Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1729730732734735767

Comments

  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited October 17 Posts: 3,558
    I'd also like to point out that I don't favour a black Bond or a Bond of any culture over a white Bond; the next actor they cast is 99% going to be a white actor, and I'm thrilled to see who they choose. My absolute main guy is still Luke Evans, even though I know it'll never happen. ;) I wouldn't want them to cast an actor from a different culture just to satisfy some kind of affirmative action.

    I'm just saying, I'll be happy with whomever they choose, as long as their acting holds up, and the stories are still cracking. :)>-
  • Posts: 10,975
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I think we should keep Bond blond, yet go far younger. Perhaps about 14 or 15?
    Instead of working for MI6 he could work at a burger joint and perhaps be an aspiring YouTuber?
    What we're looking for is a real life replication of THIS GUY to be the next Bond.................


    latest?cb=20120108001944


    Oops, I think I made this joke or one similar months ago.
    Never mind. Not funny anyway.
    Carry on......................

    lol, I sort of feels like this helps to illustrate my point; Bond's employment by MI6 is a characteristic that is inextricably linked to the character; take that away, and the James Bond stories fall apart. IMO, the same effect doesn't happen when you change his race.

    EDIT: Full disclosure, I know you were joking, of course.

    If Eon were to ever sell, I actually could envision another producer considering changing Bond's occupation to make him more modern. By that point the character might as well be renamed.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 3,558
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I think we should keep Bond blond, yet go far younger. Perhaps about 14 or 15?
    Instead of working for MI6 he could work at a burger joint and perhaps be an aspiring YouTuber?
    What we're looking for is a real life replication of THIS GUY to be the next Bond.................


    latest?cb=20120108001944


    Oops, I think I made this joke or one similar months ago.
    Never mind. Not funny anyway.
    Carry on......................

    lol, I sort of feels like this helps to illustrate my point; Bond's employment by MI6 is a characteristic that is inextricably linked to the character; take that away, and the James Bond stories fall apart. IMO, the same effect doesn't happen when you change his race.

    EDIT: Full disclosure, I know you were joking, of course.

    If Eon were to ever sell, I actually could envision another producer considering changing Bond's occupation to make him more modern. By that point the character might as well be renamed.

    Yeah, I agree; if they change his occupation, that's a huge paradigm shift to the character because it heavily affects the stories. Fleming, above all else, was writing about a man in the British secret service. If he's not that, he's not Bond.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited October 17 Posts: 5,641
    We're all huge fans of the character James Bond, but to put the character before the story is to put the cart before the horse.

    Great post, but just on this particular statement; I hope this doesn't sound nitpicky but I've always seen it as the other way round. The characters are the horse that pulls the story and keeps me invested. It has always been the thing that keeps Bond head and shoulders above similar characters like Ethan Hunt. So yeah, I think the character should definitely come first. The stories aren't really that complicated, or at least they shouldn't or don't need to be.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 3,558
    We're all huge fans of the character James Bond, but to put the character before the story is to put the cart before the horse.

    Great post, but just on this particular statement; I hope this doesn't sound nitpicky but I've always seen it as the other way round. The characters are the horse that pulls the story and keeps me invested. It has always been the thing that keeps Bond head and shoulders above similar characters like Ethan Hunt. So yeah, I think the character should definitely come first. The stories aren't really that complicated, or at least they shouldn't or don't need to be.

    Yeah, that's a good point and very difficult to argue. Hopefully not too off topic, but I've often thought about with Batman, it's his villains that really make the stories interesting, like Batman is this immovable object and the villains are unstoppable forces, and we watch because we want to see what'll happen when they collide. And I would say with Batman stories, the character certainly is at the forefront, and the story revolves around the character to bend him and test his limits, much in the way Bond stories are told, so I think I could agree with you and say the same about Bond. I hope at least some of that made sense...
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 5,641
    We're all huge fans of the character James Bond, but to put the character before the story is to put the cart before the horse.

    Great post, but just on this particular statement; I hope this doesn't sound nitpicky but I've always seen it as the other way round. The characters are the horse that pulls the story and keeps me invested. It has always been the thing that keeps Bond head and shoulders above similar characters like Ethan Hunt. So yeah, I think the character should definitely come first. The stories aren't really that complicated, or at least they shouldn't or don't need to be.

