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
I have no ideia how someone can say that, my friend. No ideia.
Killed it? Yes, murdered it for good, I'm sure ;)
He's an arrow hair bleached skinny unstylish alien looking guy. He should have made himself a favour and kept doing those weird brilliant roles, like in the Lighthouse, and steered clear of superheroes. He was just starting to earn the community's respect by distancing himself from that godawful Twilight affair, and now he takes on the Batman? I'm willing to bet that won't go as brilliant as most people think.
I concur wholeheartedly.
Well, the swastika armband makes the comparison slightly awkward. ;)
+1.
As for the reasoning, I could easily say that Aiden Turner is an oversized looking rat who should probably stick to television as he probably wouldn’t do well as a leading man in films...
...but I don’t because I understand the subjectiveness but it’s cool we can just use insults as reasons not to cast someone ;)
Great discussion guys.
@Denbigh knows what I'm all about, we're friends, we're not even arguing really. Trust me. @mtm just loves to use the word "nasty". Who else does that these days, I wonder?
Again, just kidding. He knows that as well, don't you, @mtm?
Let's all be subjective, shall we? :)
BTW, @Denbigh, loved the "Aiden Turner is an oversized looking rat who should probably stick to television as he probably wouldn’t do well as a leading man in films". Well done. We should do one for all of the proposed candidates ;) We've got two pinned down already.
Aidan Turner gets paid to model for Dunhill. So his good looks aren’t altogether subjective.
I get what you are saying though. It’s all in in jest on here mind.
What? I have no idea what you're talking about. Dalton?
No, I think throwing names and insults around is nasty and we should be able to cope with others' suggestions without trying to denigrate them, what's the problem with that? NicNac just told you to disagree nicely so you have to try and get a dig in.
And yes I do understand the real reasoning behind your destain for Pattinson @Univex, and that it's more to do with the more classic, older James Bond you would like.
And @mtm I understand you destain for insults as reason for non-casting as I also feel the same way. I think they can be unjustified a lot of the time.
Anyway, back on track, I actually still think Aaron-Taylor Johnson should be given a shot at a screentest. As said on another page, I enjoyed him in the little screentime he had in Tenet, and could be a really interesting choice imo :)
I'm just saying whoever they pick as Bond, would be loved by 95% of Bond fans. I can't believe that Craig is now seen as 'Difficult To Replace', when few years back, he was seen as unbondian....Wow!!!
By some. Not by me. He still looks like he could be Bond's KGB counterpart. Actually that would 've made him FAR cooler in my book. Two of the highest caliber agents, entangled in a film length vendetta.
Sure. Just keep earning your kudos with the folk.
I don't get offended when a friend calls me a "Turner fanboy". I laugh with him about it. So does @Denbigh when we talk about Ro-Pat, or Callum, or the other Turner. We have fun with it.
@NicNac thinks we're brawling because you pointed your finger at it, trying in your very particular way to ignite a fire and put it out at the same time, whilst earning social kudos and position in the thread and forums. And if you "don't know what I'm talking about" then you're not the smart fella I think you are. Thing is, not everyone's blind at it. And trust me, many aren't oblivious to your tactics. If you are, well, then your active subconscious is taking the best out of you.
I'm not going into this all over again, just to be finger pointed by the mods like if the fault was mine. These social tactics are too obvious for that. You try to win people over by alienating others. You bring members to the point of exhaustion just to point out that they're being rude to you, and then you obsessively insist they defend themselves, while you bury them deeper and deeper into a web of compulsory responses. Who the hell doesn't see all of this here? Who do you think is that blind?
Funny thing is, you don't need all of that. You're a smart guy, a brilliant artist, one with awesome opinions and rhetoric. I agree with you more often that not. I've praised your work, ... So you really don't need those tiresome tactics that "you know nothing about". Just chill and enjoy our bantering and friendship.
Me and @NicNac go way back, @Denbigh and I are good friends. And I sincerely hoped that by now you were amicable as well. No one is arguing, no one will.
Yeah it's hard to see someone as sort of raw and magnetic as him at the moment... I'm certainly not jealous of them having to make a decision! As others have said, it's all down to that screentest.
I'd love someone like Adrian Turner to be it but I am slightly dubious at his ability to hold a movie, but who knows, maybe he'll blow that screentest away and be brilliant.
And about that last post of yours, @mtm, I agree. With all of it. See? ;)
I also think the whole "is Bond relevant?" thing should be dropped to. There are plenty of ways they can explore Bond's character without redoing what Craig's era has already done.
I do believe Craig will be a tough act to follow, and his recasting seems to be a task Barbara and Michael like to avoid.
I have my doubts they've seriously considered any one at this point as B26 probably hasn't even been green-lit yet.
