Who should/could be a Bond actor?

1128912901291129212931295»

Comments

  • Posts: 2,253
    007HallY wrote: »
    Well, if he’s not getting final cut why would he have final say over Bond? That’s not to say he won’t be important in the process, but it’s a decision that’ll probably outlive his involvement with the franchise. The final choice will likely come down to the producers and approved by higher ups at Amazon.

    He might not make the film, citing creative differences.

    I don't think there are that many young actors suitable for the role anyway. I don't think the list is very long.
  • Posts: 6,959
    We don’t know the half of it. Can any of us say with confidence that, say, two years ago we could’ve predicted all that has happened since? We are not in the know. We are but spectators, and the curtain isn’t even up yet.
  • Posts: 2,253
    I don't think there are that many 30-year-old actors with experience, charisma, and enough talent to make a Villeneuve film.

    They're not going to hire another Lazenby, so I think the pool is quite small.
  • edited July 23 Posts: 6,959
    I don't think there are that many 30-year-old actors with experience, charisma, and enough talent to make a Villeneuve film.

    They're not going to hire another Lazenby, so I think the pool is quite small.

    I think we don’t know the pool, so we shouldn’t dive too much into it ;)

    Just kidding. I do know what you mean. Let’s keep our hopes up. A bit of positivism.

    So far so good.
  • Posts: 5,641
    007HallY wrote: »
    Well, if he’s not getting final cut why would he have final say over Bond? That’s not to say he won’t be important in the process, but it’s a decision that’ll probably outlive his involvement with the franchise. The final choice will likely come down to the producers and approved by higher ups at Amazon.

    He might not make the film, citing creative differences.

    I don't think there are that many young actors suitable for the role anyway. I don't think the list is very long.

    None of us know one way or the other. And as I always say it’s probably for the best none of us have any say over which actors should be Bond.
  • Posts: 6,959
    Metro, Daily Mail, The Sun, Daily Express, The News International, and several other outlets are running with this headline: "Callum Turner 'tipped' to take the role".

    Probably the same bu** as ever. Although I'd be happy with the choice of the 35 year old :)
  • Posts: 5,641
    He'll probably have shot the gun barrel by the end of the week. That's before he's even been signed.

    Anyway, I think he could be good. And he's not an unrealistic option. The rumour mill churns out so many different people as Bond I don't think this will impact his chances one way or the other.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 15,273
    Give it to Callum and let's get going. His Bond would fit into a more grounded spy thriller caper, and that's an exciting prospect.
  • Posts: 419
    Univex wrote: »
    Metro, Daily Mail, The Sun, Daily Express, The News International, and several other outlets are running with this headline: "Callum Turner 'tipped' to take the role".

    Probably the same bu** as ever. Although I'd be happy with the choice of the 35 year old :)

    This only time I've wished one of these stories was true.
  • weboffearweboffear Scotland
    Posts: 69
    Daniel Craig at the BFI Bond talk starts at 24 minutes in
  • Posts: 1,234
    Venutius wrote: »
    Said it before, but I still don't get why a one-and-done director would have any say in casting an actor to play Bond for the next decade. It makes no sense to me for someone in, say, 2036, to be making a Bond film bound by a casting choice taken by a director who hadn't been involved with the series for the best part of a decade by that point. Then again, I don't know how these things work, so excuse the ignorance!

    Even if he is one and done as a director, I think part of the appeal and rationale of bringing on a filmmaker of his stature is that you have confidence in him making decisions that will successfully set the direction and carry over into future films, even if he's not directing them. He might not have final say, but with Barbara and Michael gone there's a pretty big creative vacuum to be filled and it makes sense that Heyman and Pascal would view Villeneuve as a co-steward. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if he kept a producer credit even if he wasn't directing Bond 27 or 28.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,874
    Venutius wrote: »
    Said it before, but I still don't get why a one-and-done director would have any say in casting an actor to play Bond for the next decade. It makes no sense to me for someone in, say, 2036, to be making a Bond film bound by a casting choice taken by a director who hadn't been involved with the series for the best part of a decade by that point. Then again, I don't know how these things work, so excuse the ignorance!

