Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1713714716718719767

Comments

  • DeathToSpies84DeathToSpies84 Haydock, England
    Posts: 127
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    @DeathToSpies84 I agree mate, I always think that when I watch Dalton's Bond, he's very convincing with a gun which is a huge part of the character

    To me, Moore just felt a little smug when pointing a gun at someone, even if he had his serious moments. Dalton holding Pushkin at gunpoint and stripping his mistress to distract a goon in TLD was something even I don’t think Moore could of pulled off.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 503
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    @DeathToSpies84 I agree mate, I always think that when I watch Dalton's Bond, he's very convincing with a gun which is a huge part of the character

    To me, Moore just felt a little smug when pointing a gun at someone, even if he had his serious moments. Dalton holding Pushkin at gunpoint and stripping his mistress to distract a goon in TLD was something even I don’t think Moore could of pulled off.

    That's my favourite Dalton Bond moment, he just is James Bond in that moment. He's so convincing and assured. It makes you realise that Bond will do anything to get the job done and he's a ruthless killer. It's probably one of my favourite moments of the series
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 4,865
    Although he doesn't ruthlessly kill anyone there: quite the opposite in fact! :)
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 5,641
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    @DeathToSpies84 I agree mate, I always think that when I watch Dalton's Bond, he's very convincing with a gun which is a huge part of the character

    To me, Moore just felt a little smug when pointing a gun at someone, even if he had his serious moments. Dalton holding Pushkin at gunpoint and stripping his mistress to distract a goon in TLD was something even I don’t think Moore could of pulled off.

    That's my favourite Dalton Bond moment, he just is James Bond in that moment. He's so convincing and assured. It makes you realise that Bond will do anything to get the job done and he's a ruthless killer. It's probably one of my favourite moments of the series

    One of my favourite Bond scenes, too. And agreed about Moore, though I still enjoy him in the role.
  • Posts: 5,650
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    @DeathToSpies84 I agree mate, I always think that when I watch Dalton's Bond, he's very convincing with a gun which is a huge part of the character

    To me, Moore just felt a little smug when pointing a gun at someone, even if he had his serious moments. Dalton holding Pushkin at gunpoint and stripping his mistress to distract a goon in TLD was something even I don’t think Moore could of pulled off.

    That's my favourite Dalton Bond moment, he just is James Bond in that moment. He's so convincing and assured. It makes you realise that Bond will do anything to get the job done and he's a ruthless killer. It's probably one of my favourite moments of the series

    One of my favourite Bond scenes, too. And agreed about Moore, though I still enjoy him in the role.

    Very much agreed. Not just a great Dalton scene, where he's at his very best, but a great Bond scene, period.

    (In my opinion, I just don't think Moore could ever have pulled off something like that, not even close (and I too enjoy Moore, no knock against him. His portrayal had limits into how dark he'd allow it to go, and kicking Locque off a cliff seemed to be that limit)).
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 4,865
    I could imagine him playing it much smoother, less frantic. Like Pushkin walks in the door and Bond is sat at a table behind the door, his gun pointed casually at Pushkin.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 82
    Dalton was in his element in the serious, dramatic scenes, but never seemed relaxed, which meant that the lighter scenes didn't work for him so well. Moore was the opposite. Licence to Kill's focus on the dramatic really worked for Dalton's Bond, and I'm guessing that the producers deliberately went in that direction because it suited him so well. And of course that took the franchise back closer to Fleming's Bond, which was the direction Dalton had wanted anyway. It's just a shame the film did so poorly in the States, because I felt they were beginning to hit their stride with Dalton.

    I watched High-Rise again the other day. That's a film with three actors who have been linked to the Bond role in the press at one stage or another: Hiddleston, Evans, and Purefoy. All very different presences on-screen.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 30 Posts: 4,865
    Dalton was in his element in the serious, dramatic scenes, but never seemed relaxed, which meant that the lighter scenes didn't work for him so well.

