Who should/could be a Bond actor?

18518528548568571178

Comments

  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,518
    I tend to agree with you @OOWolf, a good candidate to play Bond has some combination of both 1) acting ability, and 2) "Bondness". A good actor is always going to be able to bring us into the story and the events and action better than a subpar actor, and the person does also need to "carry the role naturally" in some way as you put it.

    Just as you wouldn't necessarily want three-time-Oscar-winning-actor Meryl Streep to play Bond despite her acting mastery (as she "only" has the acting ability characteristic), I wouldn't want David Gandy despite his apparent "Bondness" (which I agree with you, he has). Some combination is needed. Which one of the two characteristics is more important? That comes with some subjectivity, but personally I'd say the former. A great actor with only some "Bondness" will be able to communicate what is needed to be Bond through acting.
  • OOWolfOOWolf Savannah
    Posts: 140
    I tend to agree with you @OOWolf, a good candidate to play Bond has some combination of both 1) acting ability, and 2) "Bondness". A good actor is always going to be able to bring us into the story and the events and action better than a subpar actor, and the person does also need to "carry the role naturally" in some way as you put it.

    Just as you wouldn't necessarily want three-time-Oscar-winning-actor Meryl Streep to play Bond despite her acting mastery (as she "only" has the acting ability characteristic), I wouldn't want David Gandy despite his apparent "Bondness" (which I agree with you, he has). Some combination is needed. Which one of the two characteristics is more important? That comes with some subjectivity, but personally I'd say the former. A great actor with only some "Bondness" will be able to communicate what is needed to be Bond through acting.

    You're definitely right, there needs to be the right balance. I thought Brosnan was great in the role of the more "modern" iterations and sadly, it was the scripts that tarnished his legacy and didn't allow us to see his full potential. 'Goldeneye' had the perfect balance of everything, to me.
  • JeremyBondonJeremyBondon Seeking out odd jobs with Oddjob @Tangier
    Posts: 1,318
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Babz is a hype woman. She knows how to play the game. Craig the best actor of his generation?
    dr-evil-how-about-no.gif

    Craig is a good actor but for the most part his character pouted his way through 5 Bond films as if that's what makes Bond cool.
    When you look at how his predecessors carried themselves and walked into a room, there was a cool and natural sauntering, whereas with Craig, there's always something forced and exaggerated. I feel like Craig is overrated in the role and his performances are amplified by how largely well-made and crafted his films are.

    Again, Craig is a good actor but he's far from great imo, of course. I don't see anything in his performances that any competent actor could easily do. He didn't have to say much particularly in his first 3 Bond films but when he started talking more in the latter 2, especially in NTTD we got the cringe stuff we saw.

    Excellent post. I couldn't agree more.
  • Posts: 14,800
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    As far as acting talent goes, hypothetically, if Craig were to indeed be nominated and win the BEST ACTOR Oscar for his performance as Bond in NTTD would that set the standards even higher?
    Would Barbara then focus only on Oscars winners to play Bond and go for a Daniel Day Lewis type? Perhaps we'd only get one Bond film once per decade but if each film brings a statue, would it be worth it?

    It would certainly put the pressure up for the next actor. He probably would not need to be an Oscar winner, but he'd be expected to master Bond enough to get an Oscar nomination.
  • Ludovico wrote: »
    Nobody made consensus back in 2004. Not Owen, not anyone. I'm not even sure Owen was that popular a prospect. That's what made that time so interesting: an interesting pool of potential candidates, but no heir apparent. And I will also add that Turner does not make consensus now.

    Depends on your definition of consensus within this little democracy we call mi6community. A while ago a lot of members voted and Turner won by a landslide, so in a way a consensus I'd argue.

    Jack O’Connell could batter Aidan Turner in a fight.
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Babz is a hype woman. She knows how to play the game. Craig the best actor of his generation?
    dr-evil-how-about-no.gif

    Craig is a good actor but for the most part his character pouted his way through 5 Bond films as if that's what makes Bond cool.
    When you look at how his predecessors carried themselves and walked into a room, there was a cool and natural sauntering, whereas with Craig, there's always something forced and exaggerated. I feel like Craig is overrated in the role and his performances are amplified by how largely well-made and crafted his films are.

