Who should/could be a Bond actor?

113201321132213231325

Comments

  • sandbagger1sandbagger1 Sussex
    Posts: 1,137
    Univex wrote: »
    None of the fellas mentioned in these 1324 pages will be Bond.

    Bond will be an unknown, as close as they can get to a mesh of the Bond from the books and the Bond from the films, minus the ten years of age they think will put Bond on their demographics bullseye.

    Do you really believe that?

    I think it’s bound to be someone we’ve mentioned. They’re not going to go with someone with no tv or film experience. I just can’t see it.

    There are a few actors of the right age that haven’t been brought up here (Cassian Bilton from the Apple TV+ show Foundation, for example), but even then I think they’re still on our radar, so to speak. Anyone with the required talent will be working on our screens somewhere, imo.
  • Posts: 16,147
    007HallY wrote: »
    dewiparry wrote: »
    I get the vibe that Suter could be a good side character agent.

    I know! Like, he’s a fellow 00 or British agent who Bond immediately distrusts and at some point is revealed to be working for the villain. He gets a particularly nasty death too.

    That’s very much the vibe I get too, haha.

    I don't know, little I've seen of him I get more of a Brosnan vibe personally. Not that's necessarily a good thing, mind you.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 8 Posts: 19,303
    zebrafish wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I always liked that Sam Mendes pictured Damian Lewis as the 009 Bond steals the Aston DB10 from :D

    That's a rumor I have never heard of.

    I feel like he's said out loud before. Lewis was never in the frame to actually play him, it's just that Mendes had an idea of the character in his head and he pictured Lewis.
    zebrafish wrote: »
    Unlikely. You have 100+ Bond-obsessed people on this forum who "waste" their time finding possible candidates. I bet the name of the next Bond actor has or will come up before it's officially announced.

    Yes I think the chance that someone has guessed him is pretty high. The idea that there's some perfect idealised candidate out there that no-one has ever seen is wishful thinking and can only lead to disappointment.
    I remember someone on here even guessed 'No Time To Die' as a film title at some point! :D
  • Posts: 7,043
    Alright, then. It will either Louis Partridge or Callum Turner.

    I mean, I hope.
  • CharmianBondCharmianBond Pett Bottom, Kent
    Posts: 577
    Univex wrote: »
    Alright, then. It will either Louis Partridge or Callum Turner.

    I mean, I hope.

    Turner is high on my shortlist but I went to see GoldenEye in the cinema and before it came on there was a promo for House of Guinness with Partridge and I've only seen him in Enola Holmes when he was even younger, so I think even Bond #8 might be too soon. I don't know if it's because I had Brosnan on the brain but I could see the same kind of charisma in that short clip.
  • Ben Radcliffe is an interesting under the radar candidate. He's only 27 but looks more mature than most, 5ft 11 and a good voice. Can he act? I've only ever seen him in Anatomy Of A Scandal so I've not much to go on. However, he is in Netflix's The Age Of Innocence series in the role played by Daniel Day-Lewis in the film. That's big shoes to fill.

    Brief video -

    https://www.instagram.com/gant/reel/DPRqVhQDbru/

    BenRadcliffe_WebSize1_146a30488795a0a62e41f68340c5291f.jpg
  • Posts: 7,043
    Ben Radcliffe is an interesting under the radar candidate. He's only 27 but looks more mature than most, 5ft 11 and a good voice. Can he act? I've only ever seen him in Anatomy Of A Scandal so I've not much to go on. However, he is in Netflix's The Age Of Innocence series in the role played by Daniel Day-Lewis in the film. That's big shoes to fill.

    Brief video -

    https://www.instagram.com/gant/reel/DPRqVhQDbru/

    BenRadcliffe_WebSize1_146a30488795a0a62e41f68340c5291f.jpg

    Bloody hell, new favorite, just like that! Well done, @Bond_Bombshell. Good voice and presence. Plays golf, also. Seems to be good at acting, btw ;)

  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,678
    Very interesting indeed…
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,994
    Univex wrote: »
    None of the fellas mentioned in these 1324 pages will be Bond.

