Who should/could be a Bond actor?

17857867887907911177

Comments

  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,888
    William Moseley Is an interesting new name in the mix.
  • GadgetManGadgetMan Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 4,247
    talos7 wrote: »
    William Moseley Is an interesting new name in the mix.

    Yeah. He does look like a Bond.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,921
    Jamie Bell?
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    edited April 2021 Posts: 2,480
    talos7 wrote: »
    William Moseley Is an interesting new name in the mix.
    Not a bad shout, he's got a distinctive look about him

    Out of interest has anyone changed their minds about who they want as Bond recently?
    Like you had someone you wanted in the part and then over time you've saw someone else who is now your favourite

    For instance, I wanted Fassbender when I thought Craig wasn't coming back but he's probably too old now, then after seeing And Then There Were None, I thought Aidan Turner could be Bond but he's more of an outside shout now if I'm honest
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,888
    Aidan Turner Is still viable, but his window is closing; time is ticking.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,834
    echo wrote: »
    Jamie Bell?
    A great actor but I think he'd be classed as too short.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,009
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    And talking of star power and knowing what they're doing, I am really excited to see Aaron Taylor-Johnson in Bullet Train. My fingers are crossed it could be his Layer Cake, despite it being more of an ensemble piece I believe.

    I think if Taylor-Johnson was going to become a proper star, he would have done so by now. He's had ample opportunities already. He's always come up short as a leading man, I think. Most of the things I've really liked him in are supporting roles. I don't mean that as an insult, by the way - being a natural supporting actor is not the same as being a bad actor.
    I definitely agree (although I loved him as John Lennon in Nowhere Boy); I think I'm just hoping that it's still possible, and why not? Stranger things have happened. It's why I'm excited for Bullet Train because if he's a significant character in that film, it's the best shot he's had.

    Don't get me wrong, it would definitely be a choice that would divide fans I imagine.

    Who knows, indeed! There's nothing I enjoy more than being proved wrong by an actor, so I'll keep an eye on him. Bullet Train sounds cool, either way.
  • Posts: 15,785
    talos7 wrote: »
    Aidan Turner Is still viable, but his window is closing; time is ticking.

    I have a feeling all of the potential Bond actors mentioned in this thread will be well past Sir Roger's AVTAK age by the time B26 begins development.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    Whoever is given the part, they need to have the gravitas of being believable as a Royal Navy Commander.

    Whether this is a part of his history now or not I don't know, but if they keep the same background as Craig's incarnation, then he needs to have been a serving SBS officer too. I am guessing Craig's Bond was both (I think SBS teams are led by either RN Commanders or Marines from what I remember reading).

    You can be relatively young and do this (early thirties I think if you work hard and talented - so Bond would fit the mark), but you do need that gravitas.

    Something to remember when thinking of casting. It can't just be someone who is British and handsome.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,480
    Whoever is given the part, they need to have the gravitas of being believable as a Royal Navy Commander.

    Whether this is a part of his history now or not I don't know, but if they keep the same background as Craig's incarnation, then he needs to have been a serving SBS officer too. I am guessing Craig's Bond was both (I think SBS teams are led by either RN Commanders or Marines from what I remember reading).

    You can be relatively young and do this (early thirties I think if you work hard and talented - so Bond would fit the mark), but you do need that gravitas.

    Something to remember when thinking of casting. It can't just be someone who is British and handsome.

    Couldn't agree more with this, well said mate
    It's one thing I think people always forget about when they suggest potential candidates. That and the actors voice, Bond should always have a commanding voice to match his presence
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    Posts: 5,834
    Denbigh wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    And talking of star power and knowing what they're doing, I am really excited to see Aaron Taylor-Johnson in Bullet Train. My fingers are crossed it could be his Layer Cake, despite it being more of an ensemble piece I believe.

    I think if Taylor-Johnson was going to become a proper star, he would have done so by now. He's had ample opportunities already. He's always come up short as a leading man, I think. Most of the things I've really liked him in are supporting roles. I don't mean that as an insult, by the way - being a natural supporting actor is not the same as being a bad actor.
    I definitely agree (although I loved him as John Lennon in Nowhere Boy); I think I'm just hoping that it's still possible, and why not? Stranger things have happened. It's why I'm excited for Bullet Train because if he's a significant character in that film, it's the best shot he's had.

    Don't get me wrong, it would definitely be a choice that would divide fans I imagine.
    Bullet Train sounds cool, either way.
    There's already been some set pics:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-9305249/Aaron-Taylor-Johnson-films-bloody-fight-scene-film-Bullet-Train-led-Brad-Pitt-LA.html
  • Posts: 14,797
    Regé-Jean Page recently left Bridgerton's second series and even Deadline ran an article stating he 'is mix to be the next James Bond'. It's unclear if they are speculating or have heard something. Though it could likely be a bit of both.

    I like this guy's look. He's as handsome as Henry Cavill or Pierce Brosnan. He also reminds me of a young Colin Salmon. I'm yet to see Bridgerton, but merely in the abstract, I could see him as the next James Bond. He's clearly going to be a star, so perhaps someone to keep an eye on.....

