Who should/could be a Bond actor?

Comments

• 007HallY

  June 30 edited June 30 Posts: 5,519

  Obviously with enough mewing anyone can attain an alpha male face and be Bond...
  
  Or something ;)
• mtm United Kingdom

  June 30 edited June 30 Posts: 18,389

  Oh mewing! Haha, yeah I saw that a while ago, that's a slightly scary little trend isn't it.
  
  Someone'll be along shortly to accuse Dan Craig of doing it :D
• 4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars

  June 30 Posts: 12,545

  Roger Moore was first The Saint and he beat up bad guys regularly, while looking dapper, eye brow sometimes raised, and a natural charm. Alpha? I am so sick of labels these days; so many people making up new ones all the time, too.
  
  I think the new Bond needs to have some sort of charisma. I'll leave it at that.
• mtm United Kingdom

  June 30 edited June 30 Posts: 18,389

  To be fair I've used the 'alpha male' descriptor for Bond before, and I do kind of think it fits. Roger is an alpha of a kind: when he went into the military he tells how the people in charge made him an officer basically because he was that type- he looks like he's in charge and just fits that bill physically. I don't think it's as specific as a facial structure, but I think we know it's not going to be Syd Little. And I think we all kind of get, totally aside from their respective talents as actors, that an Aaron, be it Taylor-Johnson or Pierre, fits the Bond bill physically more than a Chamalet. But it's also about presence to some extent, that sort of totally confident swagger of Bond, and although someone like Chamalet can do that to some extent, it's not quite the Bond presence.
• 4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars

  June 30 Posts: 12,545

  Self confidence is important as an overall trait, yes.
• 007HallY

  June 30 Posts: 5,519

  mtm wrote: »

  Oh mewing! Haha, yeah I saw that a while ago, that's a slightly scary little trend isn't it.
  
  Someone'll be along shortly to accuse Dan Craig of doing it :D

  
  Yes, Dan's certainly a natural pouter. As was Brosnan I suppose!
  
  It's a weird nonsense internet trend. I guess it's kind of funny but also a bit disconcerting.
  
  I'm just glad no one's mentioned Bond needing to be a Sigma Male yet or something, haha.
• Denbigh UK

  June 30 edited June 30 Posts: 6,041

  It's probably a product of this 'alpha-male' discussion, but when it comes to Harris Dickinson, I like him as an actor, but I think he's too "boyish" still for Bond, at least at this stage. James Bond does indeed need to project a certain physical and emotional weight, someone who can walk into a room and hold his own against larger-than-life figures: megalomaniacal villains, power-hungry bureaucrats, icy femme fatales.
  
  Dickinson is talented, and commands spaces in a different way, but in the context of James Bond, he still feels like he’d be reacting to those characters rather than dominating the space. Bond should feel like the center of gravity, not someone finding his footing around more commanding presences.
• dewiparry

  June 30 Posts: 191

  He's his own archetype. They just need charisma under pressure...imagine saying 'Bond. James Bond.' all day, every day, and on cue.
• bondywondy Uk

  June 30 edited June 30 Posts: 556

  
  

  George_Kaplan wrote: »

  bondywondy wrote: »

  but you can't look alpha male if you're not blessed with that facial structure.

  
  What exactly is an 'alpha male facial structure'?
  
  Sounds like the sort of redpill bullsh*t you'd read on a bodybuilding or looksmax forum.

  
  Easy to understand:
  
  Tom Holland
  
  
  Sean Connery
  
  
  Who looks more masculine, more intimidating, more "maybe I don't want to mess with him?"
  
  Sean Connery.
  
  Yes, it's just acting. Sean Connery wasn't a real secret agent with a licence to kill. Connery was just pretending but the look isn't pretending. That's genetics. Some men are alpha men in appearance. And Connery was such a man. By good fortune he decided to become an actor and by good fortune he was around when Eon were casting for Dr No. The rest is history.
  
  James Bond is an alpha male in looks. That's not my opinion. It's fact. Anyone can see a specific type of man was cast to play Bond. If you think Tom Holland is right for Bond you are wrong. And Daniel Craig was not right for Bond neither but this isn't a DanielCraigisnotBond post. I'm just stating the harsh fact he didn't have the classic alpha hero face. Do the vast majority of film goers care?
  
  No.
  
