thing, to start; everytime he's about to say a line you can see him thinking about it.
  • edited February 29 Posts: 3,024
    007HallY wrote: »
    I might be in the minority here, but I actually don’t think Harry Styles is a very good actor at all. Or at least not a natural one. He’s fine in Dunkirk, and I suspect if he gets a director adept at working closely with actors they can work with his limitations, but I really didn’t like him in DWD, and I’ve heard from others his performance in My Policeman is flat (not seen it myself beyond clips, but I can see what they mean just based on this).

    I do agree he’s got charisma in real life, but I’ve not found that translates into his film work. It’s unlikely he’ll be the next Bond (celebrities of his level have never gotten the role, and even if they felt the need to go with him to gain an under 30 audience it’d be utterly pointless. I suspect not an awful lot of his fanbase would be Bond fans anyway, and it’s not as though any of his films with him on top billing have been massive hits).

    I would tend to agree. He's a charismatic person but he has a long, long way to go before I'd even think of him as a decent actor. He needs to lose that self-awareness thing, to start; everytime he's about to say a line you can see him thinking about it.

    Yeah, I definitely got a sense in DWD that I could ‘see him acting’. Again, I don’t think he’s a very natural (or indeed experienced) actor, but he can certainly improve and has the potential to do so. For Bond though I think we need a bit more gravitas and acting experience there unfortunately.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,602
    I knew nothing about Styles other than my girls had a crush on him and he dresses like a poor version of David Bowie at premieres, so this was the first time I laid eyes on him earnest.

    Even though I found his performance uneven in DWD, I didn’t notice a self awareness or a telegraphing of his lines.

    He certainly has presence and he’s very comfortable in front of the camera. I don’t think he’s right for Bond, yet. But with a few more years cooking in the oven, his toolbox will grow, and if his skills start to match his charisma, he could be a force in front of the camera.

    I haven’t looked up his age, but in ten or so years could he be a Bond candidate? I wouldn’t doubt it, if he continues on this trajectory.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited February 29 Posts: 5,869
    When it comes to Don't Worry Darling, I definitely think the film is better than people make it out to be. Styles' acting is a bit rough but given at the time he was just starting out as an actor I give him somewhat the benefit of the doubt.

    I actually think what let down the film more was the personal stuff going on between Styles and Wilde. It kinda overshadowed the film and its press tour. Not to mention there were rumours going around that it wasn't the most professional of sets, with the relationship supposedly overshadowing the filmmaking and that relationship ending before the film's press tour.

    Bringing it back to Styles as Bond though, I honestly think even if he was a more natural actor, he's just not suited and I think casting someone whose mainly involved in the music industry as Bond would be a mistake.

    I do think he'd create a really cool theme though for a future film?
  • edited February 29 Posts: 503
    peter wrote: »
    I haven’t looked up his age, but in ten or so years could he be a Bond candidate?

    I believe 30 year old Harry Styles is right now at the perfect age to start playing Bond. It's certainly better than 40. Also, 10 years from now likely there will be no Bond franchise anymore. People who doubt this really don't understand that we are at the precipice of the biggest change in human history.
  • peter wrote: »
    I haven’t looked up his age, but in ten or so years could he be a Bond candidate?

    I believe 30 year old Harry Styles is right now at the perfect age to start playing Bond. It's certainly better than 40. Also, 10 years from now likely there will be no Bond franchise anymore. People who doubt this really don't understand that we are at the precipice of the biggest change in human history.

    Claiming 10 years from now there likely won’t be a Bond franchise is a bold assertion quite frankly.
  • edited February 29 Posts: 3,024
    Denbigh wrote: »
    When it comes to Don't Worry Darling, I definitely think the film is better than people make it out to be. Styles' acting is a bit rough but given at the time he was just starting out as an actor I give him somewhat the benefit of the doubt.

    I actually think what let down the film more was the personal stuff going on between Styles and Wilde. It kinda overshadowed the film and its press tour. Not to mention there were rumours going around that it wasn't the most professional of sets, with the relationship supposedly overshadowing the filmmaking and that relationship ending before the film's press tour.

    Bringing it back to Styles as Bond though, I honestly think even if he was a more natural actor, he's just not suited and I think casting someone whose mainly involved in the music industry as Bond would be a mistake.

    I do think he'd create a really cool theme though for a future film?

    That's more likely I think. He could potentially do a good job on it too.