    Rege-Jean-Page-Bridgerton-James-Bond.jpg?q=50&fit=crop&w=960&h=500
    0_Vanity-Fair-EE-Rising-Star-BAFTAs-Pre-Party-Red-Carpet-Arrivals.jpg
    for-the-people_9cv82d-scaled-e1609759753596.jpg
    0*GuqMwhTV43U5eImi.gif

    As much as I tend to be against the casting of a black actor as Bond, on looks alone I'd chose him over say Cavill, Turner and many other white actors mentioned here. Not sure why. Maybe he does have something of a younger Colin Salmon. Maybe he looks less youthful/baby face than other actors his age.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Whoever is given the part, they need to have the gravitas of being believable as a Royal Navy Commander.

    Whether this is a part of his history now or not I don't know, but if they keep the same background as Craig's incarnation, then he needs to have been a serving SBS officer too. I am guessing Craig's Bond was both (I think SBS teams are led by either RN Commanders or Marines from what I remember reading).

    You can be relatively young and do this (early thirties I think if you work hard and talented - so Bond would fit the mark), but you do need that gravitas.

    Something to remember when thinking of casting. It can't just be someone who is British and handsome.

    Couldn't agree more with this, well said mate
    It's one thing I think people always forget about when they suggest potential candidates. That and the actors voice, Bond should always have a commanding voice to match his presence

    Yes, voice is very important. Good point.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    Whoever is given the part, they need to have the gravitas of being believable as a Royal Navy Commander.

    Whether this is a part of his history now or not I don't know, but if they keep the same background as Craig's incarnation, then he needs to have been a serving SBS officer too. I am guessing Craig's Bond was both (I think SBS teams are led by either RN Commanders or Marines from what I remember reading).

    You can be relatively young and do this (early thirties I think if you work hard and talented - so Bond would fit the mark), but you do need that gravitas.

    Something to remember when thinking of casting. It can't just be someone who is British and handsome.

    This is very much a sideline but the way I understand it, a Royal Navy Commander could be the Commanding Officer of all of SBS. Sources vary. It's either a Royal Navy Captain (one rank above Commander) or a Royal Marines Lieutenant Colonel (equivalent to a RN Commander) while squadrons are led by Navy Lieutenant Commanders or Marine Majors (both one rank below the RN Commander). So Bond would be quite senior in the SBS up to possibly commanding the whole thing. That obviously doesn't work anymore.

    But Commander Bond sounds great, so they should definitely keep it.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited April 2021 Posts: 14,861
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Whoever is given the part, they need to have the gravitas of being believable as a Royal Navy Commander.

    Whether this is a part of his history now or not I don't know, but if they keep the same background as Craig's incarnation, then he needs to have been a serving SBS officer too. I am guessing Craig's Bond was both (I think SBS teams are led by either RN Commanders or Marines from what I remember reading).

    You can be relatively young and do this (early thirties I think if you work hard and talented - so Bond would fit the mark), but you do need that gravitas.

    Something to remember when thinking of casting. It can't just be someone who is British and handsome.

    Couldn't agree more with this, well said mate
    It's one thing I think people always forget about when they suggest potential candidates. That and the actors voice, Bond should always have a commanding voice to match his presence

    Yes, voice is very important. Good point.

    And to be honest, on both points I think Brosnan falls down! :) I don't buy him as a military man at all (certainly not a special forces type), plus his voice isn't really his strong point. I don't dislike him in the role though so I think there's an awful lot that a bit of straightforward movie star charisma can just make up for, but I do agree that I prefer someone who does have those aspects, like Craig or Connery (plus the charisma of course!).
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    Whoever is given the part, they need to have the gravitas of being believable as a Royal Navy Commander.

    Whether this is a part of his history now or not I don't know, but if they keep the same background as Craig's incarnation, then he needs to have been a serving SBS officer too. I am guessing Craig's Bond was both (I think SBS teams are led by either RN Commanders or Marines from what I remember reading).

    You can be relatively young and do this (early thirties I think if you work hard and talented - so Bond would fit the mark), but you do need that gravitas.

    Something to remember when thinking of casting. It can't just be someone who is British and handsome.

    This is very much a sideline but the way I understand it, a Royal Navy Commander could be the Commanding Officer of all of SBS. Sources vary. It's either a Royal Navy Captain (one rank above Commander) or a Royal Marines Lieutenant Colonel (equivalent to a RN Commander) while squadrons are led by Navy Lieutenant Commanders or Marine Majors (both one rank below the RN Commander). So Bond would be quite senior in the SBS up to possibly commanding the whole thing. That obviously doesn't work anymore.

    But Commander Bond sounds great, so they should definitely keep it.

    Cheers @ImpertinentGoon. Great info. I didn't look it up before I wrote the post. So I am happy to be contradicted. I thought a RN Commander could lead a squadron of SBS.

    Either way, my point was that Bond should have that standing, experience, and leadership qualities.

