Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1733734736738739767

Comments

  • Posts: 4,222
    Paddypower are offering 50-1 on Hoult - HUGE!!
  • Posts: 12,680
    Denbigh wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    To suggest that none of the actors mentioned would be suitable is just not accurate; none might fit one’s personal preference but there are several who are strong candidates.
    Exactly, and again we should remember we're not trying to find the next James Bond for tomorrow, we're trying to find suggestions for the next James Bond that'll be cast in maybe around three to four years.

    What I meant is that overall I'm not convinced with any of them and that overall I'm thus not happy with the list. Back in 2005, and I understand this may be distorted by nostalgia, I felt more enthusiastic at the pool of candidates, at least some of them.
    MSL49 wrote: »
    I think James Norton is a solid candidate.

    Solid like a plank of wood? No seriously in McMafia he was playing a sort of British Michael Corleone and it was like he was competing to be the next apprentice. I'm still trying to figure out what the heck were his motivations and what he was meant to care about.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 469
    My honest opinion, and I accept it is just an opinion, is that bar Fassbender and Hoult really the options are pretty awful for a variety of reasons.

    And that most of the guys suggested here are only cropping up because they happen to have dark hair and are vaguely handsome. I think most of them are utterly dreadful suggestions - with no edge or swagger to them in the slightest. Stick them in a tuxedo and if you squint they might look like someone doing a rubbish impression of Bond. But that's as far as it goes. The TV types of Norton, Madden, and Stevens etc couldn't be blander.

    And if EON are not thinking of casting for another 4 years then the entire thing is in serious trouble anyway and is likely a moribund franchise. If the next one doesn't come out for 5 years then that means we will have lost at least a generation of potential fans who will have naturally gravitated to the MI and F+F franchises instead.

    Anyway, rumours on the web today have suggested that there is pressure for NTTD to go to streaming. if that does happen it could speed up the process for the next film.

    It's a big IF though. It would be a strange move and I haven't checked the source of the rumours.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 3,558
    I believe we don’t currently know the name of the actor who will play Bond next. It’s just too far off, and even the younger ideas in this thread will be too old likely.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 469
    If it's that far off, then we are truly f*cked.
  • Posts: 4,222
    FatherV is spot on re his points. The younger generation has a shorter attention span. (MI and Marvel get this). EON need to cast and get a script ASAP (after NTTD release)and this IMHO would point to someone who is close to the finished article and "up to speed" re a BIG movie star rather than some of the other names listed.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 469
    patb wrote: »
    FatherV is spot on re his points. The younger generation has a shorter attention span. (MI and Marvel get this). EON need to cast and get a script ASAP (after NTTD release)and this IMHO would point to someone who is close to the finished article and "up to speed" re a BIG movie star rather than some of the other names listed.

    Yes, I think they need to get in a transitional actor who is likely to be popular, but only make a couple of films. This way they can then have more freedom to be more daring with the next choice after that, from a position of strength.

    I am pessimistic about the future of the franchise if they wait five years to make a risky choice, especially when the teenagers who would go on to be life long fans have no real sense of seeing Bond in cinemas/theaters.

    If this is going to be a one film every 5 years gig from now on then the franchise simply belongs to the past, and has no relevancy. In fact, does it count as a franchise if you only have one film every 5 years?
  • Posts: 4,222
    To steal a phrase from BJ we need an actor who is "oven ready".
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 3,978
    patb wrote: »
    FatherV is spot on re his points. The younger generation has a shorter attention span. (MI and Marvel get this). EON need to cast and get a script ASAP (after NTTD release)and this IMHO would point to someone who is close to the finished article and "up to speed" re a BIG movie star rather than some of the other names listed.
    If this is going to be a one film every 5 years gig from now on then the franchise simply belongs to the past, and has no relevancy. In fact, does it count as a franchise if you only have one film every 5 years?
    But the five-year gap wasn't a case "this is how long it's taken us to make the film". It was a case of creative differences and unfortunate circumstances and timing. As for casting, we don't know long it's going to take them, they could cast a guy in a year or two after No Time to Die's release for all we know, so I don't think we should expect one film every five years.
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 271
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    To suggest that none of the actors mentioned would be suitable is just not accurate; none might fit one’s personal preference but there are several who are strong candidates.
    Exactly, and again we should remember we're not trying to find the next James Bond for tomorrow, we're trying to find suggestions for the next James Bond that'll be cast in maybe around three to four years.

    What I meant is that overall I'm not convinced with any of them and that overall I'm thus not happy with the list. Back in 2005, and I understand this may be distorted by nostalgia, I felt more enthusiastic at the pool of candidates, at least some of them.
    MSL49 wrote: »
    I think James Norton is a solid candidate.