    Again, Craig is a good actor but he's far from great imo, of course. I don't see anything in his performances that any competent actor could easily do. He didn't have to say much particularly in his first 3 Bond films but when he started talking more in the latter 2, especially in NTTD we got the cringe stuff we saw.

    It’s fine not to like his Bond, but watch him in Our Friends in the North and tell me he’s a good but not great actor. He’s not my
    favourite Bond (although he is up there now), but he’s by far the best actor to play the role imo.

    And I didn’t think his earier performances were just pouting (that steely detachment in his eyes doesn’t come naturally) or that his later performances were forced or exaggerated at all personally. If anything I thought he seemed more relaxed. He’s said that in CR, he thought Bond was a man who didn’t know very much about life, which I think says a lot about his earlier take on the character. He essentially started off emotionally stunted, and I think what Craig did well was loosen up as his Bond aged and grew with experience, while still not loosing sight of the pain behind the character in his downtime. That’s why what defined his Bond for me, and gave him his own identity. He was the dynamic Bond who actually grew and evolved.
    mtm wrote: »
    No idea what you mean about people not caring about intellectual property: Danjaq own Bond and clearly are very protective of their rights.

    Times have changed mate, didn’t you hear? EON don’t understand Bond and every new film they make is a further drop of piss on Ian Fleming’s grave. It’s up to us, the brave Bond fans of the internet, to defend our hero from those monsters.

    The thing I find most ironic, when we start going on about defending the IP, is that Ian Fleming didn’t want Sean Connery. He described Dr No as dreadful, and as far as I’m aware, there’s no proof he ever actually warmed to him in the part (just fan speculation based off making Bond Scottish, but wasn’t Fleming of Scottish ancestry himself?). So, if we want to defend his intellectual property in line with his wishes, we’d have to invent a time machine, go back to 1962, get them to cast David Niven or someone Fleming saw as more befitting of the character’s social status, and kill the entire series in the process.

    He was a great writer, but the films have always done their own thing and played it fast and loose with the source material. Sometimes that works, sometimes it doesn’t. But at the end of the day, the series would never have survived this long if they’d just stuck to the books and what he wanted.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2021 Posts: 14,861
    I have no idea where this nonsense about Craig not being a good actor is coming from.
    mtm wrote: »
    No idea what you mean about people not caring about intellectual property: Danjaq own Bond and clearly are very protective of their rights.

    Times have changed mate, didn’t you hear? EON don’t understand Bond and every new film they make is a further drop of piss on Ian Fleming’s grave. It’s up to us, the brave Bond fans of the internet, to defend our hero from those monsters.

    Yes, and nobody listens to us even though we know best, woe is us.

    As you point out, adaptation is the name of the game, not replicating the exact word on the page. Always has been. We're all here because we're fans of the films foremost (if that weren't true then why are the threads about the novels so relatively quiet?), let's admit that we quite like them and how they've been doing it.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited December 2021 Posts: 2,895
    Well, it's true that the next guy doesn't have to possess top tier acting ability to play Bond - it's just that the last guy actually did. Why not try to maintain a standard once you've achieved it? Ok, back in the 90s, Brosnan wasn't the actor that Dalton was, but it wasn't an issue because Dalton hadn't been the incumbent for 15 years, his films hadn't taken Bond on such an emotional journey and there weren't actually any expectations that Bond required outstanding acting. But Craig's changed both the popular and critical perception of what a Bond film can be and a whole generation are now used to Bond being played by someone with genuine acting chops. If the new guy can't match up or at least hold his own, it's going to stand out a mile. Of course, I could be totally overthinking this - most people might not care and the rest might see Aidan Turner walking out of the sea and forgive him anything, eh! ;)
  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 573
    Craig isn't a good actor? Dang. I want whatever you guys are smoking!
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,861
    I'd agree with that: Craig's been there a long time and a lot of folk have grown up with him- people in their 30s who are married and parents now were still in school when he became Bond. I think there's an expectation that the next guy will be different but needs to keep some of the things Craig brought to it. Being believably tough is one thing: I think if (young) Brosnan became Bond now he'd be a tough sell.
    If they went funnier/more charming then I think you'd want a Ryan Reynolds type: charismatic but still believably an action star. But he needs to have that X Factor where you can't take your eyes off him: that's where Connery and Craig excelled.
  • Posts: 207
    I do wonder if they go for someone closer to Moore or Brosnan since it’s been 15 years of seriousness.
  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 573
    mtm wrote: »
    I'd agree with that: Craig's been there a long time and a lot of folk have grown up with him- people in their 30s who are married and parents now were still in school when he became Bond. I think there's an expectation that the next guy will be different but needs to keep some of the things Craig brought to it. Being believably tough is one thing: I think if (young) Brosnan became Bond now he'd be a tough sell.
    If they went funnier/more charming then I think you'd want a Ryan Reynolds type: charismatic but still believably an action star. But he needs to have that X Factor where you can't take your eyes off him: that's where Connery and Craig excelled.