    Personally, all Bond actors so far could qualify. They are all believable (I have worked with a few ex RN and Marine/Special forces types), and for me, they all fit a version of the various moulds I have encountered - either gruff individuals, having a commanding presence, a good education, or ex-public school style authority. The only one who struggles is Lazenby, and he makes up for it with the swagger of a young, ambitious navy type.

    That's just my experience. Not trying to shout down anyone who thinks differently.

    What prompted me posting this in the first place was re-watching The Hunt for Red October and seeing Connery playing a naval character - he's great. Moore does a good job in North Sea Hijack too. It basically reminded me of some of Bond's core characteristics, and him being steeped in the history of the RN. I think it is important to keep that background in the films, preferably with him as a Commander, regardless of his height, skin colour, etc.

    Doesn't he get referred to as 'Commander Bond' in NTTD?
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited April 2021 Posts: 14,861
    Moore and Connery were both in the armed forces themselves of course, so I buy them. I get what you mean about Lazenby, but as you say, the cockiness does sell it to me. Dalton is convincing enough I think; it’s just Brosnan’s slight prissiness I don’t really buy as an assassin from the Navy.

    Mind you, probably the most camp Bond of them all was the toughest and most Bond-like in real life: Niven!
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    mtm wrote: »
    Moore and Connery were both in the armed forces themselves of course, so I buy them. I get what you mean about Lazenby, but as you say, the cockiness does sell it to me. Dalton is convincing enough I think; it’s just Brosnan’s slight prissiness I don’t really buy as an assassin from the Navy.

    Mind you, probably the most camp Bond of them all was the toughest and most Bond-like in real life: Niven!

    Good point.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    Whoever is given the part, they need to have the gravitas of being believable as a Royal Navy Commander.

    Whether this is a part of his history now or not I don't know, but if they keep the same background as Craig's incarnation, then he needs to have been a serving SBS officer too. I am guessing Craig's Bond was both (I think SBS teams are led by either RN Commanders or Marines from what I remember reading).

    You can be relatively young and do this (early thirties I think if you work hard and talented - so Bond would fit the mark), but you do need that gravitas.

    Something to remember when thinking of casting. It can't just be someone who is British and handsome.

    This is very much a sideline but the way I understand it, a Royal Navy Commander could be the Commanding Officer of all of SBS. Sources vary. It's either a Royal Navy Captain (one rank above Commander) or a Royal Marines Lieutenant Colonel (equivalent to a RN Commander) while squadrons are led by Navy Lieutenant Commanders or Marine Majors (both one rank below the RN Commander). So Bond would be quite senior in the SBS up to possibly commanding the whole thing. That obviously doesn't work anymore.

    But Commander Bond sounds great, so they should definitely keep it.

    Cheers @ImpertinentGoon. Great info. I didn't look it up before I wrote the post. So I am happy to be contradicted. I thought a RN Commander could lead a squadron of SBS.

    Either way, my point was that Bond should have that standing, experience, and leadership qualities.

    Personally, all Bond actors so far could qualify. They are all believable (I have worked with a few ex RN and Marine/Special forces types), and for me, they all fit a version of the various moulds I have encountered - either gruff individuals, having a commanding presence, a good education, or ex-public school style authority. The only one who struggles is Lazenby, and he makes up for it with the swagger of a young, ambitious navy type.

    That's just my experience. Not trying to shout down anyone who thinks differently.

    What prompted me posting this in the first place was re-watching The Hunt for Red October and seeing Connery playing a naval character - he's great. Moore does a good job in North Sea Hijack too. It basically reminded me of some of Bond's core characteristics, and him being steeped in the history of the RN. I think it is important to keep that background in the films, preferably with him as a Commander, regardless of his height, skin colour, etc.

    Doesn't he get referred to as 'Commander Bond' in NTTD?

    I had put that together a while back for a post somewhere else and thought I'd share it here to.
    I have never been in or around the military in any way, so I really only have a limited understanding of how all of this works. Just as a caveat.
    I think this is a very sly situation where the difference between Fleming Bond, the post-war hero and modern Bond the post-Cikd War career soldier comes through. I don't remember everything off the top of my head, but the obit in YOLT basically states that Bond was given promotions for clandestine work during the war and his position in the RNVR was mostly cover - at least that's the way I read it. So I would presume he was basically outside the usual command structure and was never really a commanding officer and his time as an actual working seaman (or however you want to call it) was quite limited. That doesn't really work nowadays, I think, because SIS and the Navy (or military in general) are more separated and obviously there hasn't been a World War in some time so really the option of gaining ranks through working for Naval Intelligence doesn't really exist anymore.
    From what I think Bond is, his rank in the SBS would be more like a Lieutenant leading a small team, but not that much higher up.
    At the end of the day, I think this is one of those things where less thinking about it is more for us fans. He is Commander Bond and that is that. Trying to tie up too.many ends just makes a jumble of things...
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    edited April 2021 Posts: 737
    Whoever is given the part, they need to have the gravitas of being believable as a Royal Navy Commander.

    Whether this is a part of his history now or not I don't know, but if they keep the same background as Craig's incarnation, then he needs to have been a serving SBS officer too. I am guessing Craig's Bond was both (I think SBS teams are led by either RN Commanders or Marines from what I remember reading).