    Even if he is one and done as a director, I think part of the appeal and rationale of bringing on a filmmaker of his stature is that you have confidence in him making decisions that will successfully set the direction and carry over into future films, even if he's not directing them. He might not have final say, but with Barbara and Michael gone there's a pretty big creative vacuum to be filled and it makes sense that Heyman and Pascal would view Villeneuve as a co-steward. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if he kept a producer credit even if he wasn't directing Bond 27 or 28.

    Is Villeneuve the successor to Ken Adam we don't (yet) know we need?
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,829
    I watched a few episodes of The Narrow Road to the Deep North on BBC, with Jacob Elordi as the lead. I'm sorry but he doesn't have the leading man presence needed to play Bond.

    It's nothing against him personally, without going into spoilers, the show requires him to have a range of emotions that he doesn't convey as an actor. He spends most episodes with a vacant "aren't I cool look" on his face, rather than actually portraying the emotion
  • Posts: 215
    The list gets shorter. The answer is still the same.
  • edited July 25 Posts: 8,363
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    I watched a few episodes of The Narrow Road to the Deep North on BBC, with Jacob Elordi as the lead. I'm sorry but he doesn't have the leading man presence needed to play Bond.

    It's nothing against him personally, without going into spoilers, the show requires him to have a range of emotions that he doesn't convey as an actor. He spends most episodes with a vacant "aren't I cool look" on his face, rather than actually portraying the emotion

    I saw a brief section of it the other night. I don't know what it is about Elordi, but he looks like a caricature of himself, if you know what I mean? Can't see him as Bond!
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited July 25 Posts: 3,303
    Yeah, same. If someone said that Elordi was playing Prince Michael of Moldavia in a Dynasty remake, I could believe it - but I just can't see him as Bond. Which's not to say that Elordi couldn't totally silence the doubters with an unexpectedly killer performance, just as Dan did, but...I'd think it unlikely. Sorry, guys.
  • Posts: 6,959
    The truth is, that short list that Variety put out, is appalling. Holland, Dickinson and Elordi are not Bond material. And I was one of the ones that saw DC as Bond immediately when they announced it, just by an interview he did alongside Nicole Kidman at the time. These young fellas just don't make the cut, they're just not that good thespians. Yes, even Dickinson, which I've seen in many productions, is nowhere near DC's acting abilities. They don't even have the physicality for it.
  • Posts: 215
    The machine is jammed. This is bad publicity.
  • edited July 25 Posts: 117
    Personally, I'll worry more about Variety's shortlist if it's confirmed to be true. The info comes from so-called "insiders" with Amazon declining to comment officially. Apparently "the studio and producers" favour these three. I'm finding it hard to believe that this is Heyman and Pascal's wishlist. As for Connery fan Villeneuve, was his pitch really based on a young Bond? Would he have signed up to make a young Bond film? I have my doubts.
  • Posts: 2,253
    Connery was 31 or 32 when he started. I don't think a 30-year-old actor means we're going to have a teen Bond. I think they just want to make him younger.
  • Posts: 6,959
    31 in 1962 is not 31 in 2025. Just saying.
  • Posts: 117
    Connery was 31 or 32 when he started. I don't think a 30-year-old actor means we're going to have a teen Bond. I think they just want to make him younger.

    Connery looked a lot older than actors in the same age bracket do today and nobody has said anything about a teen Bond.

    My point is that I think posters are putting too much faith in the Variety article at this early stage. Maybe there's something in it, maybe there isn't. We're talking those elusive "insiders" again. I'm finding it hard to believe that the three on the shortlist are what Heyman, Pascal and Villeneuve have got in mind. I've no problem with an actor in his late twenties taking the role as long as he looks mature enough to have some gravitas. These three look particularly youthful. Tom Holland? Really? If this list has actually leaked from Amazon my guess is it's come from some berk of an executive who's not a producer.

    As others have alluded to, the pool is incredibly small if they're only looking at actors 30 and under. A lot of actors of this age look too young, are barely five or six years out of drama school, and lack experience. It's a big ask for someone like this to carry a Bond film.
  • Posts: 6,959
    I’m stil hoping this young Bond bullsh*t is exactly that. I understand the arguments in favour of it, but I’m still against it. Wanna have a young kid play Bond when his parents died? Fine. Wanna have a younger Bond in the navy? Fine. Just time jump to a 30 something Bond for the main spectacle, I say.
Sign In or Register to comment.