    I suspect the next Bond will very much be my children's Bond regardless. I don't have children yet but Craig's films are not something I think I can share with children of a reasonable age unlike, say, Moore's tenure. It's something for them in their teens if they are "into" Bond like I am.

    Do we live in different times now though? I remember being about 8 and watching TSLWM and LALD on ITV. The magic of it was how I got hooked.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    R.5d8e9c0f4685040a3aca5e7cc2148833?rik=7CMfKb%2bX%2bdOcMQ&riu=http%3a%2f%2fcdn01.cdn.justjared.com%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2fheadlines%2f2021%2f01%2fgyllenhaal-suits.jpg&ehk=gzjmrh1lA97c44%2b%2bh7kgSoyAmc7EQFGNJ2NoxX4E2KQ%3d&risl=&pid=ImgRaw&r=0
    I think Jake Gyllenhaal could have been a good Bond.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,861
    Yeah, if he were a Brit, or amazing at playing Brits, I'd go with that.
  • Posts: 14,800
    Zarozzor wrote: »
    I do wonder if they go for someone closer to Moore or Brosnan since it’s been 15 years of seriousness.

    I don't think Brosnan's tenure was that much lighter. Yes DAD was cartoonish (and I hated it), TND was probably more fun oriented than its direct predecessor, but all of them had at least a few dark moments and plenty of brutality. Not like LTK, but still.
  • One thing we need to remember is we all who post here are hardcore Bond fans. So we dwelve deeper into this than the average moviegoer. So when we talk about a guy like Aidan Turner as a potential Bond most see him as the guy from Poldark if that. Same with Nicolous Holt etc....they are mostly unknown to the average audience. The overwhelming majority of the people we mentioned here are not to famous to be cast as Bond.
  • Posts: 207
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Zarozzor wrote: »
    I do wonder if they go for someone closer to Moore or Brosnan since it’s been 15 years of seriousness.

    I don't think Brosnan's tenure was that much lighter. Yes DAD was cartoonish (and I hated it), TND was probably more fun oriented than its direct predecessor, but all of them had at least a few dark moments and plenty of brutality. Not like LTK, but still.

    That’s true. His tenure was no where near as light as Moore’s, and it had more of a mixture. GE and TWINE seemed more serious while TND and DAD seemed more fun. I can see them going for that balance again.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited December 2021 Posts: 13,882
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Nobody made consensus back in 2004. Not Owen, not anyone. I'm not even sure Owen was that popular a prospect. That's what made that time so interesting: an interesting pool of potential candidates, but no heir apparent. And I will also add that Turner does not make consensus now.

    Depends on your definition of consensus within this little democracy we call mi6community. A while ago a lot of members voted and Turner won by a landslide, so in a way a consensus I'd argue.

    Jack O’Connell could batter Aidan Turner in a fight.

    Maybe that should be added as an extra way of auditioning. All the actors that want the job, have to fight for it, last man standing is hired.
  • Posts: 207
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Nobody made consensus back in 2004. Not Owen, not anyone. I'm not even sure Owen was that popular a prospect. That's what made that time so interesting: an interesting pool of potential candidates, but no heir apparent. And I will also add that Turner does not make consensus now.

    Depends on your definition of consensus within this little democracy we call mi6community. A while ago a lot of members voted and Turner won by a landslide, so in a way a consensus I'd argue.

    Jack O’Connell could batter Aidan Turner in a fight.