    You can be relatively young and do this (early thirties I think if you work hard and talented - so Bond would fit the mark), but you do need that gravitas.

    Something to remember when thinking of casting. It can't just be someone who is British and handsome.

    This is very much a sideline but the way I understand it, a Royal Navy Commander could be the Commanding Officer of all of SBS. Sources vary. It's either a Royal Navy Captain (one rank above Commander) or a Royal Marines Lieutenant Colonel (equivalent to a RN Commander) while squadrons are led by Navy Lieutenant Commanders or Marine Majors (both one rank below the RN Commander). So Bond would be quite senior in the SBS up to possibly commanding the whole thing. That obviously doesn't work anymore.

    But Commander Bond sounds great, so they should definitely keep it.

    Cheers @ImpertinentGoon. Great info. I didn't look it up before I wrote the post. So I am happy to be contradicted. I thought a RN Commander could lead a squadron of SBS.

    Either way, my point was that Bond should have that standing, experience, and leadership qualities.

    Personally, all Bond actors so far could qualify. They are all believable (I have worked with a few ex RN and Marine/Special forces types), and for me, they all fit a version of the various moulds I have encountered - either gruff individuals, having a commanding presence, a good education, or ex-public school style authority. The only one who struggles is Lazenby, and he makes up for it with the swagger of a young, ambitious navy type.

    That's just my experience. Not trying to shout down anyone who thinks differently.

    What prompted me posting this in the first place was re-watching The Hunt for Red October and seeing Connery playing a naval character - he's great. Moore does a good job in North Sea Hijack too. It basically reminded me of some of Bond's core characteristics, and him being steeped in the history of the RN. I think it is important to keep that background in the films, preferably with him as a Commander, regardless of his height, skin colour, etc.

    Doesn't he get referred to as 'Commander Bond' in NTTD?

    I had put that together a while back for a post somewhere else and thought I'd share it here to.
    I have never been in or around the military in any way, so I really only have a limited understanding of how all of this works. Just as a caveat.
    I think this is a very sly situation where the difference between Fleming Bond, the post-war hero and modern Bond the post-Cikd War career soldier comes through. I don't remember everything off the top of my head, but the obit in YOLT basically states that Bond was given promotions for clandestine work during the war and his position in the RNVR was mostly cover - at least that's the way I read it. So I would presume he was basically outside the usual command structure and was never really a commanding officer and his time as an actual working seaman (or however you want to call it) was quite limited. That doesn't really work nowadays, I think, because SIS and the Navy (or military in general) are more separated and obviously there hasn't been a World War in some time so really the option of gaining ranks through working for Naval Intelligence doesn't really exist anymore.
    From what I think Bond is, his rank in the SBS would be more like a Lieutenant leading a small team, but not that much higher up.
    At the end of the day, I think this is one of those things where less thinking about it is more for us fans. He is Commander Bond and that is that. Trying to tie up too.many ends just makes a jumble of things...

    Good point. I haven't read the YOLT obit for ages because I hate the self reflexive joke about the popular novels being based on his exploits.

    And yes, he's Commander Bond and that is that, I agree with completely. I am not trying to overthink it at all. I am merely pointing out that whoever gets the role needs to have looked like they have military experience serving in the RN or SBS or whatever.

    They pitched it perfectly with Craig (just remembered he also gets a brief obit in SF where they mention his rank). I just think that should continue with the next incarnation of the role.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    Whoever is given the part, they need to have the gravitas of being believable as a Royal Navy Commander.

    Whether this is a part of his history now or not I don't know, but if they keep the same background as Craig's incarnation, then he needs to have been a serving SBS officer too. I am guessing Craig's Bond was both (I think SBS teams are led by either RN Commanders or Marines from what I remember reading).

    You can be relatively young and do this (early thirties I think if you work hard and talented - so Bond would fit the mark), but you do need that gravitas.

    Something to remember when thinking of casting. It can't just be someone who is British and handsome.

    This is very much a sideline but the way I understand it, a Royal Navy Commander could be the Commanding Officer of all of SBS. Sources vary. It's either a Royal Navy Captain (one rank above Commander) or a Royal Marines Lieutenant Colonel (equivalent to a RN Commander) while squadrons are led by Navy Lieutenant Commanders or Marine Majors (both one rank below the RN Commander). So Bond would be quite senior in the SBS up to possibly commanding the whole thing. That obviously doesn't work anymore.

    But Commander Bond sounds great, so they should definitely keep it.

    Cheers @ImpertinentGoon. Great info. I didn't look it up before I wrote the post. So I am happy to be contradicted. I thought a RN Commander could lead a squadron of SBS.

    Either way, my point was that Bond should have that standing, experience, and leadership qualities.

    Personally, all Bond actors so far could qualify. They are all believable (I have worked with a few ex RN and Marine/Special forces types), and for me, they all fit a version of the various moulds I have encountered - either gruff individuals, having a commanding presence, a good education, or ex-public school style authority. The only one who struggles is Lazenby, and he makes up for it with the swagger of a young, ambitious navy type.

