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
Exactly :(
Brosnan seems more conventionally handsome than Craig, but Craig has presence and a sort of masculine sex appeal that Brosnan doesn't if you ask me. Or Roger even: chiselled like a cartoon character but I'm not sure he's really described as sexy very often. I like to believe the ladies would swoon for our man.
You're his No 1 fanboy 😂
He just looked commanding in his suit and I thought he has a similar build to Craig, and similar ears lol. Who knows, a short sharp haircut can make one look instantly attractive.
I love Bale as Batman. Not a fan of any other in the role. But that's why I can't for the life of me picture Bale as Bond. He's Batman.
It's usually the first role you think of when Bale is mentioned, so it's easy to understand that.
The ladies tend to swoon over actors no matter how they look, don't they ?
Not really, from the trailer it looks like he haven't left his vampire image behind, just look at the haircut. But maybe they cast him for not a typical batman, maybe they wanted something new or fresh take on Batman, who knows.
Just asking...
I have watched every single film people recommend, he is decent actor but nothing special i could say, especially in the same league as Craig. As i said i am willing to give him a chance. If this film turned out to be great, I will be the first one to praise him ;)
No, but for comparison, I can't picture Craig either.
Oddly I can just about as he has a fairly similar attitude to the book Bond. I try to imagine Connery but oddly he never seems to fit for me. But really none of the screen Bonds come to mind when I'm reading them, it's more someone like Richard Johnson as Bulldog Drummond.
Pattinson I think could fit that mould: he's actually got a bit of a 50s look to him I'd say.
And @Univex, probably not naturally as I don’t really imagine any actor while reading the novels, but if someone asked me to imagine him, I definitely could.
Dalton for me as well.
I honestly can’t picture any of them anymore. I think I pictured Dalton at first, then Lazenby (the two who I think are closest). But re-reading them I find it really hard not to see the novel Bond as his own thing.
I agree, and I’ve said before that because of how much better people age nowadays, I’d rather an actor in his 40s for one or two films, than an actor in his late 20s/early 30s who we have to wait to grow into the role (looks wise). But I think sadly that’s just not realistic in this day and age, with how franchised everything is and how long the gaps are. They’ll want someone young enough to build a long term franchise around. There’s also the physical side too. They can’t go back to the days of over relying on stuntmen, but I bet they’re sick of Craig’s injuries. So, personally, I’ve forced myself to come to terms with the next Bond being a bit more baby faced than we’re used to. I think it’d be fine so long as they have the charisma and presence to make up for it.
This is why I don’t agree with some of the suggestions though. Too many toffs. If we’re going to have a baby faced Bond then he at least needs to look dangerous. Not poncey. If I suggest Jack O Connell I’ll just be met with cries of “too short”, but I think for a younger actor to work, it at least needs to be someone of that ilk. Someone who can do dangerous.
A young looking Roger Moore type for example, would be unbearable imo. You need to look older to pull off a lighter Bond. When Moore did the one liners and stuff, you get the sense of him being a man who’s lived long enough to be completely at ease with himself. Old and confident enough to have a wry laugh. But combine that smug poncey archetype with a babyfaced, younger look, and he’d seem annoying imo. Like a jumped up posh kid. You need to be older to pull off a lighter Bond.
But I think a Craig/Connery type in his late 20s/early 30s could work, so long as they had real presence and charisma.
Yeah Lazenby is the one that comes closest to working for me because he's got the right sort of period look (nearly) and doesn't really have a strong personality in the film so I can project book Bond's thoughts onto him.
Yep, agreed there.
Great post, and it's something to remember when making suggestions, for sure.
They're becoming all the more rare I think. Reynolds has a lightness of touch to him for sure, but his brand of comedy is a lot more extreme in comparison with Roger. He's less graceful.
Names that spring to mind for me are the George Clooney or Brad Pitt types, but even they are a bit different. Roger was very unique, all in all!
I will say this. Connery, Moore, and other actors of that vintage like Caine, were all men by the time they got to acting. They had all done National Service, and while I don't want to come across as supporting the reintroduction of National Service, it did mean that they had a man's confidence by the time they got into acting and had seen a world (immediately post war) that put acting in perspecitve. The current crop of young British actors whose names are being put forward simply don't have that and never can.
Whoever it is has to BE Bond, not act at it.