    Maybe that should be added as an extra way of auditioning. All the actors that want the job, have to fight for it, last man standing is hired.
    Set up a bracket for all of the actors who want to audition, and make them do the Bond vs Grant fight.
  • Ludovico wrote: »
    Nobody made consensus back in 2004. Not Owen, not anyone. I'm not even sure Owen was that popular a prospect. That's what made that time so interesting: an interesting pool of potential candidates, but no heir apparent. And I will also add that Turner does not make consensus now.

    Depends on your definition of consensus within this little democracy we call mi6community. A while ago a lot of members voted and Turner won by a landslide, so in a way a consensus I'd argue.

    Jack O’Connell could batter Aidan Turner in a fight.
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Babz is a hype woman. She knows how to play the game. Craig the best actor of his generation?
    dr-evil-how-about-no.gif

    Craig is a good actor but for the most part his character pouted his way through 5 Bond films as if that's what makes Bond cool.
    When you look at how his predecessors carried themselves and walked into a room, there was a cool and natural sauntering, whereas with Craig, there's always something forced and exaggerated. I feel like Craig is overrated in the role and his performances are amplified by how largely well-made and crafted his films are.

    Again, Craig is a good actor but he's far from great imo, of course. I don't see anything in his performances that any competent actor could easily do. He didn't have to say much particularly in his first 3 Bond films but when he started talking more in the latter 2, especially in NTTD we got the cringe stuff we saw.

    It’s fine not to like his Bond, but watch him in Our Friends in the North and tell me he’s a good but not great actor. He’s not my
    favourite Bond (although he is up there now), but he’s by far the best actor to play the role imo.

    And I didn’t think his earier performances were just pouting (that steely detachment in his eyes doesn’t come naturally) or that his later performances were forced or exaggerated at all personally. If anything I thought he seemed more relaxed. He’s said that in CR, he thought Bond was a man who didn’t know very much about life, which I think says a lot about his earlier take on the character. He essentially started off emotionally stunted, and I think what Craig did well was loosen up as his Bond aged and grew with experience, while still not loosing sight of the pain behind the character in his downtime. That’s why what defined his Bond for me, and gave him his own identity. He was the dynamic Bond who actually grew and evolved.

    To be clear I never said and I'm not saying I don't like Craig. As I stated I think he's a good actor, I just don't think he's a great actor and I say this as someone who's seen OFiTN. Sure, I can appreciate Craig's Bond having an arc but frankly it was clumsily executed and tbh it's a bit beside the point. It's amazing how I can buy Lazenby as a more credible Bond than Craig and that's considering Lazenby's limitations and inexperience as an actor and yet, George was able to pull off the most emotional scene that showed Bond's vulnerability while keeping Bond's character in tact. Craig hasn't really done anything that we haven't seen before and tbh, it's been done better and far more naturalistic. It's as I said, any competent actor can do what Craig did with the role. Craig had the benefit of quality consistency which after DAD can be perceived as "genius" or highbrow which imo overstated his actual performances. I'm sure you'll disagree with everything I'm saying and that's fine.
    I'll be happy with a more classic character portrayal of the Bond character that marries the tone of Casino Royale. Craig's performances as Bond were good and were enjoyable up until SF but all this talk about the next actor having impossible shoes to fill is ridiculous and hyperbole of the highest order.



  • Posts: 14,800
    Zarozzor wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Zarozzor wrote: »
    I do wonder if they go for someone closer to Moore or Brosnan since it’s been 15 years of seriousness.

    I don't think Brosnan's tenure was that much lighter. Yes DAD was cartoonish (and I hated it), TND was probably more fun oriented than its direct predecessor, but all of them had at least a few dark moments and plenty of brutality. Not like LTK, but still.

    That’s true. His tenure was no where near as light as Moore’s, and it had more of a mixture. GE and TWINE seemed more serious while TND and DAD seemed more fun. I can see them going for that balance again.

    Somehow I think they will remain fairly dark. If only because it's what has been working for them these last few years. The series might lighten up, but not right away.
  • edited June 2022 Posts: 658
    .
  • Posts: 14,800
    Cavill knows Jiu-jitsu, so he beat any one. Funny how the fighting skills/physicality attributes can not be acted.