    Bond will be an unknown, as close as they can get to a mesh of the Bond from the books and the Bond from the films, minus the ten years of age they think will put Bond on their demographics bullseye.

    So a new Lazenby? I really doubt it.
  • Posts: 16,147
    echo wrote: »
    Univex wrote: »
    None of the fellas mentioned in these 1324 pages will be Bond.

    Bond will be an unknown, as close as they can get to a mesh of the Bond from the books and the Bond from the films, minus the ten years of age they think will put Bond on their demographics bullseye.

    So a new Lazenby? I really doubt it.

    Lazenby is one sort of unknown. Nowadays, I'm seriously wondering if there are that many known actors, what with the multiplication of streaming content.
  • edited October 8 Posts: 7,043
    talos7 wrote: »
    Very interesting indeed…

    This guy is gym ready

    MV5BZDM3ODgwYmEtMjUwMS00NzM1LThiOTgtYmM2N2IzZGU3ZjFlXkEyXkFqcGc@._V1_.jpg

  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,678
    As is would suit the role nicely; he looks functionally athletic.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,895
    Given the late 20's/ea
    Univex wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Very interesting indeed…

    This guy is gym ready

    MV5BZDM3ODgwYmEtMjUwMS00NzM1LThiOTgtYmM2N2IzZGU3ZjFlXkEyXkFqcGc@._V1_.jpg

    Good suggestion mate. He seems more suitable than most young actors suggested
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 4,518
    Univex wrote: »
    talos7 wrote: »
    Very interesting indeed…

    This guy is gym ready

    MV5BZDM3ODgwYmEtMjUwMS00NzM1LThiOTgtYmM2N2IzZGU3ZjFlXkEyXkFqcGc@._V1_.jpg

    A very good candidate..
  • edited 11:12am Posts: 6,055
    I’ve mentioned Radcliffe before as a lesser known potential. Sure, although I’d have to see more of him.
    MSL49 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    dewiparry wrote: »
    I get the vibe that Suter could be a good side character agent.

    I know! Like, he’s a fellow 00 or British agent who Bond immediately distrusts and at some point is revealed to be working for the villain. He gets a particularly nasty death too.

    That’s very much the vibe I get too, haha.

    Why not for Bond?

    I know a few will disagree, and I’m not even sure how apparent it is to people outside of the UK, but for me Suter just comes off as a bit too polished and well spoken. Nice Oxford boy I call him (I think he’s genuinely from Oxford or went there. Sounds weird but he’s the sort of chap I can easily imagine wearing brightly coloured chinos and those sleeveless ‘life preserver’ jackets when he was younger. Again, no idea if that means anything to some, but it’s a very particular image of younger, wealthy, privately educated Brits I’ve seen who mostly seem to be from Oxford!)

    It’s just an aspect of his screen presence I’ve noticed - I think his first role was in Bad Education literally playing ‘Posh Student’ and it’s probably why he was cast as the aristocratic Lynley - I can very much believe he’s from an upper class background and a bit naive. For me that’s just not quite Bond (Bond should be refined, but not naive, and there should be something immediately striking about him - Suter is good looking but not very striking in my opinion). It’s a subtle problem with a potential Bond, but I think it’s there (although he could be interesting playing the type of villain I described above. That said I’m still unsure just how impactful an actor he is on the big screen).
    dewiparry wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    dewiparry wrote: »
    I get the vibe that Suter could be a good side character agent.

    I know! Like, he’s a fellow 00 or British agent who Bond immediately distrusts and at some point is revealed to be working for the villain. He gets a particularly nasty death too.

    That’s very much the vibe I get too, haha.

    Haha! "The forum guys never liked you, traitor."