    Yeah, that's a good point and very difficult to argue. Hopefully not too off topic, but I've often thought about with Batman, it's his villains that really make the stories interesting, like Batman is this immovable object and the villains are unstoppable forces, and we watch because we want to see what'll happen when they collide. And I would say with Batman stories, the character certainly is at the forefront, and the story revolves around the character to bend him and test his limits, much in the way Bond stories are told, so I think I could agree with you and say the same about Bond. I hope at least some of that made sense...

    Likewise, my post too! Just goes to show how much of a balancing act these things can be! :p
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,430
    Most of my friends whom i watch bond films with aren't really bond fan, they don't know much about books, haven't watched many Film's except Pierce and Daniel's, but whenever they talk about it, they always say it's British secret service agent who is white, none of them ever thought that bond is black, although an argument can be made for it.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Still waiting for the Jena Malone Batwoman movie that's never going to be made.Moderator
    Posts: 11,557
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I think we should keep Bond blond, yet go far younger. Perhaps about 14 or 15?
    Instead of working for MI6 he could work at a burger joint and perhaps be an aspiring YouTuber?
    What we're looking for is a real life replication of THIS GUY to be the next Bond.................


    latest?cb=20120108001944


    Oops, I think I made this joke or one similar months ago.
    Never mind. Not funny anyway.
    Carry on......................

    It's 2020, so he's likely an aspiring TikTok star, doing the lemon challenge or whatever goofy trend it is now.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,015
    Univex wrote: »
    Just to make a point:

    It's not that Bond's race defines him. It's just that Bond's race is defined in the novels. And I'm a sucker for intelectual property and original sources. But hey, that's just me and a few others apparently.

    But I do think we make a valid and fair point.

    Bond’s race is defined the films as well though. Any change IMO would be a gimmick and to prove a point (including provoking a media frenzy, which is great marketing).

    But changing the race of a character is to fundamentally change the character, in terms of already established appearance and image.

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 17 Posts: 4,865
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    I think we should keep Bond blond, yet go far younger. Perhaps about 14 or 15?
    Instead of working for MI6 he could work at a burger joint and perhaps be an aspiring YouTuber?
    What we're looking for is a real life replication of THIS GUY to be the next Bond.................


    latest?cb=20120108001944


    Oops, I think I made this joke or one similar months ago.
    Never mind. Not funny anyway.
    Carry on......................

    lol, I sort of feels like this helps to illustrate my point; Bond's employment by MI6 is a characteristic that is inextricably linked to the character; take that away, and the James Bond stories fall apart. IMO, the same effect doesn't happen when you change his race.

    EDIT: Full disclosure, I know you were joking, of course.

    Although, y’know, the Young Bond books do work if you ask me! :) But it is a different thing to ‘normal‘ Bond, sure.
    We're all huge fans of the character James Bond, but to put the character before the story is to put the cart before the horse.

    Great post, but just on this particular statement; I hope this doesn't sound nitpicky but I've always seen it as the other way round. The characters are the horse that pulls the story and keeps me invested. It has always been the thing that keeps Bond head and shoulders above similar characters like Ethan Hunt. So yeah, I think the character should definitely come first. The stories aren't really that complicated, or at least they shouldn't or don't need to be.

    They are very plot driven films rather than character driven though. Even CR is plot driven over character for the most part. The character is appealing but it’s rarely about his character.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited October 17 Posts: 5,641
    mtm wrote: »

    They are very plot driven films rather than character driven though. Even CR is plot driven over character for the most part. The character is appealing but it’s rarely about his character.

    Take the character away and the plots automatically become less interesting, is my point.
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 271
    mtm wrote: »
    MSL49 wrote: »
    Did they test Connery, Lazenby they did, how about Moore?

    It’s a good question, if they did I’ve not heard of it. I guess with Moore his whole career had been a test for Bond up until that point (!) so I could understand if they didn’t, with Connery it’s a bit weirder. Maybe they just got him to read for them live?

    Sir Roger was the man.
  • Posts: 5,198
    mtm wrote: »

    They are very plot driven films rather than character driven though. Even CR is plot driven over character for the most part. The character is appealing but it’s rarely about his character.