    Doesn't mean anything. Another actor may know a martial art or a self defence technique. And there's a big difference between fighting in a dojo or a competition and fighting in proper combat situation.
  • edited June 2022 Posts: 658
    .
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2021 Posts: 14,861
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Nobody made consensus back in 2004. Not Owen, not anyone. I'm not even sure Owen was that popular a prospect. That's what made that time so interesting: an interesting pool of potential candidates, but no heir apparent. And I will also add that Turner does not make consensus now.

    Depends on your definition of consensus within this little democracy we call mi6community. A while ago a lot of members voted and Turner won by a landslide, so in a way a consensus I'd argue.

    Jack O’Connell could batter Aidan Turner in a fight.

    Maybe that should be added as an extra way of auditioning. All the actors that want the job, have to fight for it, last man standing is hired.

    Ah; for a second there I thought you meant that all potential candidates should have to beat up Aidan Turner! :))
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Nobody made consensus back in 2004. Not Owen, not anyone. I'm not even sure Owen was that popular a prospect. That's what made that time so interesting: an interesting pool of potential candidates, but no heir apparent. And I will also add that Turner does not make consensus now.

    Depends on your definition of consensus within this little democracy we call mi6community. A while ago a lot of members voted and Turner won by a landslide, so in a way a consensus I'd argue.

    Jack O’Connell could batter Aidan Turner in a fight.
    Jimjambond wrote: »
    Babz is a hype woman. She knows how to play the game. Craig the best actor of his generation?
    dr-evil-how-about-no.gif

    Craig is a good actor but for the most part his character pouted his way through 5 Bond films as if that's what makes Bond cool.
    When you look at how his predecessors carried themselves and walked into a room, there was a cool and natural sauntering, whereas with Craig, there's always something forced and exaggerated. I feel like Craig is overrated in the role and his performances are amplified by how largely well-made and crafted his films are.

    Again, Craig is a good actor but he's far from great imo, of course. I don't see anything in his performances that any competent actor could easily do. He didn't have to say much particularly in his first 3 Bond films but when he started talking more in the latter 2, especially in NTTD we got the cringe stuff we saw.

    It’s fine not to like his Bond, but watch him in Our Friends in the North and tell me he’s a good but not great actor. He’s not my
    favourite Bond (although he is up there now), but he’s by far the best actor to play the role imo.

    And I didn’t think his earier performances were just pouting (that steely detachment in his eyes doesn’t come naturally) or that his later performances were forced or exaggerated at all personally. If anything I thought he seemed more relaxed. He’s said that in CR, he thought Bond was a man who didn’t know very much about life, which I think says a lot about his earlier take on the character. He essentially started off emotionally stunted, and I think what Craig did well was loosen up as his Bond aged and grew with experience, while still not loosing sight of the pain behind the character in his downtime. That’s why what defined his Bond for me, and gave him his own identity. He was the dynamic Bond who actually grew and evolved.

    To be clear I never said and I'm not saying I don't like Craig. As I stated I think he's a good actor, I just don't think he's a great actor and I say this as someone who's seen OFiTN. Sure, I can appreciate Craig's Bond having an arc but frankly it was clumsily executed and tbh it's a bit beside the point. It's amazing how I can buy Lazenby as a more credible Bond than Craig and that's considering Lazenby's limitations and inexperience as an actor and yet, George was able to pull off the most emotional scene that showed Bond's vulnerability while keeping Bond's character in tact.

    Well, we all see things differently, which is fine: but I really can't see that at all.
  • Posts: 207
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Nobody made consensus back in 2004. Not Owen, not anyone. I'm not even sure Owen was that popular a prospect. That's what made that time so interesting: an interesting pool of potential candidates, but no heir apparent. And I will also add that Turner does not make consensus now.

    Depends on your definition of consensus within this little democracy we call mi6community. A while ago a lot of members voted and Turner won by a landslide, so in a way a consensus I'd argue.

    Jack O’Connell could batter Aidan Turner in a fight.

    Maybe that should be added as an extra way of auditioning. All the actors that want the job, have to fight for it, last man standing is hired.

