› ›

Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1…10561057105910611062…1190

Comments

  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited March 2023 Posts: 2,871
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    QsCat wrote: »
    I think it’s very unfair to ban ByRoyalDecree. His posts were no more annoying than anyone else’s. He was a regular contributor to this forum.

    I don’t know what his last message was, but supposedly it was childish and insulting. @DarthDimi I would say that your comment to HIM was both childish and insulting. That was certainly how I felt when I first read it.

    DarthDimi wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    Benny wrote: »
    ByRoyalDecree wrote: »
    .

    Posts like the one above, that have been edited to remove them are nothing more than spam.
    This is a common practice of yours @ByRoyalDecree please stop it.

    There is no delete function.

    But there is an edit function. You can at least try to type something else instead, something worthy of a post, not spam. You are a grown up man, I'm sure you can manage. 😉

    That was very patronising. Perhaps he didn’t have anything else he wanted to say instead? Perhaps he didn’t have the time? He just wanted to delete his message, and as he rightly pointed out- there is no delete function.

    As for his ‘full stop’ messages being regarded as spam, yes, they may be somewhat annoying. But I wouldn’t say they were spam, anymore than plenty other posts on here. For example, members who keep posting certain actors for example, as if it were the first time they had been mentioned, along with numerous photos of them which have also been posted previously, numerous times. I would call THAT spam, if anything. You’re reading the post thinking “hang on, this was discussed weeks/months ago”, and it wastes everyone’s time.

    Anyway, I just think it’s a shame to ban a member unnecessarily, to shun him from the community after he has contributed to this forum, alongside his fellow Bond fans. And rather than move on and say “yeh he was annoying” or not acknowledge the ban, I wanted to point out the above…

    Not entirely unfair. But not everything was seen in public. I think we are very patient.

    Must admit, I found him quite funny at times (and didn't think public warnings made against him were necessarily always justified). That said I don't know what his last post was about, nor do I have all the info. Oh well.
    Kojak007 wrote: »


    Madden certainly wouldn't be a bad choice.

    Dunno why, but I just can't see him him being a solid choice for Bond. Not sure what it is (he's a rather decent actor), I just don't think we'd get anything interesting out of him as Bond.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited March 2023 Posts: 2,923
    Agreed. I think there needs to be something bigger and more dynamic about Bond. Madden does convey a kind of capable, solid efficiency you can rely on, but I think that Bond needs to have something more than that - something that projects a force of nature held in check. The proverbial dangerous man who's got it under control. Sope has the right kind of innate masculine presence for it - the kind of guy who could equally be a great hero or a formidable villain, so you're glad he's on your side. That's a quality in short supply, but it should definitely be part of the portrayal of Bond. IMO, obvs.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    Citadel is clearly a play for him with Bond at least on his mind. We can do our old game of whether clearly signposting if not outright saying that you want the role puts you on Eon‘s bad side.
    As for the show,it looks very 2012 network show-ish to me. Like the Blacklist with a slightly higher budget or something. A bit of setup of them finding out about their past as shown in the trailer and then missions of the week with the occasional overarching lore reveal. And Madden‘s face looks weirdly CGI in many of those trailer shots. I guess I’ll check it out, but I don’t think it will be the big throw Madden hopes it’ll be.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 1,363
    I think we might be too hard on ourselves. I love Craig's Bond, but not everyone needs to be like Craig's Bond to take the series forward. Maybe we're being too pedantic towards candidates, because Craig made the role ultra-intense. Albeit it's often forgotten that Dalton was the first ultra-intense Bond.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,863
    Venutius wrote: »
    Agreed. I think there needs to be something bigger and more dynamic about Bond. Madden does convey a kind of capable, solid efficiency you can rely on, but I think that Bond needs to have something more than that - something that projects a force of nature held in check. The proverbial dangerous man who's got it under control. Sope has the right kind of innate masculine presence for it - the kind of guy who could equally be a great hero or a formidable villain, so you're glad he's on your side. That's a quality in short supply, but it should definitely be part of the portrayal of Bond. IMO, obvs.

    Great post @Venutius
    Your analogy that Bond could be hero or villain, so we're glad he's on your side perfectly sums up who Bond should be. There is a dark side to Bond that Craig and Dalton used more than any of the other actors in their portrayal.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,863
    DewiWynBond wrote: »
    We're dropping like flies in here. Probably part of the plan.