    That's just my experience. Not trying to shout down anyone who thinks differently.

    What prompted me posting this in the first place was re-watching The Hunt for Red October and seeing Connery playing a naval character - he's great. Moore does a good job in North Sea Hijack too. It basically reminded me of some of Bond's core characteristics, and him being steeped in the history of the RN. I think it is important to keep that background in the films, preferably with him as a Commander, regardless of his height, skin colour, etc.

    Doesn't he get referred to as 'Commander Bond' in NTTD?

    I had put that together a while back for a post somewhere else and thought I'd share it here to.
    I have never been in or around the military in any way, so I really only have a limited understanding of how all of this works. Just as a caveat.
    I think this is a very sly situation where the difference between Fleming Bond, the post-war hero and modern Bond the post-Cikd War career soldier comes through. I don't remember everything off the top of my head, but the obit in YOLT basically states that Bond was given promotions for clandestine work during the war and his position in the RNVR was mostly cover - at least that's the way I read it. So I would presume he was basically outside the usual command structure and was never really a commanding officer and his time as an actual working seaman (or however you want to call it) was quite limited. That doesn't really work nowadays, I think, because SIS and the Navy (or military in general) are more separated and obviously there hasn't been a World War in some time so really the option of gaining ranks through working for Naval Intelligence doesn't really exist anymore.
    From what I think Bond is, his rank in the SBS would be more like a Lieutenant leading a small team, but not that much higher up.
    At the end of the day, I think this is one of those things where less thinking about it is more for us fans. He is Commander Bond and that is that. Trying to tie up too.many ends just makes a jumble of things...

    Good point. I haven't read the YOLT obit for ages because I hate the self reflexive joke about the popular novels being based on his exploits.

    And yes, he's Commander Bond and that is that, I agree with completely. I am not trying to overthink it at all. I am merely pointing out that whoever gets the role needs to have looked like they have military experience serving in the RN or SBS or whatever.

    They pitched it perfectly with Craig (just remembered he also gets a brief obit in SF where they mention his rank). I just think that should continue with the next incarnation of the role.

    I was saying that I was overthinking it, not you :-D So, all good here.

    I tend to agree with you that the Navy background should be considered fundamental to the character. It is interesting that you write about it being a question of gravitas and a certain feeling you get from the performance rather than something in the writing. I have been thinking a bit about ways for screenwriters to bring that part of the character into the film but maybe you are more on the right track that that shouldn't even be needed. It has to come from the actor and the way he carries himself and not some nifty piece of writing about the conflicts he was involved in or something.
  • QsCatQsCat London
    edited April 2021 Posts: 251
    mtm wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Whoever is given the part, they need to have the gravitas of being believable as a Royal Navy Commander.

    Whether this is a part of his history now or not I don't know, but if they keep the same background as Craig's incarnation, then he needs to have been a serving SBS officer too. I am guessing Craig's Bond was both (I think SBS teams are led by either RN Commanders or Marines from what I remember reading).

    You can be relatively young and do this (early thirties I think if you work hard and talented - so Bond would fit the mark), but you do need that gravitas.

    Something to remember when thinking of casting. It can't just be someone who is British and handsome.

    Couldn't agree more with this, well said mate
    It's one thing I think people always forget about when they suggest potential candidates. That and the actors voice, Bond should always have a commanding voice to match his presence

    Yes, voice is very important. Good point.

    And to be honest, on both points I think Brosnan falls down! :) I don't buy him as a military man at all (certainly not a special forces type), plus his voice isn't really his strong point. I don't dislike him in the role though so I think there's an awful lot that a bit of straightforward movie star charisma can just make up for, but I do agree that I prefer someone who does have those aspects, like Craig or Connery (plus the charisma of course!).

    I don't understand how PB's voice doesn't stand up. His voice as an actor is distinctive and he uses it very well. Now if you're saying his voice doesn't suggest he was a Commander in the Navy, well, we're now entering the realm of the ridiculous.
    I think Bond is similar to Lawrence of Arabia; an outsider who doesn't seem to fit in.
    eb6f96_5a08206a972c4e74b9294c535ac93eea~mv2.jpg

    If Bond were to initially appear somewhat unbelievable as having been in the Navy and Commando's, I don't think it's too much of a problem because it fulfils that outsider quality and also helps him to blend in as a spy.

    As much as I love Craig's interpretation and the change he helped bring to the franchise, I don't think its necessary for Bond to be as close as possible to a real life agent. The main thing is that he can get by on his wit and be the ruthless man of action when he needs to be- and that we believe him when he does.

    I like all the Bond's for different reasons. Next time round I'd like to see a Bond who is a bit more positive, more extrovert, who smiles now and then. I think the charisma of the actor and their watchability may actually be far more important than if they tick the right boxes. Ticking boxes can be boring. I loved Craig's Bond at first, but since Skyfall I find him pretty boring. He seems constantly depressed. Talking often even seems a challenge for him.

