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
Fassbender was always my first choice to replace Craig, but alas, time is against his casting unfortunately.
Agreed,its such a shame.
If we knew Craig definitely WASNT coming back,back in 2015,then Fassbender still could have made about 3 films imo.
Yeah because he's cast him once. I can see no other outcome.
What Nolan film was Pattinson in?
He's in his upcoming film, Tenet.
He was the thirteen year old kid walking in the background in Memento.
(just kidding)
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/06/robert-pattinson-james-bond-danny-boyle
Gotta say, me neither.
Won't happen now that he's Batman but he's the sort of actor we should expect imo. Someone a bit edgy and different. Those expecting the likes of Henry Cavill will be disappointed I think.
And to those above saying he could do a sixth, I hope not. I love Craig but I think it really is time for a change after NTTD. Change is what keeps the series going and he has been Bond for nearly 14 years. Any longer and things really will start to feel stale imo.
After NTTD, I think it's time for a new actor in the lead role.
I don't think they'll be thinking about it right now, because they seem to take things one film at a time. But I do think the rumours of actors being considered and even screentested after SP might have had a glimmer of truth to them. It took Craig a very long time to say he was doing a fifth, which I don't think would have been the case if he knew from the start he was doing one. I think he genuinely hadn't made his mind up yet during that period. And I'm sure he was still EON's top choice, but I bet they did start to shop around a bit just in case he decided he was done.
All that's a bit redundant now though because a lot can change over a few years. An actor they may have really liked in 2016 and thought of as a good fallback if Craig said no might have been snapped up to do some other franchise by now, or might be too old, etc. They will be back to square one again once Craig's gone.
I'm sure Barbara will be trying to persuade him after all is finished with NTTD.
Oh dear no regards to harris dickinson.
I recently watched The Death Of Stalin and I thought Jason Isaac showed a lot of potential to be a very good Bond.
He would have been brilliant as Bond. Reminds me a lot of Dalton, but he's sadly too old now.
Eon need to cast an actor who 100% resembles Bond from the novels - dark hair, tall, blue eyes. Cillian Murphy may be a good shout. He has the acting chops and looks of a Dalton-type, yet has the charisma and toughness that exuded Connery and Craig too. Peaky Blinders proves he can play the tough guy and carry the lead.
You could say the same about Craig.
I think giving him the right hair style and clothes, he would be perfect. I always pictured the Fleming Bond to be slightly unusual looking, yet still handsome. The cruel description Fleming gave Bond is embodied by Cillian - to me anyway.
43. Too old to be a likely candidate at this point.
No,it wont be him,they will aim for younger for sure.
We've had the Connery, Moore and Brosnan eras mostly featuring that type of characterization, and the Lazenby, Dalton and Craig eras generally leaning toward the other type, with the Craig era being no doubt more interested than any other in understanding what drives Bond as a person. (Even if, as you say, the Dalton era was not that far removed from the Moore era in some respects, the character still exhibited much greater depth than in the Roger era, by virtue of both Dalton's acting and certain aspects of the scripts.) My point is that both takes on the role are equally valid, and one isn't inherently superior to the other. Personally, I find both to be enjoyable.
Also, I don't think the potential of Bond as a character, in the sense you're referring to, is as much as you think. There is a limitation. We can come to understand something about who he is and why he is the way he is --both through learning about his past and, more importantly, witnessing his reactions to new situations--, but we shouldn't ever feel like we've "cracked the code" on him. If that happens, the appeal of the character will dissipate, and the fantasy aspect of the films, and Bond himself, will turn into banality. He should always be a mystery to some extent, a dull man to whom exciting things happen. And the general approach to a deeper characterization of Bond shouldn't be about visiting his childhood home or learning about his foster brother, but about seeing him react to the death of a loved one he met in a mission, or considering the possibility of having a life outside the secret service. Things that arise naturally and organically out of his job, and the formula of the films.