    What does that mean @DewiWynBond ?
  • DewiWynBondDewiWynBond
    Posts: 679
    Benny wrote: »
    DewiWynBond wrote: »
    We're dropping like flies in here. Probably part of the plan.

    What does that mean @DewiWynBond ?

    Just gobbledygook, boss. Hope there's no objections to my work here.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,863
    DewiWynBond wrote: »
    Benny wrote: »
    DewiWynBond wrote: »
    We're dropping like flies in here. Probably part of the plan.

    What does that mean @DewiWynBond ?

    Just gobbledygook, boss. Hope there's no objections to my work here.

    Of course we don’t . Also there are no bosses at MI6, it’s a very safe forum. ;)
  • ScreentestScreentest
    Posts: 21
    Taron Egerton was never considered. He believes Eon already found someone:
    https://www.gamesradar.com/taron-egerton-james-bond-exclusive-tetris/
    Golding said the same
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,508
    Venutius wrote: »
    Agreed. I think there needs to be something bigger and more dynamic about Bond. Madden does convey a kind of capable, solid efficiency you can rely on, but I think that Bond needs to have something more than that - something that projects a force of nature held in check. The proverbial dangerous man who's got it under control. Sope has the right kind of innate masculine presence for it - the kind of guy who could equally be a great hero or a formidable villain, so you're glad he's on your side. That's a quality in short supply, but it should definitely be part of the portrayal of Bond. IMO, obvs.

    100% agree with this mate, summed it up perfectly
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited March 2023 Posts: 2,923
    Cheers, lads. I know some fans have said they don't want the next guy to be a re-run of CraigBond, but that element of darkness in the character is something I wouldn't want to lose. Combine it with Craig's core decency and some of the flair and swagger of a Bond at the top of his game and I think we'll be well served.
  • Kojak007Kojak007
    Posts: 102
    I disagree, we don't need so much darkness again. I'm not against some drama if they don't go overboard with it like in the Craig era, but it needs some humour and charm too, which I mostly missed during the Craig era (except some scenes in the first half of SP).
    If they deliver some emotional films from time to time I'm not against it, but if they choose to go with darkness and emotional stories with every movie it's getting tiresome. Movies like OHMSS, LTK or CR were great and stood out because they were the exception of the rule.
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,351
    I think a slightly lighter touch while still having some darkness in the character itself and an explosion of brutality at some point can be done. I think that would feel very Bondian to me. He is a dark character. This is a dark world. But it is also full of joy and life and maybe a bit silly sometimes.
    That is of course an extremely hard balance to strike. Many movies fail at it. But writing a good movie is always hard, so maybe it's possible?
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 2,871
    My instinct is they won't approach the next Bond/their choice of actor by simply deciding they need to be 'lighter' than Craig's. There'll be more subtle things they'll introduce to differentiate the next Bond, and like Broccoli herself said the emotional centre (which is vague enough to be implemented in a variety of ways) of Craig's Bond isn't something they'll let go of any time soon.

    Basically I think we'll have just as much 'darkness' with the next Bond as the previous one. That said I'd also argue Craig's Bond wasn't humourless by any means (compared to a Bond like, say, Dalton his Bond had quite a lot of lightheartedness). The character should always have a mixture of humour and darkness anyway.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,508
    I'd love a scene similar to something in TSWLM. When XXX mentions Bond's wife and he cuts her off, sir Roger's assertive delivery of "alright, you've made your point" is perfect, it's one sentence but it tells you so much about Bond's character, rather than him being emotional
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 2,871
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    I'd love a scene similar to something in TSWLM. When XXX mentions Bond's wife and he cuts her off, sir Roger's assertive delivery of "alright, you've made your point" is perfect, it's one sentence but it tells you so much about Bond's character, rather than him being emotional

    I'd say that's more or less in the spirit of Craig's Bond too, particularly throughout the majority of SF (until M's death that is). Sort of 'stiff upper lip' but ultimately human.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,508
    007HallY wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    I'd love a scene similar to something in TSWLM. When XXX mentions Bond's wife and he cuts her off, sir Roger's assertive delivery of "alright, you've made your point" is perfect, it's one sentence but it tells you so much about Bond's character, rather than him being emotional

    I'd say that's more or less in the spirit of Craig's Bond too, particularly throughout the majority of SF (until M's death that is). Sort of 'stiff upper lip' but ultimately human.