    Let's be thankful for what Craig brought to the series, but after NTTD, let's leave him on a golden beach, alone, with a bottle of Blackwells. There, as he thinks of Vesper, he may drink himself into the grave he longs for.

    To those of you who deride Brosnan- I don't understand you. You may think him too slight -possibly the least important fault- but what about all his positives?? I don't see how he himself could have been any better in the films he had. He worked his arse off and did a brilliant job. I think he had the best balance of all the elements, even though he's not necesserily my favourite Bond. How lucky we would be to have an actor of Brosnan's calibre next time round. I hope those of you who dislike Brosnan aren't also the ones suggesting Nicholas Hoult or Jack Lowden. @-)

    anigif_sub-buzz-19038-1475818310-2.gif?output-quality=auto&output-format=auto&downsize=360:*
    hCEnFUC.gif
    1-7.gif





  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited April 2021 Posts: 14,861
    QsCat wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Whoever is given the part, they need to have the gravitas of being believable as a Royal Navy Commander.

    Whether this is a part of his history now or not I don't know, but if they keep the same background as Craig's incarnation, then he needs to have been a serving SBS officer too. I am guessing Craig's Bond was both (I think SBS teams are led by either RN Commanders or Marines from what I remember reading).

    You can be relatively young and do this (early thirties I think if you work hard and talented - so Bond would fit the mark), but you do need that gravitas.

    Something to remember when thinking of casting. It can't just be someone who is British and handsome.

    Couldn't agree more with this, well said mate
    It's one thing I think people always forget about when they suggest potential candidates. That and the actors voice, Bond should always have a commanding voice to match his presence

    Yes, voice is very important. Good point.

    And to be honest, on both points I think Brosnan falls down! :) I don't buy him as a military man at all (certainly not a special forces type), plus his voice isn't really his strong point. I don't dislike him in the role though so I think there's an awful lot that a bit of straightforward movie star charisma can just make up for, but I do agree that I prefer someone who does have those aspects, like Craig or Connery (plus the charisma of course!).

    I don't understand how PB's voice doesn't stand up. His voice as an actor is distinctive and he uses it very well. Now if you're saying his voice doesn't suggest he was a Commander in the Navy, well, we're now entering the realm of the ridiculous.

    I didn't say that no: two separate points raised in the discussion. You're joining those dots yourself.

    His voice is just a bit whiny, that's all. He does a bit of an affected raspy thing to try to mitigate it. Plus he's got his odd, unique accent.
    It's not terrible or anything, just not his greatest strength.

  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    Whoever is given the part, they need to have the gravitas of being believable as a Royal Navy Commander.

    Whether this is a part of his history now or not I don't know, but if they keep the same background as Craig's incarnation, then he needs to have been a serving SBS officer too. I am guessing Craig's Bond was both (I think SBS teams are led by either RN Commanders or Marines from what I remember reading).

    You can be relatively young and do this (early thirties I think if you work hard and talented - so Bond would fit the mark), but you do need that gravitas.

    Something to remember when thinking of casting. It can't just be someone who is British and handsome.

    This is very much a sideline but the way I understand it, a Royal Navy Commander could be the Commanding Officer of all of SBS. Sources vary. It's either a Royal Navy Captain (one rank above Commander) or a Royal Marines Lieutenant Colonel (equivalent to a RN Commander) while squadrons are led by Navy Lieutenant Commanders or Marine Majors (both one rank below the RN Commander). So Bond would be quite senior in the SBS up to possibly commanding the whole thing. That obviously doesn't work anymore.

    But Commander Bond sounds great, so they should definitely keep it.

    Cheers @ImpertinentGoon. Great info. I didn't look it up before I wrote the post. So I am happy to be contradicted. I thought a RN Commander could lead a squadron of SBS.

    Either way, my point was that Bond should have that standing, experience, and leadership qualities.

    Personally, all Bond actors so far could qualify. They are all believable (I have worked with a few ex RN and Marine/Special forces types), and for me, they all fit a version of the various moulds I have encountered - either gruff individuals, having a commanding presence, a good education, or ex-public school style authority. The only one who struggles is Lazenby, and he makes up for it with the swagger of a young, ambitious navy type.

    That's just my experience. Not trying to shout down anyone who thinks differently.

    What prompted me posting this in the first place was re-watching The Hunt for Red October and seeing Connery playing a naval character - he's great. Moore does a good job in North Sea Hijack too. It basically reminded me of some of Bond's core characteristics, and him being steeped in the history of the RN. I think it is important to keep that background in the films, preferably with him as a Commander, regardless of his height, skin colour, etc.

    Doesn't he get referred to as 'Commander Bond' in NTTD?

