How Many Films Should a Bond Actor Do?

Well, as SP has now been completed and released, it means we've had 6 different actors portraying Bond over 24 films. That's exactly 4 films per actor on average. Ironically only 1/3 of the actors have actually done that exact number of films. Moore is a huge outlying actor with his 7, as is Laz with his 1. I was wondering what people think is the right amount of films for each actor to have under their belt, with consideration to the future actors who will surely come later.

I really think 4 is the minimum. Bond is not like other franchises. Most actors in big roles get 3 films to work with, as trilogies are usually the way studios go. But nowadays it's different. A lot of franchises are going much more. Harry Potter had a hopping 8 films with all the main cast coming back each film while Marvel actors are contracted for 9! That's a lot. It depends on the actor of course, but I like the idea of Bond actors doing 4-5. Craig should do 6, though, cuz he's awesome and deserves to be alongside Connery and Moore as one of the all time greats of the franchise.
«1345

Comments

  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 15,634
    I think 5 would be the best.
  • BirdlesonBirdleson San Jose, CA
    edited November 2015 Posts: 25,337
    I once put up a thread detailing how, overall, the franchise would have been stronger if each had stopped at their third. You'd lose TB, FYEO and a few other favorites, but we would have been sparred DAF, MR and beyond, DAD, SP (I know I'm in the minority in seeing that as a plus), and we'd have had two more George's to complete an arc, and we could have had our evasive PROPERTY OF A LADY with Dalton.
  • Posts: 581
    I would agree with 5 seems like a good number for one actor and Im hoping we get a 5th from craig
  • MurdockMurdock Mr. 2000
    Posts: 15,634
    Three per actor seems like too less. 5 is a well rounded number for a good amount of adventures.
  • SzonanaSzonana Mexico
    edited November 2015 Posts: 1,104
    Id say 4.
    I made a thread like this one on IMDB and 4 films with each looked pretty good, each of them getting at least one good film.

    Im gonna write 3 scenarios 4 with each five with each and 6.

    Scenario 1: 4 films each actor

    Sean Connery

    Dr No
    From Russia with love
    Goldfinger
    Thunderball

    George Lazenby

    You only live twice
    On her Majesty's secret service
    Diamonds are forever
    Live and let die

    Roger Moore

    The man with the golden Gun
    The spy who loved me
    Moonraker
    For your eyes only

    Timothy Dalton

    Octopussy
    A view to kill
    The living daylights
    Licence to kill

    Pierce Brosnan

    Goldeneye
    Tomorrow never dies
    The world is not enough
    Die Another day

    Daniel Craig

    Casino Royale
    Quantum of Solace
    Skyfall
    Spectre


    2nd Scenario : 5 films each actor

    Sean Connery

    Dr No
    From Russia with love
    Goldfinger
    Thunderball
    You only live Twice

    George Lazenby

    On her Majesty's secret service
    Diamonds are forever
    Live and let die
    The man with the golden gun
    The spy who loved me

    Roger Moore

    Moonraker
    For your eyes only
    Octopussy
    A view to kill
    The living daylights

    Timothy Dalton

    Licence to Kill
    Goldeneye
    Tomorrow never dies
    The world is not enough
    die Another day

    Pierce Brosnan

    Casino Royale ( he would have had a wonderful start with this one)
    Quantum of Solace
    Skyfall
    Spectre
    Bond 25


    Daniel Craig
    from Bond 26 to 30

    Or maybe someone else?
    we would have needed religiously 1 film each year so the actors we had would have been the ones we have gotten till now

    6 films each actor the most un plausible scenario with these same 6 actors maybe we would have missed Pierce with this one as well. We could have lost Craig with 5 films each so this one looks the worst to me.