  But the vast majority of film goers don't post on Bond forums. They're fans in a superficial way. I only care because I take the time to educate misinformed people like you that want to gaslight others by making out Holland and others are right for Bond. I accept Craig was miscast in 2005. It's my opinion due to the fact he lacked the alpha male hero face established in 1962. And I will accept the next guy will also be miscast.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
• mtm United Kingdom

  June 30 Posts: 18,389

  Denbigh wrote: »

  It's probably a product of this 'alpha-male' discussion, but when it comes to Harris Dickinson, I like him as an actor, but I think he's too "boyish" still for Bond, at least at this stage. James Bond does indeed need to project a certain physical and emotional weight, someone who can walk into a room and hold his own against larger-than-life figures: megalomaniacal villains, power-hungry bureaucrats, icy femme fatales.
  
  Dickinson is talented, and commands spaces in a different way, but in the context of James Bond, he still feels like he’d be reacting to those characters rather than dominating the space. Bond should feel like the center of gravity, not someone finding his footing around more commanding presences.

  
  I must admit I think it's possible Dickinson could do that. He does still have quite youthful looks and I think he's had a lot of roles where he plays younger types, but I think there's a steel to him and I don't think it would be beyond him to play a more in control character.
• echo 007 in New York

  June 30 Posts: 6,831

  He is definitely in control in Babygirl. And sexy.
• Denbigh UK

  June 30 edited June 30 Posts: 6,041

  mtm wrote: »

  Denbigh wrote: »

  It's probably a product of this 'alpha-male' discussion, but when it comes to Harris Dickinson, I like him as an actor, but I think he's too "boyish" still for Bond, at least at this stage. James Bond does indeed need to project a certain physical and emotional weight, someone who can walk into a room and hold his own against larger-than-life figures: megalomaniacal villains, power-hungry bureaucrats, icy femme fatales.
  
  Dickinson is talented, and commands spaces in a different way, but in the context of James Bond, he still feels like he’d be reacting to those characters rather than dominating the space. Bond should feel like the center of gravity, not someone finding his footing around more commanding presences.

  
  I must admit I think it's possible Dickinson could do that. He does still have quite youthful looks and I think he's had a lot of roles where he plays younger types, but I think there's a steel to him and I don't think it would be beyond him to play a more in control character.

  Possibly, but I struggle to see it personally. Part of it, I think, is his face, as I mentioned, there’s still something quite boyish about his features. I feel like we’d end up with something more in line with his performance in The King's Man: solid, but not quite James Bond.
  
  And if the idea is to lean into that youthfulness, I’m not sure how I feel about that either. With First Light already covering Bond's early days, I don’t think it’s necessary, or especially compelling, to explore that angle. A Bond who’s a few years into the job? Sure. But even then, I still struggle to picture Dickinson in the role.
• mtm United Kingdom

  June 30 Posts: 18,389

  echo wrote: »

  He is definitely in control in Babygirl. And sexy.

  
  Yes good point, I haven't caught that one yet, just trailers.
• George_Kaplan Being chauffeured by Tibbett

  June 30 edited 12:02am Posts: 817

  bondywondy wrote: »

  George_Kaplan wrote: »

  bondywondy wrote: »

  but you can't look alpha male if you're not blessed with that facial structure.

  
  What exactly is an 'alpha male facial structure'?
  
  Sounds like the sort of redpill bullsh*t you'd read on a bodybuilding or looksmax forum.

  
  Easy to understand:
  
  Tom Holland
  
  
  Sean Connery
  
  
  Who looks more masculine, more intimidating, more "maybe I don't want to mess with him?"
  
  Sean Connery.
  
  Yes, it's just acting. Sean Connery wasn't a real secret agent with a licence to kill. Connery was just pretending but the look isn't pretending. That's genetics. Some men are alpha men in appearance. And Connery was such a man. By good fortune he decided to become an actor and by good fortune he was around when Eon were casting for Dr No. The rest is history.
  
  James Bond is an alpha male in looks. That's not my opinion. It's fact. Anyone can see a specific type of man was cast to play Bond. If you think Tom Holland is right for Bond you are wrong. And Daniel Craig was not right for Bond neither but this isn't a DanielCraigisnotBond post. I'm just stating the harsh fact he didn't have the classic alpha hero face. Do the vast majority of film goers care?
  
  No.
  
  But the vast majority of film goers don't post on Bond forums. They're fans in a superficial way. I only care because I take the time to educate misinformed people like you that want to gaslight others by making out Holland and others are right for Bond. I accept Craig was miscast in 2005. It's my opinion due to the fact he lacked the alpha male hero face established in 1962. And I will accept the next guy will also be miscast.

  
  I don't think Tom Holland is right for Bond at all. And yes, Connery looks more dangerous and intimidating, which I attribute that to his size, muscular build, rougher features, and the way he carries himself. I just don't understand what you mean by an 'alpha male face structure', because you still haven't explained.