    I had put that together a while back for a post somewhere else and thought I'd share it here to.
    I have never been in or around the military in any way, so I really only have a limited understanding of how all of this works. Just as a caveat.
    I think this is a very sly situation where the difference between Fleming Bond, the post-war hero and modern Bond the post-Cikd War career soldier comes through. I don't remember everything off the top of my head, but the obit in YOLT basically states that Bond was given promotions for clandestine work during the war and his position in the RNVR was mostly cover - at least that's the way I read it. So I would presume he was basically outside the usual command structure and was never really a commanding officer and his time as an actual working seaman (or however you want to call it) was quite limited. That doesn't really work nowadays, I think, because SIS and the Navy (or military in general) are more separated and obviously there hasn't been a World War in some time so really the option of gaining ranks through working for Naval Intelligence doesn't really exist anymore.
    From what I think Bond is, his rank in the SBS would be more like a Lieutenant leading a small team, but not that much higher up.
    At the end of the day, I think this is one of those things where less thinking about it is more for us fans. He is Commander Bond and that is that. Trying to tie up too.many ends just makes a jumble of things...

    Good point. I haven't read the YOLT obit for ages because I hate the self reflexive joke about the popular novels being based on his exploits.

    And yes, he's Commander Bond and that is that, I agree with completely. I am not trying to overthink it at all. I am merely pointing out that whoever gets the role needs to have looked like they have military experience serving in the RN or SBS or whatever.

    They pitched it perfectly with Craig (just remembered he also gets a brief obit in SF where they mention his rank). I just think that should continue with the next incarnation of the role.

    I was saying that I was overthinking it, not you :-D So, all good here.

    I tend to agree with you that the Navy background should be considered fundamental to the character. It is interesting that you write about it being a question of gravitas and a certain feeling you get from the performance rather than something in the writing. I have been thinking a bit about ways for screenwriters to bring that part of the character into the film but maybe you are more on the right track that that shouldn't even be needed. It has to come from the actor and the way he carries himself and not some nifty piece of writing about the conflicts he was involved in or something.

    Completely agree about all this.

    Sorry if I came across as annoyed - that was just bad writing on my part. All good here too!
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    Posts: 737
    QsCat wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    Whoever is given the part, they need to have the gravitas of being believable as a Royal Navy Commander.

    Whether this is a part of his history now or not I don't know, but if they keep the same background as Craig's incarnation, then he needs to have been a serving SBS officer too. I am guessing Craig's Bond was both (I think SBS teams are led by either RN Commanders or Marines from what I remember reading).

    You can be relatively young and do this (early thirties I think if you work hard and talented - so Bond would fit the mark), but you do need that gravitas.

    Something to remember when thinking of casting. It can't just be someone who is British and handsome.

    Couldn't agree more with this, well said mate
    It's one thing I think people always forget about when they suggest potential candidates. That and the actors voice, Bond should always have a commanding voice to match his presence

    Yes, voice is very important. Good point.

    And to be honest, on both points I think Brosnan falls down! :) I don't buy him as a military man at all (certainly not a special forces type), plus his voice isn't really his strong point. I don't dislike him in the role though so I think there's an awful lot that a bit of straightforward movie star charisma can just make up for, but I do agree that I prefer someone who does have those aspects, like Craig or Connery (plus the charisma of course!).

    I don't understand how PB's voice doesn't stand up. His voice as an actor is distinctive and he uses it very well. Now if you're saying his voice doesn't suggest he was a Commander in the Navy, well, we're now entering the realm of the ridiculous.
    I think Bond is similar to Lawrence of Arabia; an outsider who doesn't seem to fit in.
    eb6f96_5a08206a972c4e74b9294c535ac93eea~mv2.jpg

    If Bond were to initially appear somewhat unbelievable as having been in the Navy and Commando's, I don't think it's too much of a problem because it fulfils that outsider quality and also helps him to blend in as a spy.

    As much as I love Craig's interpretation and the change he helped bring to the franchise, I don't think its necessary for Bond to be as close as possible to a real life agent. The main thing is that he can get by on his wit and be the ruthless man of action when he needs to be- and that we believe him when he does.

    I like all the Bond's for different reasons. Next time round I'd like to see a Bond who is a bit more positive, more extrovert, who smiles now and then. I think the charisma of the actor and their watchability may actually be far more important than if they tick the right boxes. Ticking boxes can be boring. I loved Craig's Bond at first, but since Skyfall I find him pretty boring. He seems constantly depressed. Talking often even seems a challenge for him.

    Let's be thankful for what Craig brought to the series, but after NTTD, let's leave him on a golden beach, alone, with a bottle of Blackwells. There, as he thinks of Vesper, he may drink himself into the grave he longs for.

    To those of you who deride Brosnan- I don't understand you. You may think him too slight -possibly the least important fault- but what about all his positives?? I don't see how he himself could have been any better in the films he had. He worked his arse off and did a brilliant job. I think he had the best balance of all the elements, even though he's not necesserily my favourite Bond. How lucky we would be to have an actor of Brosnan's calibre next time round. I hope those of you who dislike Brosnan aren't also the ones suggesting Nicholas Hoult or Jack Lowden. @-)

    anigif_sub-buzz-19038-1475818310-2.gif?output-quality=auto&output-format=auto&downsize=360:*
    hCEnFUC.gif
    1-7.gif






    Personally, Brosnan is my least favourite, but that doesn't mean I think he is bad. In many respects he is the best thing about the films he is in. I rank GE very lowly, but not because of his performance. I think he's good in all four of his efforts. Also, personally I think he does a good job of the ex military aspect too. He carries himself with confidence. But everyone sees things differently, and that's fair.