    Sean Connery
    Dr No- on her majesty's secret service

    George Lazenby
    Diamonds are forever-For Your eyes only

    Roger Moore
    Octopussy- Tomorrow never dies

    Timothy
    The world is not enough-Skyfall

    Pierce Brosnan
    Spectre-Bond 30










  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!
    Posts: 16,052
    I think it ultimately depends on the qualities of the actor, the films, the time between films etcetera. If Connery hadn't developed his issues with the producers over time and if the scripts had remained of the quality of FRWL, those 6 films he did could have all been great. In fact, Connery would have rocked in OHMSS too.
  • Posts: 582
    5 films per Bond sounds good to me. My prediction when Craig started was that he would do 5 films. DC is the best Bond for me, and CR the best Bond, but it is a shame that Brosnan couldn't redeem his era with a decent 5th Bond. Having said that after DAD, it definitely felt like a change was needed.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 6,254
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    the time between films
    This. Time is of the essence. The more films you can pump out (within reason) in a Bond actor's prime, the better.
  • DragonpolDragonpol Schloss Drache ~ Writer/Director @ The Bondologist Blog
    Posts: 12,478
    Five would be a good number of Bond films for one actor, yes.
  • If we could rewrite history, and I know there are threads that do it, I would give DAF to Laz so Connery stops at 5, AVTAK to Dalts so Moore stops at 6, and do Dalts' cancelled 1 in 1991/2 and that's it really. Simple and easy, plus much more balanced. We have an actor that's done 7 films and one that did 1. It shouldn't be that way. It's easy to have perspective with the history behind us of course. They didn't know how things would turn out, but now they should know this going forward and make it happen right from the start like Marvel, who signs their big stars to 9 films. Get the next Bond actor for 5 from the first contract. Done and done.
  • Posts: 10,570
    The main thing is age upon securing the part? Then obviously gaps between filming? Unless they start making back to back films with a two year gap? On this basis its is either going to be 4 or 5 movies?
  • Posts: 1,472
    No older than 50 please (unless the guy in question is a genetic wonder) and 5 films max per actor, any more and they become stale in the part.
  • It depends, but I have always thought in 5 as the magical number. Anyway, 3 or 4 are fine, too.
  • Posts: 1,472
    To be honest no actor has so far churned out more than 4 good performances as Bond. Perhaps DC can buck this trend.
  • Lancaster007Lancaster007 Shrublands Health Clinic, England
    Posts: 1,855
    If they could produce them every two years, then I'd say 5 films per actor. That should be enough. But as things stand sometimes it's three or even four years between, then you'd have to say just 4 films each. Though I hope DC does one last film, but Bond on a mission, no navel gazing, just wham-bang-thank-you-Bond!
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!
    Posts: 16,052
    @Lancaster007, that right there is another valid argument why Craig mustn't quit now. He hasn't had his TB, his OP, his TLD yet. Let's go out with a bang and give Craig a glorified adventure flick.

    SPECTRE SPOILER
    Of course we can never do it entirely without the personal connection if they bring back Blofeld - and I hope they will - but we shouldn't continue to emphasise the fact. The YOLT Blofeld, after all, didn't mention that Bond killed Dr. No either, yet that fact seemed to have made it all rather personal for him in FRWL.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,029
    It's more a question of how long the same actor should be Bond.

    If it's a decade then 4 movies will be the most we get.
    If it's 12 years, then 5.
    Or as many as they can do within that time.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe 1962 - 2002
    Posts: 6,816
    Six. No more, no less.
  • Posts: 2,341
    In my opinion it is not determined by # of films but by the actors age. a decade of carrying the Walther PPK is adequate. Pierce Brosnan was 49 in his final outing and now that Craig is 48 and with four films (three good, one not so good) then it is time he hung it up. Just my opinion.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    It really depends on the actor imho. There is no 'canned', 'one size fits all' answer.

    -Connery (should have lost weight and he could have stayed on infinitely as far as I'm concerned)
    -Lazenby (I was ok with his one film but I wouldn't have missed him. One was enough)
    -Moore (should have packed it in with OP but could also have gone out with MR)
    -Dalton (probably should have done one more)
    -Brosnan (two would have been fine.....the first two)
    -Craig (I'd be ok if he left now. Otherwise one more).
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,029
    bondjames wrote: »
    It really depends on the actor imho. There is no 'canned', 'one size fits all' answer.