    And I think that's why in general his Bond didn't hit the mark for people: for better or worse Bond has moved beyond Fleming and the audience expect certain things from 007, and one of those is suaveness and cool and confidence. And by being on edge and slightly frantic, Dalton seemed on the edge of nervousness, and that's not the swaggering, super-cool Bond people expect. Bond is in control. Now, he doesn't have to be that all the time: even Moore's Bond got scared and rattled from time to time, but you do need a sense that in general Bond thinks he's got the biggest balls in the room. Most of the moments we love and which make us smile from the Bond films involve him being cool and swaggery. Would Dalton's Bond have popped that grape into his mouth in Derval's room in Thunderball?

    Craig went serious with his Bond, but his Bond had the huge self-belief that Dalton's Bond missed- and CR even made us question whether his huge self-confidence was a fault of his character and misplaced which was a brave place to go, but it was crucially still there, so he still felt like James Bond 007 next to Connery and Moore.
    Now it may well be that John Glen is to blame for Dalton's Bond missing that swagger as a director is supposed to guide the performances, but nevertheless I think it's an aspect which really damaged his portrayal.
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    edited September 30 Posts: 271
    Was Purefoy still on the list last time around?
  • Posts: 12,680
    MSL49 wrote: »
    Was Purefoy still on the list last time around?

    He was certainly rumored. Ex aequo with Jason Isaacs he was my first choice to succeed Brosnan, until Craig was cast.
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 271
    Was Iain Glen too villain to be consired in the past?
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,015
    MSL49 wrote: »
    Tom Hiddleston from villain to hero? He remind's me little bit of Roger Moore.

    Yes, certainly in ‘The Night Manager’ with a hint of Daniel Craig.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,015
    mtm wrote: »
    Dalton was in his element in the serious, dramatic scenes, but never seemed relaxed, which meant that the lighter scenes didn't work for him so well.

    And I think that's why in general his Bond didn't hit the mark for people: for better or worse Bond has moved beyond Fleming and the audience expect certain things from 007, and one of those is suaveness and cool and confidence. And by being on edge and slightly frantic, Dalton seemed on the edge of nervousness, and that's not the swaggering, super-cool Bond people expect. Bond is in control. Now, he doesn't have to be that all the time: even Moore's Bond got scared and rattled from time to time, but you do need a sense that in general Bond thinks he's got the biggest balls in the room. Most of the moments we love and which make us smile from the Bond films involve him being cool and swaggery. Would Dalton's Bond have popped that grape into his mouth in Derval's room in Thunderball?

    Craig went serious with his Bond, but his Bond had the huge self-belief that Dalton's Bond missed- and CR even made us question whether his huge self-confidence was a fault of his character and misplaced which was a brave place to go, but it was crucially still there, so he still felt like James Bond 007 next to Connery and Moore.
    Now it may well be that John Glen is to blame for Dalton's Bond missing that swagger as a director is supposed to guide the performances, but nevertheless I think it's an aspect which really damaged his portrayal.

    I’m not going to disagree with anything above, as it’s all true IMO. That is why Connery is the best Bond IMO.

    But, the box office results showed that Dalton was popular with the British audience, it’s with the US audience that he failed to gain a following. For all the reasons you list above.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Robotswana
    Posts: 38,632
    MSL49 wrote: »
    Was Iain Glen too villain to be consired in the past?

    I too have thought about him as a decent Bond candidate.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited September 30 Posts: 5,015
    MSL49 wrote: »
    Was Iain Glen too villain to be consired in the past?

    I too have thought about him as a decent Bond candidate.

    When he was young, I see what you mean.

    When he’s older, he would make a good M too.

    Great English accent and voice.

    This is one of Roger Moore’s major strength’s, as well as being a master class actor in terms of screen presence and star quality.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 4,865
    suavejmf wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Dalton was in his element in the serious, dramatic scenes, but never seemed relaxed, which meant that the lighter scenes didn't work for him so well.

