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
Good point. re beards. Nothing wrong with Bond sporting one if the circumstances require him to do so, but any potential candidate must look the part without one.
It was never my intention to "mansplain" @Tuulia as you so eloquently put it @CommanderRoss. Is that a modern ninety-niners' pejorative term, by the way? My only intention was to offer an invite to the "small" female fan-base for their future choices, though I did happen to add that Bond had a bigger male following than it did a female one, and that the final choice shouldn't be dictated by female cinemagoers for that reason. If anything, I felt Tuulia was "womansplaining" me with her opening gambit of not agreeing with what I said and then deciding to dissect my comments.
Okay, let's first address your female friend asking to be chaperoned to CR. I'm unsure of the circumstances. Did she ask because she knew that the audience would be mostly made-up of males, or does she not like going to the cinema alone and none of her female friends wanted to go-see a Bond movie so she asked you instead? Either way, it doesn't prove anything.
Again, I'm not saying Bond movies can't have its female admirers, just that they're in far smaller numbers. From my own observations it was Brosnan that caused the major upswing and brought in the women flocking to the aisles, especially with him being somewhat of a pretty-boy pin-up and someone that they could finally salivate over. Roger Moore didn't have that, nor did Dalton if I'm brutally honest. The bigger question here is: would these same Brosnan admirers have gone to see GE had a less favourable pin-up appeared in the role instead? Considering it was Brosnan that drew them to the movie in the first place, I'd have to say a big, emphatic "No." In other words, they hadn't shown any interest in Bond until Brosnan was cast and are not Bond fans per se.
With regards to your adding Tom Hanks and Gary Oldman to the "guy's actor" list, I wouldn't be so bold. Hanks was made popular by a previous generation of cinemagoers, not the current one, and doesn't command the same following as he once did. That was another reason why I left Harrison Ford and Sylvester Stallone off the list. Gary Oldman, though not in the same league as Hanks, was also an actor from a previous generation. I might argue that Oldman didn't really have too much success at headlining a movie, mostly playing villains to other A-list actors. I'll give you Cruise who does seem to be able to keep pulling in audiences to some degree, depending on what movie he's in. But none of those actors are the current BO stars that headline and pull in the "ninety-niner" audiences any more like The Rock, Jason Statham and Mark Wahlberg continue to do.
As for your comment: my "idea of alpha male is, I'm afraid, misconceived" and then posting a video from primatologist Frans de Waal on alpha males among chimpanzees and how humans too have a striking similarity, I'm left somewhat bemused. Maybe you can post a video on how chimpanzees react to a Bond film as well? And no, I didn't watch what Frans de Waal had to say either. Why would I? That wasn't the thrust of my original post.
Anyway, back on topic...
Thanks for the free publicity, @ClarkDevlin!
Why are these in spoiler, is it because we were talking about James bond(age) parody?
No, just to make people curious. ;)
Disqualifying your opponent isn't a very strong discussion technique, especially not when it has a whim of disqualifying because of the other beeing of the opposite sex. Now I'll admit you didn't say it directly, but again it did seem to have that implication. And that's called 'mansplaining'. I haven't got a clue who coined the term. She was living in Bangkok at the time, and I was visiting her. She knows I'm a bit of a Bond-fan. She herself is too. I guess I was the go-to friend for the occasion. Don't worry, she's seen them all in cinemas, and usually not with me, but indeed with her female friends. On the premises of what do you come to this conclusion? AFAK in the olden days gender roles were pushed so far that it would be rather strange for women to go to a 'men's film'. Even now cinema's organise 'ladies'nights'. Stereotypes live by the fact that there's a base of truth in them, and Bond certainly started out as a male fantasy. But just as more and more men don't feel ashamed to go to a romcom alone, more and more women dare to go to action movies and enjoy them.
In other words, had Moore been Bond in the nineties, he might've had the same effect.
I think there's a huge difference between European audiences and American audiences when it comes to this. None of the actors you mention have that effect on the public in at least my country. We only see about 20% of hollywood films produced anyway as many aren't expected to end up beeing hits here. Not any bigger anyway then the ones I mentioned.
Interesting. You are aware of the fact that the whole idea of alpha male is based on what we learned from primates in the first place? So your view of the alpha male is just as much based on our cousins' as mine. Except for the minor difference I like to keep up with my science.
I think most chimps would love to see a good Bond film if it could be translated to their tongue. AFAK that hasn't happened yet.
Octopussy doesn't love chimpanzees, though.
Rather have both, actually. :-D
Haha, good point! :))
Not a given...
Well he did give him a ringing endorsement. And the two have collaborated on 3 out of the last four Nolan projects. So either he's Bond or the villain.
Even worse is thinking Tom Hardy would be cast as Bond, purely because he’s worked on 3 of Nolan’s last four movies. So has Michael Caine and Cillian Murphy. They must be in contention as well.
Crystal balls should be put away before they hurt someone. ;)
I can't personally see Hardy getting the gig after Craig (too similar as far as I'm concerned), & the rationale that he's a given just because he's worked with Nolan is perhaps flawed. I can definitely see him being cast as a villain (perhaps another OO6 type character), which could create great buzz. Cillian Murphy has an opportunity as a secondary character.
I hope Nolan gets a crack at it one day, but I can't see it happening under Babs. If the younger Wilson takes over then perhaps it may, because he has been more vocal about Nolan in the past.
When they get round to B26 I think anything is on the table. From what we've read, there are several directors who would be interested in taking it on at that point, many of whom have already had discussions with EON (including Nolan).
That’s why I used the word “would” and not “will” ;)
Words of wisdom. People complain that SF is too much like TDK and TDKR, yet they want Nolan to direct and to make a Bond Batman with the same cast apparently. Even if Nolan was to direct one day, which is unlikely at the moment, he could do a different casting. At least nobody wants Tim Burton to direct a Bond movie, or else people here would be clamoring for Johnny Depp as Bond!