    Ah; for a second there I thought you meant that all potential candidates should have to beat up Aidan Turner! :))
    Turner would be the one beating up the other ones! While also completely nailing the FRWL screen test.
  • Posts: 14,800
    Zarozzor wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Nobody made consensus back in 2004. Not Owen, not anyone. I'm not even sure Owen was that popular a prospect. That's what made that time so interesting: an interesting pool of potential candidates, but no heir apparent. And I will also add that Turner does not make consensus now.

    Depends on your definition of consensus within this little democracy we call mi6community. A while ago a lot of members voted and Turner won by a landslide, so in a way a consensus I'd argue.

    Jack O’Connell could batter Aidan Turner in a fight.

    Maybe that should be added as an extra way of auditioning. All the actors that want the job, have to fight for it, last man standing is hired.

    Ah; for a second there I thought you meant that all potential candidates should have to beat up Aidan Turner! :))
    Turner would be the one beating up the other ones! While also completely nailing the FRWL screen test.

    We don't know that. Like I said, fighting in a controlled environment is nothing like fighting in real life.
  • Ludovico wrote: »
    Nobody made consensus back in 2004. Not Owen, not anyone. I'm not even sure Owen was that popular a prospect. That's what made that time so interesting: an interesting pool of potential candidates, but no heir apparent. And I will also add that Turner does not make consensus now.

    Depends on your definition of consensus within this little democracy we call mi6community. A while ago a lot of members voted and Turner won by a landslide, so in a way a consensus I'd argue.

    Jack O’Connell could batter Aidan Turner in a fight.

    Maybe that should be added as an extra way of auditioning. All the actors that want the job, have to fight for it, last man standing is hired.

    Haha that would be great. Could be an TV special. Get Graham Norton or someone to host it. Barbara and Micheal sat ringside. At the end Daniel Craig could come out to present the winner with a tuxedo. And didn’t Lazenby win the role by breaking a stuntman’s nose? So, there’s prescedent there.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 2,895
    Funnily enough, an old-time boxing match involving multiple combatants that went on until only one man was left standing was called a 'Battle Royale'! Seems fitting...
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2021 Posts: 14,861
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Nobody made consensus back in 2004. Not Owen, not anyone. I'm not even sure Owen was that popular a prospect. That's what made that time so interesting: an interesting pool of potential candidates, but no heir apparent. And I will also add that Turner does not make consensus now.

    Depends on your definition of consensus within this little democracy we call mi6community. A while ago a lot of members voted and Turner won by a landslide, so in a way a consensus I'd argue.

    Jack O’Connell could batter Aidan Turner in a fight.

    Maybe that should be added as an extra way of auditioning. All the actors that want the job, have to fight for it, last man standing is hired.

    Haha that would be great. Could be an TV special. Get Graham Norton or someone to host it. Barbara and Micheal sat ringside. At the end Daniel Craig could come out to present the winner with a tuxedo. And didn’t Lazenby win the role by breaking a stuntman’s nose? So, there’s prescedent there.

    Although Lewis Collins lost it by doing something similar!
    Zarozzor wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Nobody made consensus back in 2004. Not Owen, not anyone. I'm not even sure Owen was that popular a prospect. That's what made that time so interesting: an interesting pool of potential candidates, but no heir apparent. And I will also add that Turner does not make consensus now.

    Depends on your definition of consensus within this little democracy we call mi6community. A while ago a lot of members voted and Turner won by a landslide, so in a way a consensus I'd argue.

    Jack O’Connell could batter Aidan Turner in a fight.

    Maybe that should be added as an extra way of auditioning. All the actors that want the job, have to fight for it, last man standing is hired.

    Ah; for a second there I thought you meant that all potential candidates should have to beat up Aidan Turner! :))
    Turner would be the one beating up the other ones! While also completely nailing the FRWL screen test.

    I'm sure you'll be very happy together.
  • Posts: 12,243
    https://www.indiewire.com/2021/12/james-bond-next-007-british-male-any-race-1234684126/

    I like what I hear here. Seems like Fukunaga had a good partnership with the producers, and if he's up to it and has great original ideas to offer for a new Bond, I'd love to see him back. The biggest thing that gives me pause is that I didn't like the last victory lap attempt from the same director (Mendes SP); there has to be enough positive differences. Really hope they don't go for a super hard, origin story reset; I don't want one again after CR.
Sign In or Register to comment.