    I wasn't much a fan of DWD, but it sounds like a troubled production. And to be fair to Styles I think some of that backstory suggests he was brought on late in the day. From what I understand Shia LeBeouf was the original choice, but there's a bit of mixed messaging over whether he was fired or quit.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited February 29 Posts: 8,009
    Now I know that someone is going to dig up an extremely flamboyant photo to counter this, he’s an entertainer with a broad range, but this photo shows his potential. He has an excellent speaking voice and charisma for days. Casting him would truly bring Bond into the modern era and would fit the criteria of reinvention.

    QS70W45.jpg
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,997
    peter wrote: »
    I haven’t looked up his age, but in ten or so years could he be a Bond candidate?

    I believe 30 year old Harry Styles is right now at the perfect age to start playing Bond. It's certainly better than 40. Also, 10 years from now likely there will be no Bond franchise anymore. People who doubt this really don't understand that we are at the precipice of the biggest change in human history.

    Claiming 10 years from now there likely won’t be a Bond franchise is a bold assertion quite frankly.

    If Barbara and Michael thought there wouldn't be a Bond franchise in ten years, they would be trying to sell *now*, to maximize their value before the bottom drops out.

    But they're not, as far as we know.

    Copyright is a very tricky thing.
  • edited February 29 Posts: 3,024
    peter wrote: »
    I haven’t looked up his age, but in ten or so years could he be a Bond candidate?

    I believe 30 year old Harry Styles is right now at the perfect age to start playing Bond. It's certainly better than 40. Also, 10 years from now likely there will be no Bond franchise anymore. People who doubt this really don't understand that we are at the precipice of the biggest change in human history.

    I'm not gonna lie, this post is very fun to read with different Bond villain voices in mind.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,047
    peter wrote: »
    I haven’t looked up his age, but in ten or so years could he be a Bond candidate?

    I believe 30 year old Harry Styles is right now at the perfect age to start playing Bond. It's certainly better than 40. Also, 10 years from now likely there will be no Bond franchise anymore. People who doubt this really don't understand that we are at the precipice of the biggest change in human history.

    moonrakerdorks.png?resize=670%2C340&ssl=1
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited February 29 Posts: 5,869
    I think also given the context of how Styles was received as an actor, being laughed at and memed, do you run the risk of repeating that by giving him a large cultural role such as James Bond, especially with only Don't Worry Darling, My Policeman and his cameo in Eternals on his resume?
  • peter wrote: »
    I haven’t looked up his age, but in ten or so years could he be a Bond candidate?

    I believe 30 year old Harry Styles is right now at the perfect age to start playing Bond. It's certainly better than 40. Also, 10 years from now likely there will be no Bond franchise anymore. People who doubt this really don't understand that we are at the precipice of the biggest change in human history.

    Claiming 10 years from now there likely won’t be a Bond franchise is a bold assertion quite frankly.

    It's not the Bond Franchise. It's cinema as we know it. ;)
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,158
    peter wrote: »
    I haven’t looked up his age, but in ten or so years could he be a Bond candidate?

    I believe 30 year old Harry Styles is right now at the perfect age to start playing Bond. It's certainly better than 40. Also, 10 years from now likely there will be no Bond franchise anymore. People who doubt this really don't understand that we are at the precipice of the biggest change in human history.

    They literally postponed the Dune 2 release date out of the ideal holiday slot in December until March because the actors couldn't market the movie.
  • A tattooed popstar? "Would you put a bumper sticker on a Bentley" comes to mind.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,009
    Daniel has several; I don’t recall seeing a single one on screen when he was Bond. Makeup is a wonderful thing.

    https://inkedceleb.com/daniel-craig-tattoo-list/
  • peter wrote: »
    I haven’t looked up his age, but in ten or so years could he be a Bond candidate?

    I believe 30 year old Harry Styles is right now at the perfect age to start playing Bond. It's certainly better than 40. Also, 10 years from now likely there will be no Bond franchise anymore. People who doubt this really don't understand that we are at the precipice of the biggest change in human history.

    Claiming 10 years from now there likely won’t be a Bond franchise is a bold assertion quite frankly.

    It's not the Bond Franchise. It's cinema as we know it. ;)

    Is it though? All I’m seeing are bold claims with little to no evidence to back them up.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,602
    peter wrote: »
    I haven’t looked up his age, but in ten or so years could he be a Bond candidate?