    And I think that's why in general his Bond didn't hit the mark for people: for better or worse Bond has moved beyond Fleming and the audience expect certain things from 007, and one of those is suaveness and cool and confidence. And by being on edge and slightly frantic, Dalton seemed on the edge of nervousness, and that's not the swaggering, super-cool Bond people expect. Bond is in control. Now, he doesn't have to be that all the time: even Moore's Bond got scared and rattled from time to time, but you do need a sense that in general Bond thinks he's got the biggest balls in the room. Most of the moments we love and which make us smile from the Bond films involve him being cool and swaggery. Would Dalton's Bond have popped that grape into his mouth in Derval's room in Thunderball?

    Craig went serious with his Bond, but his Bond had the huge self-belief that Dalton's Bond missed- and CR even made us question whether his huge self-confidence was a fault of his character and misplaced which was a brave place to go, but it was crucially still there, so he still felt like James Bond 007 next to Connery and Moore.
    Now it may well be that John Glen is to blame for Dalton's Bond missing that swagger as a director is supposed to guide the performances, but nevertheless I think it's an aspect which really damaged his portrayal.

    I’m not going to disagree with anything above, as it’s all true IMO. That is why Connery is the best Bond IMO.

    But, the box office results showed that Dalton was popular with the British audience, it’s with the US audience that he failed to gain a following. For all the reasons you list above.

    Yeah no Bond film has yet been a disaster, it's all relative. Some are just bigger hits than others.
    suavejmf wrote: »
    MSL49 wrote: »
    Was Iain Glen too villain to be consired in the past?

    I too have thought about him as a decent Bond candidate.

    When he was young, I see what you mean.

    When he’s older, he would make a good M too.

    Great English accent and voice.

    This is one of Roger Moore’s major strength’s, as well as being a master class actor in terms of screen presence and star quality.

    I'm not sure I've heard him do an English accent?
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,015
    mtm wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Dalton was in his element in the serious, dramatic scenes, but never seemed relaxed, which meant that the lighter scenes didn't work for him so well.

    And I think that's why in general his Bond didn't hit the mark for people: for better or worse Bond has moved beyond Fleming and the audience expect certain things from 007, and one of those is suaveness and cool and confidence. And by being on edge and slightly frantic, Dalton seemed on the edge of nervousness, and that's not the swaggering, super-cool Bond people expect. Bond is in control. Now, he doesn't have to be that all the time: even Moore's Bond got scared and rattled from time to time, but you do need a sense that in general Bond thinks he's got the biggest balls in the room. Most of the moments we love and which make us smile from the Bond films involve him being cool and swaggery. Would Dalton's Bond have popped that grape into his mouth in Derval's room in Thunderball?

    Craig went serious with his Bond, but his Bond had the huge self-belief that Dalton's Bond missed- and CR even made us question whether his huge self-confidence was a fault of his character and misplaced which was a brave place to go, but it was crucially still there, so he still felt like James Bond 007 next to Connery and Moore.
    Now it may well be that John Glen is to blame for Dalton's Bond missing that swagger as a director is supposed to guide the performances, but nevertheless I think it's an aspect which really damaged his portrayal.

    I’m not going to disagree with anything above, as it’s all true IMO. That is why Connery is the best Bond IMO.

    But, the box office results showed that Dalton was popular with the British audience, it’s with the US audience that he failed to gain a following. For all the reasons you list above.

    Yeah no Bond film has yet been a disaster, it's all relative. Some are just bigger hits than others.
    suavejmf wrote: »
    MSL49 wrote: »
    Was Iain Glen too villain to be consired in the past?

    I too have thought about him as a decent Bond candidate.

    When he was young, I see what you mean.

    When he’s older, he would make a good M too.

    Great English accent and voice.

    This is one of Roger Moore’s major strength’s, as well as being a master class actor in terms of screen presence and star quality.

    I'm not sure I've heard him do an English accent?

    In Game of Thrones he has an English accent. I didn’t even know he was Scottish!!
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 4,865
    suavejmf wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Dalton was in his element in the serious, dramatic scenes, but never seemed relaxed, which meant that the lighter scenes didn't work for him so well.