    Take the character away and the plots automatically become less interesting, is my point.
    +1
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 469
    In all honesty I can see both sides of the black Bond argument and I am not exactly sure where I stand on it. There is no reason why he shouldn't be black in the films, but then I am sympathetic to the continuity argument and keeping him essentially supposed to be the same bloke in all films. I don't see the different actors as playing different Bond characters. They are the same character in different situations. Whenever I watch Roger Moore's Bond for example, I see him as a man who in the distant past had been genitally tortured by Le Chiffre. It makes his character more interesting. Hence why he has a flippant approach to threat - because he has seen far worse in the past.

    And when people say Moore is miles away from Fleming's take on the character I question that too. We don't see the glum and depressed side of Fleming's Bond in Moore's films, but Fleming's Bond often acted with amusement and confidence in the face of bizarre villains, would occasionally make a quip, and also often acted paternally or at least felt responsible for vulnerable women - things I admire in Moore's take on the character. People often forget that Moore showed his dangerous side far more often than is given credit for - his sense of danger and swag in LALD, TMWTGG, and TSWLM especially (with the odd moments here and there in his later films). In fact, he shows immense swag in all his films, even in AVTAK (even if his physique can't quite match it).

  • DoctorNoDoctorNo USA-Maryland
    Posts: 658
    I agree Moore isn’t given credit for his darker moments as Bond and would often act in Fleming character, but his MO or comfort zone was smirky glib charm in films that were often pastiche. You can also question how credible he was in Fleming character. I have a hard time picturing Moore withstanding genital torture, but Connery all day long.
  • Posts: 12,680
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    James Bond is a British secret intelligence service agent, code number 007, residing in London but active internationally, who in the world we live in, could be a black man or a man of any other race as long as the character remains British.

    That's an incomplete characterisation, from which race, gender and overall physical characteristics were taken away. So I'd say that's only half of it, if that. James Bond is more than what you've depicted @Denbigh, my friend.

    Exactly. Race, physical appearance and gender do define the character of Bond and those rules have already been set.

    Also, as a response to the Axel Foley comments. He’s a black character and should remain as such.

    Axel Foley can talk his way into getting whatever he wants. If he wants a free room in a fancy hotel like the Beverly Palm Hotel, all he has to do is go up to the front desk and say they made a mistake with the reservation. When they contest this, he launches into a tirade about racism and makes a scene, after which they give him a room. The whole reason this is funny is because he’s black. The rules of this character (appearance, characteristics etc) have been set.

    Regarding Foley, if he was not conceived originally as Black before casting Eddie Murphy, he became very much a Black character once Murphy made Foley his own. I don't know if anybody can play Axel Foley but Murphy and I doubt a remake would be a good idea, but if there was one Foley could only be Black. Not White, Asian or Hispanic.
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    With Elba, I just didn't like how much he advertised himself for the role...

    I thought he generally kept quiet on it? I know there was that funny photo of him and Craig, but I don't remember much else. I do think he generally comes across as a spanner and rather full of himself, but hey, so does Bond! :)

    He did everything but keep quiet about it. He behaved exactly like that actor from Nip/Tuck: like the role was meant to be his by right.

    I'm looking through a few of the articles and I'm not really seeing any comments which come across to me like that. I'm looking at a Vanity Fair interview where they've asked him about it and he's said "Of course, if someone said to me "Do you want to play James Bond?", I'd be like, Yeah! That's fascinating to me.
    'But it's not something I've expressed, like, Yeah, I wanna be the black James Bond."


    I dunno, I'm not getting the vibes that he's acting like it's his by right from that.

    When he was rumoured he made a few tweets about it. Something like:" Shouldn't Bond be handsome? Thank you for thinking about me," and" This is what the people want so they should listen to them." Not his exact words, but something of the sort. From what I've understood he didn't say that a Black actor deserved the role, but that HE deserved it by popular acclaim. He's not the first one who said such thing, to be fair, but as for the Nip/Tuck guy, it's a very presumptuous way to express your interest.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 17 Posts: 4,865
    mtm wrote: »

    They are very plot driven films rather than character driven though. Even CR is plot driven over character for the most part. The character is appealing but it’s rarely about his character.

    Take the character away and the plots automatically become less interesting, is my point.