    Solid like a plank of wood? No seriously in McMafia he was playing a sort of British Michael Corleone and it was like he was competing to be the next apprentice. I'm still trying to figure out what the heck were his motivations and what he was meant to care about.

    I mean he is not the best but not the worst either.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    edited October 23 Posts: 469
    Denbigh wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    FatherV is spot on re his points. The younger generation has a shorter attention span. (MI and Marvel get this). EON need to cast and get a script ASAP (after NTTD release)and this IMHO would point to someone who is close to the finished article and "up to speed" re a BIG movie star rather than some of the other names listed.
    If this is going to be a one film every 5 years gig from now on then the franchise simply belongs to the past, and has no relevancy. In fact, does it count as a franchise if you only have one film every 5 years?
    But the five-year gap wasn't a case "this is how long it's taken us to make the film". It was a case of creative differences and unfortunate circumstances and timing. As for casting, we don't know long it's going to take them, they could cast a guy in a year or two after No Time to Die's release for all we know, so I don't think we should expect one film every five years.

    Well, it's a six year gap now because of Covid, right? But it would have been five years anyway.

    I understand completely why it has taken so long. And I don't blame EON for it (apart from them making the decision to wait on Craig, rather than finding someone else for the part and giving him way too much power).

    So please understand, I am not assigning blame here. It is what it is. But if they want to get back on top of the pile and put the recent multiple issues behind them then they need to get a move on. Because the longer they leave it the less of a market there will be for the series when they do finally return.

    In the last ten years lots of older people who are fans of the series have died off, but have not been replaced with a younger generation. It is like a football club losing older season ticket holders but not replacing them with younger season ticket holders. Pretty soon the money stops coming in.

    This doesn't mean that a Bond film in 5 or even 10 years wouldn't find an audience. But it's share of the market would be much smaller, and the name far less prestigious.
  • Posts: 4,222
    If you look at all of the ups and downs re the brand over recent years, surely, they need someone like the great Sir Roger who will be a reliable represetative of the brand. We live in a media world where just a small slip up (slit wrists) can be misinterpreted and blown our of context. "Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown"
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited October 23 Posts: 3,558
    If it's that far off, then we are truly f*cked.

    I wouldn't be surprised if it's the better part of a decade before we're sitting down in a theatre (?) in front of Bond 26. I'd love to eat my hat on this one, of course.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 469
    If it's that far off, then we are truly f*cked.

    I wouldn't be surprised if it's the better part of a decade before we're sitting down in a theatre (?) in front of Bond 26. I'd love to eat my hat on this one, of course.

    Me too.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited October 23 Posts: 5,015
    talos7 wrote: »
    To suggest that none of the actors mentioned would be suitable is just not accurate; none might fit one’s personal preference but there are several who are strong candidates.

    As an example, in what way is Timothy Chamalet suitable? Or Jack O Connell? Both good actors, but one is an odd looking skinny little American and the other is as tall as an Ewok.

    Both these actors were touted as Bond candidates. But they can’t really be can they?

    But yes, there have been some Bondian suggestions among the many.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,015
    MSL49 wrote: »
    I think James Norton is a solid candidate.

    A solid BBC TV actor.
  • Agent_Zero_OneAgent_Zero_One Ireland
    edited October 23 Posts: 124
    Having just finished the Haunting of Bly Manor (fantastic show, BTW), I have to say that I could definitely see Oliver Jackson-Cohen as Bond. Not exactly a Bondian performance perse, but the elements were certainly there.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 5,470
    Having just finished the Haunting of Bly Manor (fantastic show, BTW), I have to say that I could definitely see Oliver Jackson-Cohen as Bond. Not exactly a Bondian performance perse, but the elements were certainly there.
    I’ve never seen anything featuring him; based on photos alone, I don’t see it.
    I remember someone saying that he looks better on the screen than in photos; this is exactly how I feel about Hugh Jackman. He looks significantly different on screen than
    In many photos.


  • Posts: 10,975
    suavejmf wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    To suggest that none of the actors mentioned would be suitable is just not accurate; none might fit one’s personal preference but there are several who are strong candidates.

    As an example, in what way is Timothy Chamalet suitable? Or Jack O Connell? Both good actors, but one is an odd looking skinny little American and the other is as tall as an Ewok.

    Both these actors were touted as Bond candidates. But they can’t really be can they?

    But yes, there have been some Bondian suggestions among the many.

    I'm with you on this. It's kind of like suggesting Don Knotts as a great Bond candidate back in the '80's and being serious about it.
  • edited October 24 Posts: 528
    I can’t think of anyone better than John Boyega. Tall , dashing, athletic, a good actor and will be the perfect age of 32-33 when Bond 26 comes about. Barbara, I hope you are sniffing about.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 5,470
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    To suggest that none of the actors mentioned would be suitable is just not accurate; none might fit one’s personal preference but there are several who are strong candidates.