    And I think that's why in general his Bond didn't hit the mark for people: for better or worse Bond has moved beyond Fleming and the audience expect certain things from 007, and one of those is suaveness and cool and confidence. And by being on edge and slightly frantic, Dalton seemed on the edge of nervousness, and that's not the swaggering, super-cool Bond people expect. Bond is in control. Now, he doesn't have to be that all the time: even Moore's Bond got scared and rattled from time to time, but you do need a sense that in general Bond thinks he's got the biggest balls in the room. Most of the moments we love and which make us smile from the Bond films involve him being cool and swaggery. Would Dalton's Bond have popped that grape into his mouth in Derval's room in Thunderball?

    Craig went serious with his Bond, but his Bond had the huge self-belief that Dalton's Bond missed- and CR even made us question whether his huge self-confidence was a fault of his character and misplaced which was a brave place to go, but it was crucially still there, so he still felt like James Bond 007 next to Connery and Moore.
    Now it may well be that John Glen is to blame for Dalton's Bond missing that swagger as a director is supposed to guide the performances, but nevertheless I think it's an aspect which really damaged his portrayal.

    I’m not going to disagree with anything above, as it’s all true IMO. That is why Connery is the best Bond IMO.

    But, the box office results showed that Dalton was popular with the British audience, it’s with the US audience that he failed to gain a following. For all the reasons you list above.

    Yeah no Bond film has yet been a disaster, it's all relative. Some are just bigger hits than others.
    suavejmf wrote: »
    MSL49 wrote: »
    Was Iain Glen too villain to be consired in the past?

    I too have thought about him as a decent Bond candidate.

    When he was young, I see what you mean.

    When he’s older, he would make a good M too.

    Great English accent and voice.

    This is one of Roger Moore’s major strength’s, as well as being a master class actor in terms of screen presence and star quality.

    I'm not sure I've heard him do an English accent?

    In Game of Thrones he has an English accent. I didn’t even know he was Scottish!!

    I've never seen it, but just watched a few clips and he seems to be speaking in his normal Scottish burr to me. I thought you were the accent police! :D
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,015
    mtm wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Dalton was in his element in the serious, dramatic scenes, but never seemed relaxed, which meant that the lighter scenes didn't work for him so well.

    And I think that's why in general his Bond didn't hit the mark for people: for better or worse Bond has moved beyond Fleming and the audience expect certain things from 007, and one of those is suaveness and cool and confidence. And by being on edge and slightly frantic, Dalton seemed on the edge of nervousness, and that's not the swaggering, super-cool Bond people expect. Bond is in control. Now, he doesn't have to be that all the time: even Moore's Bond got scared and rattled from time to time, but you do need a sense that in general Bond thinks he's got the biggest balls in the room. Most of the moments we love and which make us smile from the Bond films involve him being cool and swaggery. Would Dalton's Bond have popped that grape into his mouth in Derval's room in Thunderball?

    Craig went serious with his Bond, but his Bond had the huge self-belief that Dalton's Bond missed- and CR even made us question whether his huge self-confidence was a fault of his character and misplaced which was a brave place to go, but it was crucially still there, so he still felt like James Bond 007 next to Connery and Moore.
    Now it may well be that John Glen is to blame for Dalton's Bond missing that swagger as a director is supposed to guide the performances, but nevertheless I think it's an aspect which really damaged his portrayal.

    I’m not going to disagree with anything above, as it’s all true IMO. That is why Connery is the best Bond IMO.

    But, the box office results showed that Dalton was popular with the British audience, it’s with the US audience that he failed to gain a following. For all the reasons you list above.

    Yeah no Bond film has yet been a disaster, it's all relative. Some are just bigger hits than others.
    suavejmf wrote: »
    MSL49 wrote: »
    Was Iain Glen too villain to be consired in the past?

    I too have thought about him as a decent Bond candidate.

    When he was young, I see what you mean.

    When he’s older, he would make a good M too.

    Great English accent and voice.

    This is one of Roger Moore’s major strength’s, as well as being a master class actor in terms of screen presence and star quality.

    I'm not sure I've heard him do an English accent?

    In Game of Thrones he has an English accent. I didn’t even know he was Scottish!!