Hard to say whether Aidan Turner could hold a movie on his own. Depends on how well the general public would want to pay to look at him for 2 plus hours, especially as Bond.
So it could be a gamble that pays off like Craig or it could lead to a one off Bond film.
I thought it was good, but yeah it's hard to see how they can do it again. Unless you take him way back, before becoming a 00 and back to the Navy, but then I think you ditch too much of the iconography of Bond.
Still, I guess the comic book movies manage to get away with retelling the origin stories quite often so maybe there's a spin on it they could add. I'm not sure what that could be, though.
Yes that does feel a bit played out now. I guess one way you could possibly do an origin story which eliminates that is having it as an M origin story: a new M joins the service and sets up the double O section. Make it a new idea, not one we're constantly being told is outdated: the new M is so tired and hamstrung with all of today's intercommunications that he wants to simplify things and introduce a new elite division of autonomous agents. Maybe he even sets up a special division of Q branch that develops tools so that these new agents can function entirely on their own.
I dunno, maybe that makes no sense, but framing Bond and the double Os as a brilliant new thing rather than a hangover from the 1950s might be good.
Well bear in mind Craig was less of a gamble: he'd been in several big movies and had made a pretty effective and convincing Bond audition when he starred in Layer Cake (although I believe he was already on their radar before that). Turner at the moment isn't quite at that level so seems more uncertain.
Interesting thing, when Craig's name was first tossed around, I can recall looking up his IMDb page, which then had a cool shot of him from TOMB RAIDER, and I immediately thought "that's more like it." I went to see LAYER CAKE specifically because he was a Bond contender and was won over.
I always thought the media backlash after his casting, too blonde, too short, etc was very petty as he looked like Bond to me regardless.
But yes, it seems Turner has mostly done television work, and unless one follows that, or is a Bond fan on these forums, he's unlikely to be known.
The problem with the M idea, as cool as it sounds, is then it's not a James Bond film anymore. It'd be like making the new Batman film about how Gordon became an officer, which isn't a Batman film. Plus we already had somewhat of an M origin with Gareth Mallory.
As for what new stuff they could try, I would actually be up for something that kind of reverses the concepts explored in Craig's, which is why I think a "younger" Bond (early 30s) could be interesting, cause then you could maybe flip it and explore the idea of positive reinvigoration, but not in the same way they did with Q and Moneypenny. Have those characters be firmly rooted in what we know as classic MI6 and classic spy espionage, and then have James Bond be the one who is introducing new ways and methods, while also staying true to what we love about classic James Bond.
It kinda makes him a leading figure of MI6's 00 agency in a new way - possibly.
I'd also love to see a new spin on the Felix and Bond relationship. An "older" Felix dealing a "younger" Bond is something I've always thought would be interesting. I'd also like Joel Edgerton to play him :D
Yeah you're quite right: I don't know how you make it about Bond's character changing, apart from him adapting to being a 00, but really the great thing about CR is it didn't hang around in London much at all: he was out on missions in the field, which is where we want to see him. Office politics and how MI6 works aren't all that interesting, unless you're blowing the building up! (Which is what they've done a couple of times to keep us interested! :) )
Yeah there's something to that: I guess if you have the 00s being a new idea and he's the one spearheading that and making it work you could do it. It's tricky in a way of course because Fleming's Bond, even in the 50s, is a bit of an 'old dog': he's a creature of habit, driving his twenty year old car, snobbishly sticking to old brands and doing exactly the same things every day, literally fighting against those people who want to change the world; so maybe that attitude is hardwired into him and it wouldn't feel like Bond if he were a thrusting new young thing. I dunno! It's a very hard thing to do.
I used to think Craig's Bond, although very good, wasn't a great adaptation of Fleming's Bond as he's actually slightly more interesting and has more depth, but I've also realised, dipping into the books a little, that he really exhibits the character's attitude and general aura a bit more than most of the actors who've played him on the screen so far. I can believe his mind works in the same way as the internal monologue we read. He just feels right.
Well said.
I don't know if I'd make the 00 program a new thing - more so that James Bond is a new character to be in it, and is someone who can shake up the program and MI6 in a more fresh way than being the "old dog" as you mention.
As for who James Bond is, I think it's definitely adaptable. I mean in this day and age, we're all very much creatures of habit, and everything seems to be a reference to the past, so even if we were to introduce a "younger" Bond, he can still be interested those things, and enjoy the things he enjoys but its just through fresher eyes. And as for the villains, well we still face people with over-the-top eccentric ideas of what the modern world should be like, which are even opposed by the people that are very much rooted in it. If that makes sense.
The world's their oyster really and there's so many ways you can go with it :)
Agreed. What I’ve seen of Aidan Turner is promising, but not certain.