    Well naturally; as I said, the character of Bond is appealing. But as Nick said, the films are about the plots. A lot of the pleasure is in seeing how Bond reacts to certain plot situations though of course.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 5,641
    To be fair to Elba, I'm not sure if it was a legitimate interest or whether he was just enjoying the attention that came with it. Strangely enough, it usually came back around into circulation when he had a new film coming out. Perhaps he was just a smart PR guy rather than a genuine candidate?
  • Posts: 12,680
    To be fair to Elba, I'm not sure if it was a legitimate interest or whether he was just enjoying the attention that came with it. Strangely enough, it usually came back around into circulation when he had a new film coming out. Perhaps he was just a smart PR guy rather than a genuine candidate?

    I think there's a lot of that. If it is the case it didn't serve him that well: when was his last big success? The Jungle Book?
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 17 Posts: 4,865
    In all honesty I can see both sides of the black Bond argument and I am not exactly sure where I stand on it. There is no reason why he shouldn't be black in the films, but then I am sympathetic to the continuity argument and keeping him essentially supposed to be the same bloke in all films. I don't see the different actors as playing different Bond characters. They are the same character in different situations. Whenever I watch Roger Moore's Bond for example, I see him as a man who in the distant past had been genitally tortured by Le Chiffre. It makes his character more interesting. Hence why he has a flippant approach to threat - because he has seen far worse in the past.

    That's interesting- I'm not sure if I do. I'm not even sure if I believe the Bond who fights Zorin even remembers flying up into space.
    And when people say Moore is miles away from Fleming's take on the character I question that too. We don't see the glum and depressed side of Fleming's Bond in Moore's films, but Fleming's Bond often acted with amusement and confidence in the face of bizarre villains, would occasionally make a quip, and also often acted paternally or at least felt responsible for vulnerable women - things I admire in Moore's take on the character. People often forget that Moore showed his dangerous side far more often than is given credit for - his sense of danger and swag in LALD, TMWTGG, and TSWLM especially (with the odd moments here and there in his later films). In fact, he shows immense swag in all his films, even in AVTAK (even if his physique can't quite match it).

    You won't find me criticising Roger in any way! I don't know if I can see it that way, as I don't really see them as the same character, but I'm happy enough if they aren't. He's James Bond 007, movie star and that's fine by me. It's a bit like when folks criticise the Christopher Reeve Superman movies because Clark Kent shouldn't be his cover identity but should be his real self. But sod that, I don't care how it is in some comics I'm not reading: the films are brilliant and so is he.
    DoctorNo wrote: »
    I have a hard time picturing Moore withstanding genital torture, but Connery all day long.

    I'm not going to try with either! :D
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited October 17 Posts: 5,641
    Ludovico wrote: »
    To be fair to Elba, I'm not sure if it was a legitimate interest or whether he was just enjoying the attention that came with it. Strangely enough, it usually came back around into circulation when he had a new film coming out. Perhaps he was just a smart PR guy rather than a genuine candidate?

    I think there's a lot of that. If it is the case it didn't serve him that well: when was his last big success? The Jungle Book?

    Hobbs and Shaw made a big chunk of change last Summer; that was the last time his name was bandied about by tabloids for Bond too, unless I've missed something since.
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    They are very plot driven films rather than character driven though. Even CR is plot driven over character for the most part. The character is appealing but it’s rarely about his character.

    Take the character away and the plots automatically become less interesting, is my point.

    Well naturally; as I said, the character of Bond is appealing. But as Nick said, the films are about the plots. A lot of the pleasure is in seeing how Bond reacts to certain plot situations though of course.

    Yeah, he did say that. He also said this:
    Yeah, that's a good point and very difficult to argue. Hopefully not too off topic, but I've often thought about with Batman, it's his villains that really make the stories interesting, like Batman is this immovable object and the villains are unstoppable forces, and we watch because we want to see what'll happen when they collide. And I would say with Batman stories, the character certainly is at the forefront, and the story revolves around the character to bend him and test his limits, much in the way Bond stories are told, so I think I could agree with you and say the same about Bond. I hope at least some of that made sense...

    So there you go. Plot plus character.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 17 Posts: 4,865
    Ludovico wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    James Bond is a British secret intelligence service agent, code number 007, residing in London but active internationally, who in the world we live in, could be a black man or a man of any other race as long as the character remains British.

    That's an incomplete characterisation, from which race, gender and overall physical characteristics were taken away. So I'd say that's only half of it, if that. James Bond is more than what you've depicted @Denbigh, my friend.

    Exactly. Race, physical appearance and gender do define the character of Bond and those rules have already been set.