    I've never seen it, but just watched a few clips and he seems to be speaking in his normal Scottish burr to me. I thought you were the accent police! :D

    So did I!? Ha ha.

    I missed that Scottish burr completely. I thought he was English based on GoT.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 4,865
    Heh! Fair enough, it's not the strongest and he may well have been toning it down a bit for that.
  • Posts: 2,113
    mtm wrote: »
    That's debatable, and I think the official account of events has been massaged slightly! :)

    Cubby was interested in him from 1968 on.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 4,865
    mtm wrote: »
    That's debatable, and I think the official account of events has been massaged slightly! :)

    Cubby was interested in him from 1968 on.

    Indeed, that's not the same thing though.
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    edited October 1 Posts: 271
    mtm wrote: »
    That's debatable, and I think the official account of events has been massaged slightly! :)

    Cubby was interested in him from 1968 on.

    On Dalton or who?
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Still waiting for the Jena Malone Batwoman movie that's never going to be made.Moderator
    Posts: 11,557
    MSL49 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    That's debatable, and I think the official account of events has been massaged slightly! :)

    Cubby was interested in him from 1968 on.

    On Dalton or who?

    Dalton I believe. He was offered, or given his age, maybe just considered for Bond back in 68. Even in my dream timeline, that was much too early for Dalton to be cast.
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 271
    Connery shouldn't have come back after OHMSS and Moore shouldn't have come back after OP and i think Craig shouldn't have come back after SP.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Still waiting for the Jena Malone Batwoman movie that's never going to be made.Moderator
    Posts: 11,557
    MSL49 wrote: »
    Connery shouldn't have come back after OHMSS and Moore shouldn't have come back after OP and i think Craig shouldn't have come back after SP.

    I agree except on Moore, who I think maybe should have left after MR.
  • Posts: 10,274
    I agree with Connery stopping with YOLT. I enjoy AVTAK and am very much looking forward to NTTD though, so I can't agree on the others.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 3,981
    I'm glad Craig is getting a proper send-off in what looks like a really good movie :)
  • Posts: 128
    I realize many people care not for the connecting arc between Craig's films. Had they known they'd go for certain number of films up front they could have written the stories more cleverly, up front. But, for whatever reasons -- apparently things were not developed in this manner. And it seems to have become a routine thing to read that the script is not ready, or was worked out just in time to film, and, generally, that they cook everything up one at a time. Perhaps after D Craig's turn they can plan for more than just the next one. At any rate -- I still think it all came out pretty well, and still is superior to the days of overly-silly and overly-reliant on gadgets and special effects. So, here's me hoping that before they start up after DC that they figure out in advance, for more than just the next film, where they're going with it all. Even if the plan changes to one-adventure-not-connected-with-the-next on about the level of most of the films, they still would do well to lay things out, plan ahead, and so on. Doing that should help avoid gaps, inconsistencies and those awkward "but wait ! it was really this not that !" moments. Surprises and twists are cool, if they're really worked out in advance.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 4,865
    Since62 wrote: »
    I realize many people care not for the connecting arc between Craig's films. Had they known they'd go for certain number of films up front they could have written the stories more cleverly, up front. But, for whatever reasons -- apparently things were not developed in this manner. And it seems to have become a routine thing to read that the script is not ready, or was worked out just in time to film, and, generally, that they cook everything up one at a time. Perhaps after D Craig's turn they can plan for more than just the next one. At any rate -- I still think it all came out pretty well, and still is superior to the days of overly-silly and overly-reliant on gadgets and special effects. So, here's me hoping that before they start up after DC that they figure out in advance, for more than just the next film, where they're going with it all. Even if the plan changes to one-adventure-not-connected-with-the-next on about the level of most of the films, they still would do well to lay things out, plan ahead, and so on. Doing that should help avoid gaps, inconsistencies and those awkward "but wait ! it was really this not that !" moments. Surprises and twists are cool, if they're really worked out in advance.

    Maybe, but Fleming linked his novels together and I doubt he had them all planned out years in advance. I think if you're interested in hiring good directors you want to give them some freedom over the story, I don't know how much you can plan ahead.
Sign In or Register to comment.