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
the only problem though is, Henry does look like something's fallen out of his backside...
Nooooo...the dream cannot die!
It's time for a balding, overweight Bond. With no acting experience.
It's my favourite Bond song, along with LALD. Lyricist Carole Bayer Sager is one of the greats.
You called ?
We'd make great OO's @barryt007 Bazza.
Licence to thrill.
I often find it a problem: those who look the part are mediocre actors at best and lack presence, or have been untested.
00 Octopussy brigade !!
Poor Henry. He's never gonna cut it as a credible actor. His best role was in Red Riding Hood but even then he was outshone by the wolf!
Luke Bracy does have a link to the Bond universe. He co-starred in The November Man with Pierce Brosnan. I don't remember Bracy having a particularly strong Bond look or vibe but he may have matured a bit since then. Could be someone to add to the list of names.
We probably won't even know who will replace Craig till after Bond 25 is released...
Exactly. It's been that way for previous Bond's too.
The guy deserved more and better roles than he's been offered. He was great in the Wire circa 16 years ago but the UK has only really given him Luther, which is entertaining but...
They'll be giving Bond a full arm sleave tattoo next.
You have to remember too, he hasn't really worked with a great director yet.
Good God no way....we would have to buy him a pack of nappies and a dummy.
I fear that Cavill would just be a good looking clothes horse, lacking the acting chops to bring any real mettle to the character. A worse version of Brosnan.
People forget that Connery was an excellent screen actor. He brought heft and gravitas to Bond not only through his looks, but his acting too - I include his sense of physicality in this, as knowing how to move and use your body is a key skill of a great actor.
Moore was not as good an actor as Connery, but knew his craft well.
I agree good direction is important. Young helped craft Connery's Bond and I think Gilbert did something similar with Moore, whose characterisation only really came together with TSWLM.
I've seen Brosnan deliver good screen performances when directed by top notch directors like Boorman and Polanski, which makes me think his Bond could have been a whole lot better than it ended up being - you have to blame the screenwriters and producers as well here, for never really helping Brosnan deliver on his potential.
But with Cavill I haven't seen even that. I just don't think he's good enough. Unless you want to watch remakes of DAD and TWINE for the next decade after Craig.
The only problem I have with Brosnan´s Bond films is that apparently noone stopped the camera and told Pierce to stop acting. If they can do that with Cavill, a lot is possible.
Connery oozed so much charisma that he got away with lots of overacting. Other actors cannot allow themselves such.
Regarding acting chops, I'm not as hung up on it as others either. Daniel Craig is perhaps the most acclaimed actor to play Bond, and yet I personally rank his performance in SP as bottom of the barrel (along with Brosnan in TWINE, for different reasons). So I don't pay attention to an actor's reputation as highly as others perhaps do. The trick for me is whether one can be credible in the role and with the direction the producers take for a particular film. This is more difficult to do as time progresses perhaps, because of the exceptional performances we have had over the years from all the Bond actors - our expectations get framed and whenever we see a scene that reminds us of the past we inevitably subconsciously expect the actor to ace it like his illustrious predecessors did - why isn't he as suave and nonchalant as Roger, why doesn't he move as silkily and stealthily as Sean, or why isn't he as intense as Tim etc. etc.
As I've mentioned previously, I think versatility is a very important characteristic, along with an ability to subtly convey mood, emotion and danger. I'll admit that I'm not entirely convinced yet if Cavill can be relied upon to do that.
I don't know anything about him but he seems a bit young. A few more lines in the face could help to give him a more distinguished look.
Connery oozed so much charisma that he got away with lots of overacting. Other actors cannot allow themselves such.
[/quote]
Yes, having seen MI:F twice, there were too many instances one can tell that Cavill IS acting. It really takes a viewer out of a film.
EDIT: I should also add that the first time I saw Cavill in anything was The Tudors way back when. I certainly didn't think he was wooden in that, but it was a while ago. It was actually co-star Jonathan Rhys Meyers who I felt was out of his depth.
I thought Cavill would succeed to Craig then judging by his acting in The Tudors. The series was not very good, a poor man's Rome, but he had presence and charisma. It's like he lost it along the way.
And I've said it before but now his face looks like it's made of plastic.
https://www.capitalfm.com/news/tv-film/denzel-washington-opinion-james-bond-actor/