    Also, as a response to the Axel Foley comments. He’s a black character and should remain as such.

    Axel Foley can talk his way into getting whatever he wants. If he wants a free room in a fancy hotel like the Beverly Palm Hotel, all he has to do is go up to the front desk and say they made a mistake with the reservation. When they contest this, he launches into a tirade about racism and makes a scene, after which they give him a room. The whole reason this is funny is because he’s black. The rules of this character (appearance, characteristics etc) have been set.

    Regarding Foley, if he was not conceived originally as Black before casting Eddie Murphy, he became very much a Black character once Murphy made Foley his own. I don't know if anybody can play Axel Foley but Murphy and I doubt a remake would be a good idea, but if there was one Foley could only be Black. Not White, Asian or Hispanic.

    Wasn't there talk of some Netflix Beverley Hills Cop 4 on the way at some point?
    Ludovico wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    With Elba, I just didn't like how much he advertised himself for the role...

    I thought he generally kept quiet on it? I know there was that funny photo of him and Craig, but I don't remember much else. I do think he generally comes across as a spanner and rather full of himself, but hey, so does Bond! :)

    He did everything but keep quiet about it. He behaved exactly like that actor from Nip/Tuck: like the role was meant to be his by right.

    I'm looking through a few of the articles and I'm not really seeing any comments which come across to me like that. I'm looking at a Vanity Fair interview where they've asked him about it and he's said "Of course, if someone said to me "Do you want to play James Bond?", I'd be like, Yeah! That's fascinating to me.
    'But it's not something I've expressed, like, Yeah, I wanna be the black James Bond."


    I dunno, I'm not getting the vibes that he's acting like it's his by right from that.

    When he was rumoured he made a few tweets about it. Something like:" Shouldn't Bond be handsome? Thank you for thinking about me," and" This is what the people want so they should listen to them." Not his exact words, but something of the sort. From what I've understood he didn't say that a Black actor deserved the role, but that HE deserved it by popular acclaim. He's not the first one who said such thing, to be fair, but as for the Nip/Tuck guy, it's a very presumptuous way to express your interest.

    I'm not really getting those impressions from those words either to be honest! :) Are you sure he wasn't being tongue-in-cheek? If he said the handsome thing it sounds like a joke.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    To be fair to Elba, I'm not sure if it was a legitimate interest or whether he was just enjoying the attention that came with it. Strangely enough, it usually came back around into circulation when he had a new film coming out. Perhaps he was just a smart PR guy rather than a genuine candidate?

    I think there's a lot of that. If it is the case it didn't serve him that well: when was his last big success? The Jungle Book?

    Hobbs and Shaw made a big chunk of change last Summer; that was the last time his name was bandied about by tabloids for Bond too, unless I've missed something since.


    It was pretty good fun too in a very brainless way of course! Elba did well enough with his role but it was a bit thankless in that his character was only really angry all the time.
    So there you go. Plot plus character.

    That is how all stories pretty much work, yes. But you can generally divide them all into plot-driven and character-driven, and Bond falls into the first category. All stories have characters in them though of course, and Bond's character is, as we've both been saying, a very appealing element in these movies.
    Funnily enough I'd say possibly less so in the books. He's got some quirks but generally he's just a bit of a machine in the books and the pleasure from reading them comes in the pace and wild imagination of the world around him. Bond himself is a bit of a blank slate. He doesn't do much that's cool, he rarely makes gags, there's no vicarious pleasure in seeing him do something the reader wouldn't do to the scale we get in the films. There's pleasure in the world he lives in and the things he gets to do, but I don't know if the reader gets much of a chance to fall in love with the man himself. I think it's quite interesting how the movies made Bond the star.
  • Posts: 12,680
    Maybe it was mostly tongue in cheek, but the rumour was serious enough for Amy Pascal to think it's a great idea. Be that as it may, if it was remotely serious, that's not how you get the role.