    😂
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 9,258
    It would be funny, Heyman casting another Radcliffe in the leading role! =))
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited 11:25am Posts: 8,678
    An actor of Ben Radcliffe‘s level of experience, accomplishment and exposure landing the role is far more likely , and desirable, than someone like Harris, Holland or Elordi

    At this point no one is a “ favorite “ ; the casting process is going to be extensive and vigorous. A lot of actors will be considered, contacted and be given initial interviews; a number of them will receive a formal screentest.

    B. Radcliffe should be considered
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 704
    Ben Radcliffe is an interesting under the radar candidate. He's only 27 but looks more mature than most, 5ft 11 and a good voice. Can he act? I've only ever seen him in Anatomy Of A Scandal so I've not much to go on. However, he is in Netflix's The Age Of Innocence series in the role played by Daniel Day-Lewis in the film. That's big shoes to fill.

    Brief video -

    https://www.instagram.com/gant/reel/DPRqVhQDbru/

    BenRadcliffe_WebSize1_146a30488795a0a62e41f68340c5291f.jpg

    It would be suprise if he doesnt have on their list.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited 11:42am Posts: 19,303



    I watched this out of curiosity; he's not very good in it (there's a moment of revelation there which he does absolutely nothing with at all and it kind of punctures the whole thing), but to be honest it's so poorly-made and directed that I'm not sure it's a complete mark against him, maybe he could be better in other stuff, and it's a couple of years old and he's still young. At the moment I'm not excited by him at all, but I'd still give him the benefit of the doubt for the time being.

    If you've watched that trailer, incidentally, you've seen the whole thing. I'm mildly astonished at how amateurish it is though: cheap effects, bad direction, poor performances... no wonder I'd not heard of it before. I don't think I've seen something from Disney before that wouldn't be of professional enough quality to put on BBC Two or Channel 4. And it's produced by Cuarón(!)
    007HallY wrote: »
    I’ve mentioned Radcliffe before as a lesser known potential. Sure, although I’d have to see more of him.

    Not many unknown unknowns around! :)
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 704
    007HallY wrote: »
    I’ve mentioned Radcliffe before as a lesser known potential. Sure, although I’d have to see more of him.
    MSL49 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    dewiparry wrote: »
    I get the vibe that Suter could be a good side character agent.

    I know! Like, he’s a fellow 00 or British agent who Bond immediately distrusts and at some point is revealed to be working for the villain. He gets a particularly nasty death too.

    That’s very much the vibe I get too, haha.

    Why not for Bond?

    I know a few will disagree, and I’m not even sure how apparent it is to people outside of the UK, but for me Suter just comes off as a bit too polished and well spoken. Nice Oxford boy I call him (I think he’s genuinely from Oxford or went there. Sounds weird but he’s the sort of chap I can easily imagine wearing brightly coloured chinos and those sleeveless ‘life preserver’ jackets when he was younger. Again, no idea if that means anything to some, but it’s a very particular image of younger, wealthy, privately educated Brits I’ve seen who mostly seem to be from Oxford!)

    It’s just an aspect of his screen presence I’ve noticed - I think his first role was in Bad Education literally playing ‘Posh Student’ and it’s probably why he was cast as the aristocratic Lynley - I can very much believe he’s from an upper class background and a bit naive. For me that’s just not quite Bond (Bond should be refined, but not naive, and there should be something immediately striking about him - Suter is good looking but not very striking in my opinion). It’s a subtle problem with a potential Bond, but I think it’s there (although he could be interesting playing the type of villain I described above. That said I’m still unsure just how impactful an actor he is on the big screen).
    dewiparry wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    dewiparry wrote: »
    I get the vibe that Suter could be a good side character agent.

    I know! Like, he’s a fellow 00 or British agent who Bond immediately distrusts and at some point is revealed to be working for the villain. He gets a particularly nasty death too.

    That’s very much the vibe I get too, haha.

    Haha! "The forum guys never liked you, traitor."