    -Connery (should have lost weight and he could have stayed on infinitely as far as I'm concerned)
    -Lazenby (I was ok with his one film but I wouldn't have missed him. One was enough)
    -Moore (should have packed it in with OP but could also have gone out with MR)
    -Dalton (probably should have done one more)
    -Brosnan (two would have been fine.....the first two)
    -Craig (I'd be ok if he left now. Otherwise one more).

    Connery and Moore did one too many.
    You should reconsider on Brosnan. Craig's first would have been TWINE followed by DAD, you really want that??
    Be glad Brosnan was there up to DAD or Craig as it is would never had happened!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2015 Posts: 23,883
    You should reconsider on Brosnan. Craig's first would have been TWINE followed by DAD, you really want that??
    Be glad Brosnan was there up to DAD or Craig as it is would never had happened!
    Now that you put it like that, I'm relieved that Brosnan took one for the team by appearing in both TWINE & DAD. I wouldn't have wanted Craig (or any actor for that matter) to suffer such humiliation.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,029
    bondjames wrote: »
    You should reconsider on Brosnan. Craig's first would have been TWINE followed by DAD, you really want that??
    Be glad Brosnan was there up to DAD or Craig as it is would never had happened!
    Now that you put it like that, I'm relieved that Brosnan took one for the team by appearing in both TWINE & DAD. I wouldn't have wanted Craig (or any actor for that matter) to suffer such humiliation.

    Brosnan is probably the only one that was able to take one (two) for the team with grace.
    I for one, am eternally grateful for that.

    I do hope Craig will do a fifth Bond movie. After Spectre it feels (at least for me) as if he has only arrived fully at the role and is now up there with Connery, not entirely but almost. A fifth movie could in fact dethrone Connery.
  • BirdlesonBirdleson San Jose, CA
    Posts: 25,337
    3 would avoid many problems.
  • Posts: 581
    Ya I think Craig has to do a 5th have him get married and Blofeld escapes n kills her trying to kill him and Bond tracks him down and kills him
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,029
    Birdleson wrote: »
    3 would avoid many problems.

    :))

    good one
  • mrchopsticks3mrchopsticks3 California
    Posts: 4
    Five at a minimum, but then again, it depends on who it is. I'm hoping DC will do at least eight, though that's doubtful at this point. I'm glad Remington Steele only did four, I was never a fan of his and was happy to see him go. I wasn't a Dalton fan either, though I wish he could have done the planned "Warhead 2000" and then called it a day.
  • SzonanaSzonana Mexico
    Posts: 1,104
    bondjames wrote: »
    You should reconsider on Brosnan. Craig's first would have been TWINE followed by DAD, you really want that??
    Be glad Brosnan was there up to DAD or Craig as it is would never had happened!
    Now that you put it like that, I'm relieved that Brosnan took one for the team by appearing in both TWINE & DAD. I wouldn't have wanted Craig (or any actor for that matter) to suffer such humiliation.

    Brosnan is probably the only one that was able to take one (two) for the team with grace.
    I for one, am eternally grateful for that.

    I do hope Craig will do a fifth Bond movie. After Spectre it feels (at least for me) as if he has only arrived fully at the role and is now up there with Connery, not entirely but almost. A fifth movie could in fact dethrone Connery.

    Ok dethroning Connery is going a little too far don't you think?
    But yes Craig doing one more would be nice so he can finally get his professional mission film with the Bond elements in Check and the Mi6 team at their place with no out of the field.

    I loved Spectre but Craig needs to close with your Typical Bond flick.

    My idea
    We leave the Madeline story out, maybe they could breifly mention things didn't work out in the end and start like any other Bond movie before Carig came to the Picture.
    He( Craig) would still be Bond but this time just getting a traditional film like the other guys did.

    He recives his mission from M, some flirting with MoneyPenny and goes with Q to get his gadgets.

    Latter goes to his missing to save the world, meets to or three Bond ladies and finishes in a happy ending with the main Bond girl without the i love you thing.

    Craig proved he is able to do a regular Bond flick now its time he closes his tenure that way.

  • Posts: 1,366
    4 for most actors. Preferable none in Craig's case.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Earth, spinning in its grave.
    Posts: 30,790
    2-7
Sign In or Register to comment.