    In any case, race considerations aside, I never understood what people found Bondian about Idris Elba. Colin Salmon yes, he looks like a Black Bond and I can understand why people would want him in the role.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 5,641
    mtm wrote: »
    That is how all stories pretty much work, yes. But you can generally divide them all into plot-driven and character-driven, and Bond falls into the first category. All stories have characters in them though of course, and Bond's character is, as we've both been saying, a very appealing element in these movies.
    Funnily enough I'd say possibly less so in the books. He's got some quirks but generally he's just a bit of a machine in the books and the pleasure from reading them comes in the pace and wild imagination of the world around him. Bond himself is a bit of a blank slate. He doesn't do much that's cool, he rarely makes gags, there's no vicarious pleasure in seeing him do something the reader wouldn't do to the scale we get in the films. There's pleasure in the world he lives in and the things he gets to do, but I don't know if the reader gets much of a chance to fall in love with the man himself. I think it's quite interesting how the movies made Bond the star.

    Yes, that is how stories work. By contrast, what you're describing is a very rigid view on storytelling and I think most would struggle with it as it eliminates stories that balance both. Bond is a character and is a natural driving force in the plots of all the stories (sometimes of his own initiative), after all. Plenty of spy stories do the same thing. I don't see it as being that black and white.

    As for Bond in the books, I'm not really sure I agree with you there. I don't see him as a blank slate at all. But a lot of that goes back to me seeing Bond as an extension of the author himself, whom I both admire for his skills and talents and am repulsed by his views in equal measure. But I appreciate that is a matter of taste moreso than anything else. Gags, doing cool things, etc are pebble dashing to me - though you are right that it was the amplification of these things that propelled the character to the "superstar" levels that he has enjoyed for so long.

    I feel like a character that is essentially more of a vessel for us to experience "things" in a film is someone like Mad Max. He is a true blank slate. I don't see Bond as being in a similar vein.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 17 Posts: 4,865
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Maybe it was mostly tongue in cheek, but the rumour was serious enough for Amy Pascal to think it's a great idea. Be that as it may, if it was remotely serious, that's not how you get the role.

    I don't know, the studio head thinking it's a great idea doesn't exactly seem a bad way of getting of a role! :D
    Ludovico wrote: »
    In any case, race considerations aside, I never understood what people found Bondian about Idris Elba. Colin Salmon yes, he looks like a Black Bond and I can understand why people would want him in the role.

    Elba is a big handsome guy who lots of people find very attractive, he's an alpha male type, he's a charismatic lead performer in movies, he can handle comedy and drama, he can smoulder in a pretty sexy way, he's built like Connery, he's got the swagger... I'm not sure what isn't Bondian about him to be honest. He'd need to tone down the Sarf Lahdahn, but if Roger could manage that I'm sure he could! As I said before, I do find him to be a bit full of himself when he is himself, but as an actor he's pretty good. But he's a bit too old for it now.
    Salmon's okay, I never found him to be a very good actor to be honest. He always seems to be over-enunciating to me and kind of trips up on his words.
  • edited October 17 Posts: 12,680
    Amy Pascal is not exactly known to have very good ideas or to back up good ideas. Case in point: her enthusiasm for the train wreck that was the Ghostbusters remake. In any case, it was not her call to make and showed a lack of respect for her coworkers and the actor holding the role at the time.
    Elba looks too brutish. With a few more pounds he'd make a great Mr Big. Colin Salmon I haven't seen him in a role in years, but he looks better imo and in his heyday had at least as much charisma.
  • iamurospiamurosp Belgrade, Serbia
    Posts: 5
    Turner. Aidan Turner.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 17 Posts: 4,865
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Amy Pascal is not exactly known to have very good ideas or to back up good ideas.

    It doesn't really matter if she's the one in charge! :)
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Elba looks too brutish.

    Nope. He can certainly look tough when he needs to, which is rather what Bond is. I'd take tough over fey in a Hiddleston kind of way any day of the week.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Colin Salmon I haven't seen him in a role in years, but he looks better imo and in his heyday had at least as much charisma.

    Not really, no. I'd say there's a reason one is a movie star and one wasn't.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 3,558
    I think I'd say Daniel Craig looks a little more brutish than Idris Elba does, personally.
    Colin Salmon would have been/basically was a great Bill Tanner, much better than Kinnear is, even if Kinnear is a better actor than Salmon.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited October 17 Posts: 3,981
    Honestly, maybe he could've been good, but given his age now, I'd say he's certainly out of the case.

    I also personally feel like the overexposure of the guy would make the films akin to what the Mission Impossible franchise is with Tom Cruise, just watching Idris Elba do the things that James Bond would do, as opposed to watching James Bond do those things. I'd also say the same about many actors who are overexposed at this point.
Sign In or Register to comment.