    😂

    What you think was Moore or Brosnan too polished for Bond?
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 9,258
    Ben Radcliffe might be the best option out there if they are serious about the actor having to be in his late twenties or early thirties. They NEED to test his for the role at least.
  • edited 11:47am Posts: 6,055
    MSL49 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    I’ve mentioned Radcliffe before as a lesser known potential. Sure, although I’d have to see more of him.
    MSL49 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    dewiparry wrote: »
    I get the vibe that Suter could be a good side character agent.

    I know! Like, he’s a fellow 00 or British agent who Bond immediately distrusts and at some point is revealed to be working for the villain. He gets a particularly nasty death too.

    That’s very much the vibe I get too, haha.

    Why not for Bond?

    I know a few will disagree, and I’m not even sure how apparent it is to people outside of the UK, but for me Suter just comes off as a bit too polished and well spoken. Nice Oxford boy I call him (I think he’s genuinely from Oxford or went there. Sounds weird but he’s the sort of chap I can easily imagine wearing brightly coloured chinos and those sleeveless ‘life preserver’ jackets when he was younger. Again, no idea if that means anything to some, but it’s a very particular image of younger, wealthy, privately educated Brits I’ve seen who mostly seem to be from Oxford!)

    It’s just an aspect of his screen presence I’ve noticed - I think his first role was in Bad Education literally playing ‘Posh Student’ and it’s probably why he was cast as the aristocratic Lynley - I can very much believe he’s from an upper class background and a bit naive. For me that’s just not quite Bond (Bond should be refined, but not naive, and there should be something immediately striking about him - Suter is good looking but not very striking in my opinion). It’s a subtle problem with a potential Bond, but I think it’s there (although he could be interesting playing the type of villain I described above. That said I’m still unsure just how impactful an actor he is on the big screen).
    dewiparry wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    dewiparry wrote: »
    I get the vibe that Suter could be a good side character agent.

    I know! Like, he’s a fellow 00 or British agent who Bond immediately distrusts and at some point is revealed to be working for the villain. He gets a particularly nasty death too.

    That’s very much the vibe I get too, haha.

    Haha! "The forum guys never liked you, traitor."

    😂

    What you think was Moore or Brosnan too polished for Bond?

    I think Moore was almost a pastiche of a David Niven sort. Well spoken and debonair, but lots of innuendos, wryness, and eyebrow raising (and much more sexual, and harder edged).

    Brosnan had this strange Irish Transatlantic accent that made him unique and a bit enigmatic even.

    Both I’d say had a lot more presence and gravitas than Suter.

    It’d be a bit like if Tom Hiddleston were cast as Bond (incidentally I think he’s best when playing well spoken villains - Loki and Crimson Peak being the examples. If I had to bet what Suter’s short term career in films would be, I’d guess along those lines rather than the hero).
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 9,258
    The next Bond has to be debonair and that's what I see a lot in B Radcliffe, he seems like a good balance. Only problem is can he act?
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 704
    007HallY wrote: »
    MSL49 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    I’ve mentioned Radcliffe before as a lesser known potential. Sure, although I’d have to see more of him.
    MSL49 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    dewiparry wrote: »
    I get the vibe that Suter could be a good side character agent.

    I know! Like, he’s a fellow 00 or British agent who Bond immediately distrusts and at some point is revealed to be working for the villain. He gets a particularly nasty death too.

    That’s very much the vibe I get too, haha.

    Why not for Bond?

    I know a few will disagree, and I’m not even sure how apparent it is to people outside of the UK, but for me Suter just comes off as a bit too polished and well spoken. Nice Oxford boy I call him (I think he’s genuinely from Oxford or went there. Sounds weird but he’s the sort of chap I can easily imagine wearing brightly coloured chinos and those sleeveless ‘life preserver’ jackets when he was younger. Again, no idea if that means anything to some, but it’s a very particular image of younger, wealthy, privately educated Brits I’ve seen who mostly seem to be from Oxford!)

