It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Honestly, the boy's so young I think it's impossible to tell if there's any Bond potential there. I personally find him a bit feminine/androgynous looking (he's a good looking kid, but I think that element is something he leans into and is part of his appeal. It's no slight against how he comes off onscreen or how he could look when he's older - but again, it doesn't scream Bond to me right now, and it's all part of that sense he's simply way too young, or potentially really not right for the role anyway). He's a good actor and I'm sure he has great stuff ahead. That said I don't think he's even comparable to Henry Cavill when he was in his early 20s. And no, I certainly wouldn't say from what I've seen he's a better actor, nor does he have a more commanding screen presence than Harris Dickinson (I can understand having reservations about Dickinson as Bond or thinking he doesn't quite have the right qualities for the character, but the guy is genuinely a magnetic actor, and I'd say he made much more impact onscreen when he was Partridge's age - Beach Rats, Postcards From London etc).
Suter and Partridge however should get a screentest
I'm not even sure if Suter's a great film actor, let alone a good potential Bond ;) In that 'not quite right' category for me, but his voice might be good for a Bond video game or radio/podcast adaptation of Fleming.
But what will be will be I suppose.
Yes agreed, Dickinson just is a top movie actor and well on his way to being a star, he just is.
Oh yeah. Whether he translates to Bond or not is another thing, but I can't fault this guy's talent nor his experience in film and high end tv for his age. A Murder at the End of the World, Triangle of Sadness, Babygirl etc.
Nah, I'm sorry, but Patridge before this Guinness role (as far as I know) and Suter aren't anywhere near Dickinson in terms of being captivating onscreen actors from what I've seen of all of them (one is too young, and the other may well continue to be a TV actor with some minor supporting roles at best), again at least at the moment. That's not even an indication of whether they'll be Bond or not, or what any will do later on. But there's a reason why Dickinson has as much buzz around him for Bond as he does.
I'll have to give it a watch. I'm sure he's great in it (again, a good actor from what I've seen, although a bit green). I'm not sure he looks 27 or older, but that's just me.
I meant he looked older in the show ;) In character.
Partridge is fine so far, I'm certainly not going to say he's bad because he's not. I'm not really blown away so far though, and if you had to pick anyone from this show to be Bond it would be Norton as he does a very good job in the sexy swaggery, more dangerous role and actually gives a lot more charisma than I've seen him show before. Anthony Boyle is really quite good too, I can see him doing it just as well.
Niamh McCormack is also a standout; she'd fit in a Bond very well and has plenty of presence.
Just finished the first episode. It’s not my cup of tea - or pint of Guinness - unfortunately. Good production design, direction, and cinematography, but it’s a bit talky and stereotypically televisual for large portions, if that makes sense. Even with a few bigger and more energetic scenes. It was like a more stylish version of an old BBC period drama (again, it’s just not my thing). I can appreciate the writing and production work, but I didn’t feel much towards most of the characters.
Partridge is fine, although I’m not seeing Bond at all. He has this tendency to frown a lot. It’s not fair because it’s not meant to be a Bond audition, so I don’t think it says anything about his potential further down the line. But no, he’s no Harris Dickinson, and he looks like a guy in his early 20s to me ;)
I don’t think he was the most captivating actor in that episode by any means either. James Norton and Niamh McCormack I thought more interesting than him (incidentally, I think Norton gets way too much criticism on these forums just because he’s not the best fit for Bond - he’s a pretty good character actor! McCormack’s performance I liked a lot and I think she’s got a strong screen presence and distinctive face). But again, maybe this just wasn’t my thing.
I suppose Patridge has a chiselled chin and sort of looks like a very young version of Timothy Dalton almost, so I understand it's somewhat easier to slot him into 'Bond' in some people's minds... although as I said I don't think he inherently gives off the same harder edged or even brooding impression as Dalton, nor do I think there's much in his performances to say he's at his strongest as an actor currently, let alone a potential Bond.
This is something that Leo Suter doesn't have.
Louis Partridge is very young in any case. I mean, I want to see another Bond actor before I die.
The new Frankenstein trailer looks good and he does his English accent and has a haunting voice
In this video he is so fine and cool. He looks so much like Bond to me. It's hard to imagine why people aren't vibing with his choice. He's perfect.
Wouldn’t be my choice, but as I’ve always said it’s not stupid considering him. But honestly, I think this all just shows we’re very much in rumour mill mode with this film. World of Reel’s not exactly always 100% accurate, and the last Variety and Deadline articles even acknowledged they were speculating in places, but there’s probably grains of truth to all this. Probably more in the sense they’re considering all their options before going into casting though. It’s often the case studios push for higher profile actors for big roles, but it doesn’t mean that’ll actually be the choice in practice (depends whether the actor wants to do it, or maybe it becomes apparent they’re not right, or maybe a better candidate crops up etc. But no, this doesn’t mean Elordi will be Bond anymore than it was guaranteed Wolverine would be played by Russell Crowe, or that someone like Cary Grant or Richard Burton were to be Bond in ‘62. It doesn’t mean he won’t be the pick either, mind).
I think it all just comes back to the idea this isn’t a process we’re part of/are looking from afar on. It’s too early to say for sure who Bond will be played by.
Yeah, should probably have added it, Moore too, although I'm not sure how the general public was following it then. In any case, Moore and Brosnan (one out of two for the latter), overall my comparison stands.