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
You must be high tonight, or some other form of intoxication my dear @Univex. Tomorrow another day...
I think the advantage of an actor only getting 2-3 films is that he'll be in the role long enough to make an impression and (hopefully) leave us wanting more.
I think jack lowden will be in the mix.
Eh eh, I knew you'd say that, dear friend. Don't fret, Turner is still the most viable choice as far as star status and age are concerned.
Any of these two as Bond would make me one happy fan.
“We weren’t sure if the show would have an audience, whether people would remember or care about the books or anything, and it just felt big to be in the centre leading this show.
“British actor, British character - would people buy it? Do people want an Irish guy doing that?”
Spoiler alert: They certainly do want that, if the show’s weekly ratings and army of loyal fans are anything to go by.
There are even rumours of the Poldark lead being a favourite to play the next James Bond when the time comes.
The actor should find that role to be an easy enough transition—the two characters get up to roughly the same things in different time periods-- except that 007 tends to keep his shirt on a bit more.
I'm not understanding this new trend of advocating a Bond actor only do 2 or 3 films. That was never the intention of the producers.
The contract for a new Bond actor tends to be 3 films with the option of a 4th. If the films are a success (which is almost ALWAYS the case), the actor is then signed either per film or with a renewed contract altogether.
Craig was signed an open ended contract for an additional 2 films during SF for instance. Roger was signed on a one film basis after his initial contract expired.
Tim's 3 film contract expired during the delay and Cubby wanted him to sign another multi-picture contract once the series was restarted.
Cubby wanted his Bond actors to stick around.
Had Barbara and Michael not lucked out and secured the rights for CR, Brosnan almost certainly would have signed for a 5th outing, and possibly a 6th.
You Turner fans will clutch at every available straw.
That kind of article has been written numerous times, just replace the actor and the program, we've seen it all before.
Aidan Turner makes Shartlake a dull boy. Oh well.
No. Toffs can't play Bond....you need someone who has the grit and swagger to play someone with class and elegance. however, they need that animalistic quality. It's what makes both Sean Connery and Daniel's casting so perfect.
I really think that the best choice is Jack O'Connell. Recent photos of JOC at the Venice Film Festival have only gone further in confirming my suspicions that this guy is the perfect choice for 007.
He isn't there yet........................give it a few years when they reboot in 2022 and he'll be terrific.
Er, I'm not sure if this is supposed to be tongue in cheek or not @Murdock but if it isn't then you're being quite harsh here. He's put in plenty of good performances in many other films, and I thought he was quite good in that. To say he'll never be there is a bit silly - I've seen plenty of suggestions that are far worse than O'Connell, though he wouldn't be my first choice either.
That's if Eon goes back to a normal schedule for B26.
Productivity since LTK has been reduced to half. If that diminishing rate continues, we would only get 4 more films within the next 30 years....and that's counting NTTD.
My estimate is we're looking at close to a decade from now before cameras roll on B26, which would make Turner 45/46 when he starts. Roger's initial Bond age.
By then Turner should look great.
You'd have Brett Ratner directing if Aidan Turner could be Bond.
New blood???? the crew for Bond 25 is top-notch and you'd be singing their praises if it was your boy instead of Craig.
You are transparent.
He is a phenomenal actor and has a great presence.
There promotion his new movie where he looks a bit like Daniel Craig in days of Tombraider and Casino Royale. On the red carpet he wear some kind of tux, but i think his performance and English voice growing that he mabey should play Bond. If not Bond, mabey another agent or ally. I think mabey there should recast the part of Jafar for The Return of Jafar.
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1981893/
Of course it wil break the option to stil casting a older then me actor as 7th 007. He is from 1982.
Believe this same premiere, but then with his wife/girl friend.
And another picture from the two from last year
Lakes aren't known to be very transparent either.
I'm sorry????
So true, @Shardlake ... so true...
Seeing the Instagram pics of DC Bond fighting one of the thugs he knocked off the bike, it looks like we're making a U-turn back to the CR days... Craig, unlike any Bond before him, has captured the vulnerable, and; the visceral violence of this man's life, and; his desperation to survive-- like no other...
I will miss this bloke quite a bit... No, a lot....
We will see how Eon treads into the muddy waters of replacing Craig. I don't see it as a decision that will come swiftly, nor lightly... Daniel Craig broke the mold-- literally and in every way, while capturing the Fleming spirit--... Very hard to replace....
I agree, think we'll probably get another few year gap, but I'm actually not so sure that that's a good thing. Getting the next one out quicker would stop the memory of Craig from looming too large and casting too big a shadow, and would calm down the people who think that Lynch's new 007 will be taking over the franchise.
Replacing Craig is a very tricky one imo because on the one hand, they should go for something different. That's always the best way to help people get over the last guy, and after so many years a real change of direction and sense of freshness is needed. They can't just copy Craig.
But on the other hand I think he has sort of redefined who Bond is now and I fully expect there to be some similarities between him and the next guy. Brosnan was Cubby's choice, Craig was Barbara's and she seems much happier with him and the sort of films they make now. So I think those hoping for another Moore/Brosnan type will be disappointed.
That's why Jack O Connell would be good I think. Similar sort of actor to Craig, seems very much BB's type, but he's so much younger and I think that and the energy it brings would in itself be enough to set him apart, after a couple of films now of an older more weary Bond.