    It’s just an aspect of his screen presence I’ve noticed - I think his first role was in Bad Education literally playing ‘Posh Student’ and it’s probably why he was cast as the aristocratic Lynley - I can very much believe he’s from an upper class background and a bit naive. For me that’s just not quite Bond (Bond should be refined, but not naive, and there should be something immediately striking about him - Suter is good looking but not very striking in my opinion). It’s a subtle problem with a potential Bond, but I think it’s there (although he could be interesting playing the type of villain I described above. That said I’m still unsure just how impactful an actor he is on the big screen).
    dewiparry wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    dewiparry wrote: »
    I get the vibe that Suter could be a good side character agent.

    I know! Like, he’s a fellow 00 or British agent who Bond immediately distrusts and at some point is revealed to be working for the villain. He gets a particularly nasty death too.

    That’s very much the vibe I get too, haha.

    Haha! "The forum guys never liked you, traitor."

    😂

    What you think was Moore or Brosnan too polished for Bond?

    I think Moore was almost a pastiche of a David Niven sort. Well spoken and debonair, but lots of innuendos, wryness, and eyebrow raising (and much more sexual, and harder edged).

    Brosnan had this strange Irish Transatlantic accent that made him unique and a bit enigmatic even.

    Both I’d say had a lot more presence and gravitas than Suter.

    It’d be a bit like if Tom Hiddleston were cast as Bond (incidentally I think he’s best when playing well spoken villains - Loki and Crimson Peak being the examples. If I had to bet what Suter’s short term career in films would be, I’d guess along those lines rather than the hero).

    Bond actor has to have that movie star charisma both Moore and Brosnan had that even more than regular actor.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited 12:03pm Posts: 9,258
    MSL49 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    MSL49 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    I’ve mentioned Radcliffe before as a lesser known potential. Sure, although I’d have to see more of him.
    MSL49 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    dewiparry wrote: »
    I get the vibe that Suter could be a good side character agent.

    I know! Like, he’s a fellow 00 or British agent who Bond immediately distrusts and at some point is revealed to be working for the villain. He gets a particularly nasty death too.

    That’s very much the vibe I get too, haha.

    Why not for Bond?

    I know a few will disagree, and I’m not even sure how apparent it is to people outside of the UK, but for me Suter just comes off as a bit too polished and well spoken. Nice Oxford boy I call him (I think he’s genuinely from Oxford or went there. Sounds weird but he’s the sort of chap I can easily imagine wearing brightly coloured chinos and those sleeveless ‘life preserver’ jackets when he was younger. Again, no idea if that means anything to some, but it’s a very particular image of younger, wealthy, privately educated Brits I’ve seen who mostly seem to be from Oxford!)

    It’s just an aspect of his screen presence I’ve noticed - I think his first role was in Bad Education literally playing ‘Posh Student’ and it’s probably why he was cast as the aristocratic Lynley - I can very much believe he’s from an upper class background and a bit naive. For me that’s just not quite Bond (Bond should be refined, but not naive, and there should be something immediately striking about him - Suter is good looking but not very striking in my opinion). It’s a subtle problem with a potential Bond, but I think it’s there (although he could be interesting playing the type of villain I described above. That said I’m still unsure just how impactful an actor he is on the big screen).
    dewiparry wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    dewiparry wrote: »
    I get the vibe that Suter could be a good side character agent.

    I know! Like, he’s a fellow 00 or British agent who Bond immediately distrusts and at some point is revealed to be working for the villain. He gets a particularly nasty death too.

    That’s very much the vibe I get too, haha.

    Haha! "The forum guys never liked you, traitor."

    😂

    What you think was Moore or Brosnan too polished for Bond?

    I think Moore was almost a pastiche of a David Niven sort. Well spoken and debonair, but lots of innuendos, wryness, and eyebrow raising (and much more sexual, and harder edged).

    Brosnan had this strange Irish Transatlantic accent that made him unique and a bit enigmatic even.

    Both I’d say had a lot more presence and gravitas than Suter.

    It’d be a bit like if Tom Hiddleston were cast as Bond (incidentally I think he’s best when playing well spoken villains - Loki and Crimson Peak being the examples. If I had to bet what Suter’s short term career in films would be, I’d guess along those lines rather than the hero).