    I believe 30 year old Harry Styles is right now at the perfect age to start playing Bond. It's certainly better than 40. Also, 10 years from now likely there will be no Bond franchise anymore. People who doubt this really don't understand that we are at the precipice of the biggest change in human history.

    Claiming 10 years from now there likely won’t be a Bond franchise is a bold assertion quite frankly.

    It's not the Bond Franchise. It's cinema as we know it. ;)

    Is it though? All I’m seeing are bold claims with little to no evidence to back them up.

    But didn’t you get the memo, @007ClassicBondFan ?? @DEKE_RIVERS knows all, all knows DekeRivers. One line words of wisdom, he comes not to troll, but to educate. He knows all, and all knows him.
  • peter wrote: »
    I haven’t looked up his age, but in ten or so years could he be a Bond candidate?

    I believe 30 year old Harry Styles is right now at the perfect age to start playing Bond. It's certainly better than 40. Also, 10 years from now likely there will be no Bond franchise anymore. People who doubt this really don't understand that we are at the precipice of the biggest change in human history.

    Claiming 10 years from now there likely won’t be a Bond franchise is a bold assertion quite frankly.

    It's not the Bond Franchise. It's cinema as we know it. ;)

    Is it though? All I’m seeing are bold claims with little to no evidence to back them up.

    Two strikes last year.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,158
    peter wrote: »
    I haven’t looked up his age, but in ten or so years could he be a Bond candidate?

    I believe 30 year old Harry Styles is right now at the perfect age to start playing Bond. It's certainly better than 40. Also, 10 years from now likely there will be no Bond franchise anymore. People who doubt this really don't understand that we are at the precipice of the biggest change in human history.

    Claiming 10 years from now there likely won’t be a Bond franchise is a bold assertion quite frankly.

    It's not the Bond Franchise. It's cinema as we know it. ;)

    Is it though? All I’m seeing are bold claims with little to no evidence to back them up.

    They are just being silly. No one knows what the true impact of AI will be and on what timeframe.

    Dune part 2 was just pushed from a perfectly good holiday opening in December into early March, despite being completed and ready to show, because they were afraid the cast wouldn't be able to market the film due to strikes. But we're supposed to believe in 10 years not only will there be no actors, but there won't be any franchises left.
  • talos7 wrote: »
    Daniel has several; I don’t recall seeing a single one on screen when he was Bond. Makeup is a wonderful thing.

    https://inkedceleb.com/daniel-craig-tattoo-list/

    A few, yeah. Done in the '90s and have meanings behind them. Styles is plastered in meaningless doodles.
  • peter wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I haven’t looked up his age, but in ten or so years could he be a Bond candidate?

    I believe 30 year old Harry Styles is right now at the perfect age to start playing Bond. It's certainly better than 40. Also, 10 years from now likely there will be no Bond franchise anymore. People who doubt this really don't understand that we are at the precipice of the biggest change in human history.

    Claiming 10 years from now there likely won’t be a Bond franchise is a bold assertion quite frankly.

    It's not the Bond Franchise. It's cinema as we know it. ;)

    Is it though? All I’m seeing are bold claims with little to no evidence to back them up.

    But didn’t you get the memo, @007ClassicBondFan ?? @DEKE_RIVERS knows all, all knows DekeRivers. One line words of wisdom, he comes not to troll, but to educate. He knows all, and all knows him.

    He's ok, man. I never write long paragraphs.
  • peter wrote: »
    I haven’t looked up his age, but in ten or so years could he be a Bond candidate?

    I believe 30 year old Harry Styles is right now at the perfect age to start playing Bond. It's certainly better than 40. Also, 10 years from now likely there will be no Bond franchise anymore. People who doubt this really don't understand that we are at the precipice of the biggest change in human history.

    Claiming 10 years from now there likely won’t be a Bond franchise is a bold assertion quite frankly.

    It's not the Bond Franchise. It's cinema as we know it. ;)

    Is it though? All I’m seeing are bold claims with little to no evidence to back them up.

    They are just being silly. No one knows what the true impact of AI will be and on what timeframe.

    Dune part 2 was just pushed from a perfectly good holiday opening in December into early March, despite being completed and ready to show, because they were afraid the cast wouldn't be able to market the film due to strikes. But we're supposed to believe in 10 years not only will there be no actors, but there won't be any franchises left.

    Nobody knows but I would take it seriously.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,158
    peter wrote: »
    I haven’t looked up his age, but in ten or so years could he be a Bond candidate?