    As an example, in what way is Timothy Chamalet suitable? Or Jack O Connell? Both good actors, but one is an odd looking skinny little American and the other is as tall as an Ewok.

    Both these actors were touted as Bond candidates. But they can’t really be can they?

    But yes, there have been some Bondian suggestions among the many.

    I'm with you on this. It's kind of like suggesting Don Knotts as a great Bond candidate back in the '80's and being serious about it.

    My ultimate point is that many names have been put forth ; there are at least a half dozen strong choices even if there not everyone’s personal favorites.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,015
    I can’t think of anyone better than John Boyega. Tall , dashing, athletic, a good actor and will be the perfect age of 32-33 when Bond 26 comes about. Barbara, I hope you are sniffing about.

    I hear that Hugh Grant is to be cast as Shaft as well.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,015
    talos7 wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    To suggest that none of the actors mentioned would be suitable is just not accurate; none might fit one’s personal preference but there are several who are strong candidates.

    As an example, in what way is Timothy Chamalet suitable? Or Jack O Connell? Both good actors, but one is an odd looking skinny little American and the other is as tall as an Ewok.

    Both these actors were touted as Bond candidates. But they can’t really be can they?

    But yes, there have been some Bondian suggestions among the many.

    I'm with you on this. It's kind of like suggesting Don Knotts as a great Bond candidate back in the '80's and being serious about it.

    My ultimate point is that many names have been put forth ; there are at least a half dozen strong choices even if there not everyone’s personal favorites.

    Yes, that’s fair enough and fair comment.
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 271
    How about Rupert Friend, he made reading's last time around?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Robotswana
    Posts: 38,632
    This thread.
    broken-record-gif-1.gif
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,015
    MSL49 wrote: »
    How about Rupert Friend, he made reading's last time around?

    I’d say he’s definitely worth a screen test.
  • BennyBenny spammer bannerModerator
    Posts: 10,815
    suavejmf wrote: »
    MSL49 wrote: »
    How about Rupert Friend, he made reading's last time around?

    I’d say he’s definitely worth a screen test.

    He's also known to American audiences through Homeland.
    Something despite being popular amongst select fans, is something Aidan Turner does not possess.
    Although I'm in a minority, I think Chris Hemsworth could play the part. More likely in a lighter way. But he has the looks, can do action and even act. An unlikely choice, but one I'd like to see screentest.
    As a good all-round contender, I think Hoult is a safe bet. Looks, height, age, acting ability, well known without being a mega star. Placing him in the highly possible to get a screen test when casting begins I'd say.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited October 24 Posts: 5,015
    Benny wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    MSL49 wrote: »
    How about Rupert Friend, he made reading's last time around?

    I’d say he’s definitely worth a screen test.

    He's also known to American audiences through Homeland.
    Something despite being popular amongst select fans, is something Aidan Turner does not possess.
    Although I'm in a minority, I think Chris Hemsworth could play the part. More likely in a lighter way. But he has the looks, can do action and even act. An unlikely choice, but one I'd like to see screentest.
    As a good all-round contender, I think Hoult is a safe bet. Looks, height, age, acting ability, well known without being a mega star. Placing him in the highly possible to get a screen test when casting begins I'd say.

    I like Hemsworth. But his faux English accent is a tad pantomime IMO. Personally, I’ve no desire to see another Auzzie Bond.
  • BennyBenny spammer bannerModerator
    Posts: 10,815
    If he worked on the accent with a dialect coach, would that change your mind @suavejmf ?
    He has masses of likability and charisma. And is popular with audiences.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 5,470
    Benny wrote: »
    If he worked on the accent with a dialect coach, would that change your mind @suavejmf ?
    He has masses of likability and charisma. And is popular with audiences.

    Hemsworth is actually high on my list. He’s got charisma and charm to spare and can obviously handle the physical stuff.
    His film , “ Extraction “ was a lot of fun.

    If they want to go with a lighter tone that still features an actor’s physicality, he would not be a bad choice. Based on charisma alone he’s worthy of a screentest; that is a quality that can’t be coached or acquired.

    As far as judging him on being Australian, each actor has to be judged on their own merits. Some people like Lazenby, some don’t. I personally like him, although I am aware of his shortcomings; had he stayed on, he would have matured nicely into the tale.
    Then there’s the missed opportunity of an actor who could have brought the charm of Moore with the hard edge brutal physicality of Craig, Hugh Jackman.

    With that said, I’m not British , a pitch perfect accent is not very important to me , but I can completely understand someone having it as a priority. I live in New Orleans, over the the years there have been countless, horrid attempts by actors to do a New Orleans accent, with Dennis Quaid in “The Big Easy” being the worst offender. So I get it.
Sign In or Register to comment.