    Bond actor has to have that movie star charisma both Moore and Brosnan had that even more than regular actor.

    Yep, and B Radcliffe has that much.

    Looks very debonair: https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/04/13/14/56568405-10715179-image-a-59_1649857079549.jpg
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 704
    Ben Radcliffe might be the best option out there if they are serious about the actor having to be in his late twenties or early thirties. They NEED to test his for the role at least.

    They can let these talents to lip through their fingers.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,678
    The next Bond has to be debonair and that's what I see a lot in B Radcliffe, he seems like a good balance. Only problem is can he act?

    Details, details… 😂
  • Posts: 6,055
    MSL49 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    MSL49 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    I’ve mentioned Radcliffe before as a lesser known potential. Sure, although I’d have to see more of him.
    MSL49 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    dewiparry wrote: »
    I get the vibe that Suter could be a good side character agent.

    I know! Like, he’s a fellow 00 or British agent who Bond immediately distrusts and at some point is revealed to be working for the villain. He gets a particularly nasty death too.

    That’s very much the vibe I get too, haha.

    Why not for Bond?

    I know a few will disagree, and I’m not even sure how apparent it is to people outside of the UK, but for me Suter just comes off as a bit too polished and well spoken. Nice Oxford boy I call him (I think he’s genuinely from Oxford or went there. Sounds weird but he’s the sort of chap I can easily imagine wearing brightly coloured chinos and those sleeveless ‘life preserver’ jackets when he was younger. Again, no idea if that means anything to some, but it’s a very particular image of younger, wealthy, privately educated Brits I’ve seen who mostly seem to be from Oxford!)

    It’s just an aspect of his screen presence I’ve noticed - I think his first role was in Bad Education literally playing ‘Posh Student’ and it’s probably why he was cast as the aristocratic Lynley - I can very much believe he’s from an upper class background and a bit naive. For me that’s just not quite Bond (Bond should be refined, but not naive, and there should be something immediately striking about him - Suter is good looking but not very striking in my opinion). It’s a subtle problem with a potential Bond, but I think it’s there (although he could be interesting playing the type of villain I described above. That said I’m still unsure just how impactful an actor he is on the big screen).
    dewiparry wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    dewiparry wrote: »
    I get the vibe that Suter could be a good side character agent.

    I know! Like, he’s a fellow 00 or British agent who Bond immediately distrusts and at some point is revealed to be working for the villain. He gets a particularly nasty death too.

    That’s very much the vibe I get too, haha.

    Haha! "The forum guys never liked you, traitor."

    😂

    What you think was Moore or Brosnan too polished for Bond?

    I think Moore was almost a pastiche of a David Niven sort. Well spoken and debonair, but lots of innuendos, wryness, and eyebrow raising (and much more sexual, and harder edged).

    Brosnan had this strange Irish Transatlantic accent that made him unique and a bit enigmatic even.

    Both I’d say had a lot more presence and gravitas than Suter.

    It’d be a bit like if Tom Hiddleston were cast as Bond (incidentally I think he’s best when playing well spoken villains - Loki and Crimson Peak being the examples. If I had to bet what Suter’s short term career in films would be, I’d guess along those lines rather than the hero).

    Bond actor has to have that movie star charisma both Moore and Brosnan had that even more than regular actor.

    Yes, and honestly I’m conflicted about whether Suter has enough as an actor to fill those shoes.

    Oddly, having just looked it up, I think he may well be playing a well spoken villain in his next film (it’s an Anna Biller thing called The Face of Horror).
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 9,258
    talos7 wrote: »
    The next Bond has to be debonair and that's what I see a lot in B Radcliffe, he seems like a good balance. Only problem is can he act?

    Details, details… 😂

    I get the feeling that Knight would be in favour of Ben as Bond, even if Villeneuve isn't.
  • Posts: 2,440
    Leo Suter is starting to get older, he will be 35 in 2028.
Sign In or Register to comment.