    I believe 30 year old Harry Styles is right now at the perfect age to start playing Bond. It's certainly better than 40. Also, 10 years from now likely there will be no Bond franchise anymore. People who doubt this really don't understand that we are at the precipice of the biggest change in human history.

    Claiming 10 years from now there likely won’t be a Bond franchise is a bold assertion quite frankly.

    It's not the Bond Franchise. It's cinema as we know it. ;)

    Is it though? All I’m seeing are bold claims with little to no evidence to back them up.

    They are just being silly. No one knows what the true impact of AI will be and on what timeframe.

    Dune part 2 was just pushed from a perfectly good holiday opening in December into early March, despite being completed and ready to show, because they were afraid the cast wouldn't be able to market the film due to strikes. But we're supposed to believe in 10 years not only will there be no actors, but there won't be any franchises left.

    Nobody knows but I would take it seriously.

    No one is disputing AI will be disruptive, and carries a lot of scary implications if nothing is done to curtail it.
  • Posts: 1,550
    CrabKey wrote: »
    I believe it will be a mistake to cast someone well known. They come with too much familiarity and too much expectation. For me Connery and Lazenby were fresh faces. Moore and Brosnan came with their TV personas. While they made enjoyable films, neither convinced me they were Bond. Craig was known, but he didn't have that TV series familiarity.

    You left Dalton out? 😃

    Dalton same as Craig and one of the better Bonds.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 1,384
    CrabKey wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    I believe it will be a mistake to cast someone well known. They come with too much familiarity and too much expectation. For me Connery and Lazenby were fresh faces. Moore and Brosnan came with their TV personas. While they made enjoyable films, neither convinced me they were Bond. Craig was known, but he didn't have that TV series familiarity.

    You left Dalton out? 😃

    Dalton same as Craig and one of the better Bonds.

    :)>-
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,602
    peter wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    I haven’t looked up his age, but in ten or so years could he be a Bond candidate?

    I believe 30 year old Harry Styles is right now at the perfect age to start playing Bond. It's certainly better than 40. Also, 10 years from now likely there will be no Bond franchise anymore. People who doubt this really don't understand that we are at the precipice of the biggest change in human history.

    Claiming 10 years from now there likely won’t be a Bond franchise is a bold assertion quite frankly.

    It's not the Bond Franchise. It's cinema as we know it. ;)

    Is it though? All I’m seeing are bold claims with little to no evidence to back them up.

    But didn’t you get the memo, @007ClassicBondFan ?? @DEKE_RIVERS knows all, all knows DekeRivers. One line words of wisdom, he comes not to troll, but to educate. He knows all, and all knows him.

    He's ok, man. I never write long paragraphs.

    Yes, but you're funny (and you may be the next Bond).
  • Posts: 1,550
    delfloria wrote: »
    The longer they wait on #26 the less the next generation of film going audiences will be tied to Craig, making a fresh start much easier. Personally, I look forward to an "unknown" like Connery, Lazenby, Dalton and Craig.

    Is being tied to Craig really an issue? The best Bond of all bowed out twice and the next Bond film with a new actor was released in two years. I don't need half a decade to get Craig out of my system. That happened with the credit roll at the end of NTTD. Craig was a very good Bond, but Bonds come and go. The first time it happened was jarring, but it's long been a routine.

  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited February 29 Posts: 8,602
    CrabKey wrote: »
    delfloria wrote: »
    The longer they wait on #26 the less the next generation of film going audiences will be tied to Craig, making a fresh start much easier. Personally, I look forward to an "unknown" like Connery, Lazenby, Dalton and Craig.

    Is being tied to Craig really an issue? The best Bond of all bowed out twice and the next Bond film with a new actor was released in two years. I don't need half a decade to get Craig out of my system. That happened with the credit roll at the end of NTTD. Craig was a very good Bond, but Bonds come and go. The first time it happened was jarring, but it's long been a routine.

    Some believe that if there was a longer between period Moore and Dalton, that Dalton may have had a better shot with audiences.

    Moore had an impact, and his depiction resonated, and, I think there's an element of truth that this may've hurt Dalton's fortunes as the character.

    Craig had been Bond for 15'ish years, and although the fandom may be ready to move on, the worldwide audiences have only known one actor in the role, for a decade and a half.

    Separation and time, from one era to another, is good for many reasons, but one of them is to give the new guy a solid runway to soar.
Sign In or Register to comment.