    Yeah I'd say so too mate
  • M_BlaiseM_Blaise
    Posts: 331
    007HallY wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    I'd love a scene similar to something in TSWLM. When XXX mentions Bond's wife and he cuts her off, sir Roger's assertive delivery of "alright, you've made your point" is perfect, it's one sentence but it tells you so much about Bond's character, rather than him being emotional

    I'd say that's more or less in the spirit of Craig's Bond too, particularly throughout the majority of SF (until M's death that is). Sort of 'stiff upper lip' but ultimately human.

    "You know the answer to that. You know the whole story."
  • BirdlesonBirdleson Moderator
    Posts: 2,161
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    "You know the answer to that. You know the whole story."

    I love the way he delivers that line, like he's a nine year old boy again, lost in the past.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 2,871
    Birdleson wrote: »
    M_Blaise wrote: »
    "You know the answer to that. You know the whole story."

    I love the way he delivers that line, like he's a nine year old boy again, lost in the past.

    It's great. I'd say Craig's acting throughout that film is surprisingly subtle but really hits the right notes. It's one of the things I think any actor has to have when they play Bond - that ability to be understated and yet convey exactly what's Bond is thinking in the moment. Like @Jordo007 said it's there with Moore and that TSWLM moment. Connery had it too with moments like him looking uncomfortable after Honey reveals how she killed her rapist in DN, or his expressions during the laser scene in GF.

    In that sense Bond is a surprisingly tricky role to play. Go too far with that sense of emotionality and you get something like Brosnan in TWINE (essentially close to soap opera acting). Play it too 'straight' and you get the worst of Lazenby's wooden acting in OHMSS.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 2,923
    I remember being struck by Craig's performance in SF - it was so different to QOS and wasn't what I'd been expecting at all. Bond was a far more terse, closed character in SF. All the unfilmed missions between QOS and SF had left their mark, I guess! ;)
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,495
    Exclusive: Henry Cavill In Talks For James Bond Villain
    https://giantfreakinrobot.com/ent/henry-cavill-james-bond-villain.html

    GFR's "trusted and proven sources" are back with another "scoop".

    "Our trusted and proven sources tell us Henry Cavill is negotiating to play a villain in the next James Bond film. We don’t know the name of the antagonist but considering the franchise, it’s bound to be something very European and eccentric like Dr. Ernst von MaliceFace.

    [...] This news would seem to confirm that, unless Henry Cavill is playing both James Bond and the secret agent’s evil twin, the Enola Holmes star is out of the running to play 007. Cavill has long been considered one of the frontrunners to succeed Daniel Craig, but while Mike Myers can play both the hero and villain of his Austin Powers films, for Cavill or anyone else to do that in the Bond franchise would be a little too weird.    "
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,962
    "trusted and proven sources" :))
  • Herr_StockmannHerr_Stockmann
    Posts: 893
    Giantfreakinrobot.com isn't known for being a reliable source. At all. Even though Cavill could reasonably be a good Bond villain.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,454
    Cavill made a great villain in another high profile spy series so I'd love to see that, despite the utter lack of confirmations in this article. If he can't be Bond, let him go up against Bond.
  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 717
    Generally if Dark Horizons isn’t reporting it I take it with a pinch of salt.

    Would Eon cast the bad guy before 007? I don’t think they would, but I don’t really know. Has a bad guy been cast before they had their new Bond in the past?
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited March 2023 Posts: 5,869
    I think this is complete bull but either way casting an actor some audiences have been asking to be Bond for years opposite the one they actually go with is just asking for it.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,962
    It would be distracting stunt casting, not unlike the Idea of casting Connery in Skyfall.
  • HarmonyRocketsHarmonyRockets
    edited March 2023 Posts: 175
    Was he not the villain in the last Mission: Impossible movie? Why would any fan be supportive of this? Does that seem like something Barbara would do? Also, what is up with people's obsession with this guy?
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,786
    sandbagger1 wrote: »
    Generally if Dark Horizons isn’t reporting it I take it with a pinch of salt.

    Would Eon cast the bad guy before 007? I don’t think they would, but I don’t really know. Has a bad guy been cast before they had their new Bond in the past?

    I wouldn't have thought so to be honest.
Sign In or Register to comment.