    As I have said before, I think EON have chosen the lead actor brilliantly each and every time. The fact that the films have continued to be successful proves that. Whatever one thinks of Brosnan, or Moore, or Dalton, they each in their own way kept things going when the series was in doubt. And even in the case of Lazenby, the only instance where you could say they made an error, his performance is actually terrific for the most part, and the film now stands as one of the very best. So retrospectively it has worked out - even if has taken 50 years!

    James Bond 007 is both a very simple character and a complex one. Each actor has brought out certain elements of the character that the other actors haven't. And I think when people suggest actors here, they acknowledge that nobody can really encapsulate every single aspect of the character perfectly. So what you get are actors who bring out particular traits more than others.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited April 2021 Posts: 8,009
    James Bond 007 is both a very simple character and a complex one. Each actor has brought out certain elements of the character that the other actors haven't. And I think when people suggest actors here, they acknowledge that nobody can really encapsulate every single aspect of the character perfectly. So what you get are actors who bring out particular traits more than others.

    Excellently put, @FatherValentine.

    For contrast, I never bought Moore as an ex-military man, mainly because of his lack of physical fighting skills. There are countless times, to me, where he feels like a stiff, graceless English teacher in his rough and tumbles with enemies. But he excelled in his own way in other important areas which meant the films rarely suffered as slices of entertainment in spite of that gripe.

    I think that owes a lot to what you are saying, there.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,888
    An actor who is between 30 and 35 is a safe bet. Following Craig, they will want someone with acting chops . Hoult and Lowden ate two of my top candidates.
  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    edited April 2021 Posts: 737
    James Bond 007 is both a very simple character and a complex one. Each actor has brought out certain elements of the character that the other actors haven't. And I think when people suggest actors here, they acknowledge that nobody can really encapsulate every single aspect of the character perfectly. So what you get are actors who bring out particular traits more than others.

    Excellently put, @FatherValentine.

    For contrast, I never bought Moore as an ex-military man, mainly because of his lack of physical fighting skills. There are countless times, to me, where he feels like a stiff, graceless English teacher in his rough and tumbles with enemies. But he excelled in his own way in other important areas which meant the films rarely suffered as slices of entertainment in spite of that gripe.

    I think that owes a lot to what you are saying, there.

    You give with one hand, and you take away with the other, @CraigMooreOHMSS, haha. Obviously you are 100% correct that my previous comment was 'Excellently put'. Well spotted!

    But I'm afraid I disagree about Moore. If you look at AVTAK maybe, but in LALD, TMWTGG and the fight in Octopussy's bedroom he's good. I think you have to judge his fight scenes alongside other fight scenes in films made around the same time, rather than against how film fights look now. If you do that they compare very well to what was in contemporaneous cinemas.

    Also, his gun handling is pretty good overall too. Look at him in The Wild Geese and North Sea Hijack for more evidence of that. Also, he does remind me of ex naval men I have met. He's got a gravitas and looks comfortable among other naval men in TSWLM, for example. He also had a National Service background too, so had some military experience.

    Obviously, we all have a different takes on things, but you've touched a nerve with this one haha!

  • FatherValentineFatherValentine England
    edited April 2021 Posts: 737
    Moore apparently knocked out Lee Marvin on the set of Shout at the Devil when Marvin was drunk and acting up. He was a lot tougher than he ever made out. One thing I like about him is he doesn't feel the need to brag about himself or talk himself up. He was self deprecating to the point that people ended up being quite dismissive of him as a result - particularly about his acting ability. Not that anyone is being dismissive of him here.

    But it is fair to point out that the lasting impression of his ability in action scenes is in AVTAK, where he seemingly didn't do anything on set that involved doing more than standing up. He does look awful in those fights for sure.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,009
    James Bond 007 is both a very simple character and a complex one. Each actor has brought out certain elements of the character that the other actors haven't. And I think when people suggest actors here, they acknowledge that nobody can really encapsulate every single aspect of the character perfectly. So what you get are actors who bring out particular traits more than others.

    Excellently put, @FatherValentine.

    For contrast, I never bought Moore as an ex-military man, mainly because of his lack of physical fighting skills. There are countless times, to me, where he feels like a stiff, graceless English teacher in his rough and tumbles with enemies. But he excelled in his own way in other important areas which meant the films rarely suffered as slices of entertainment in spite of that gripe.

    I think that owes a lot to what you are saying, there.

    You give with one hand, and you take away with the other, @CraigMooreOHMSS, haha. Obviously you are 100% correct that my previous comment was 'Excellently put'. Well spotted!

    Such is life, eh? ;)

    But I'm afraid I disagree about Moore.

    And I'm sure you wouldn't be alone in that! Haha! But it was always an issue for me outside of AVTAK, too. But I digress to my point that it was not his physical abilities that made his Bond so popular, so I guess it ultimately doesn't particularly matter anyway.
Sign In or Register to comment.