Jump to content
Hondo's Bar

Who do you see as the next BOND?


Recommended Posts

Pierce Brosnan is possibly coming to the end of his suave Bond tenure... who do you think will fit the role next?

 

I think the late bloomer Christian Bale might be a possibility. If he pulls off batman, I think it will give him the big boost to be accepted in the Bond role.

 

I don't see them going with someone too young, b/c then you throw off the role. I think you will be looking at a 35 if not a tad older actor claiming the role. I'd like to see Hugh Jackman, but his background isn't as close as they'd like I am sure. I have read that Clive Owen is a candidate too, but personally, I dunno about him as the next Felming great.

 

So, if I had to put my finger on 2 strong candidates, I'd think Bale is a good one, and Jason Satham. I just dunno how Satham would look with head hair, unless they decide to let Bond go buzzed...

 

Well, let me know what you think...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

007.gif

 

You know, in college, i watched the fuck out of 007: did a marathon of all the Connery ones, almost all of Roger Moore's, and a few of that other guy's (was he in 'the Living Daylights"? that one was cool), and yeah, Brosnan's the best since Connery. I think i repressed that shitty "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" one. :D

 

But i was thinkin the other day: even halfway significant shit hasnt happened since Goldeneye with 006; Tomorrow Never Dies had some cool action goin on, The World is Not Enough was shit, and i didnt even see the last one, to be honest. But im thinkin shit like XxX is doin good cause - and didnt Brosnan himself say this? - this franchise hasnt broken its formula in like forever, i dont feel the need to see new ones cause its more of the same; new chick, new adveritsing products, new device or two, that's it.

 

There's actually been other spy-like movies ive enjoyed more in years past, like...The Saint. My point being: it sucks to see Pierce leave, but with him, goes whatever residual interest i had in this franchise, and that's a shame. They really gotta do more to change it up to stay alive, i think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Nick, you'll be happy to hear that changing up the Bond formula is one of the bigger options they're considering for the next one. Martin Campbell (who directed GoldenEye) is going to direct the next one - most likely an adaption of Casino Royale - and promises a grittier, darker, more realistic Bond, similar to GoldenEye but further. Whether or not Brosnan comes back is still up in the air (admittedly, he is getting a little old for this shit), some sources say yes, some say no. If he doesn't come back Campbell is seriously considering going with a much younger Bond, reinventing the franchise from the beginning by showing Bond's first mission with MI6, something similar to what was done to the Jack Ryan series in The Sum of All Fears. The bad thing about that would be losing some great supporting characters, such a Judi Dench and John Cleese (it'd be a shame to lose such a perfect Q as John Cleese after only two appearances) but it could also open the series up to a great new Bond that could help reinvent the franchise. Christian Bale would be an awesome choice, Sig, but he hasn't really ever been mentioned.

 

Now, I have been a Bond fan all my life. I've seen every movie, every Bond, and eagerly await each new movie (by the way, Nick, the "other Bond" you were thinking of was Timothy Dalton who, I think, is underrated...and George Lazenby was Bond in On Her Majesty's Secret Service). One of the things that I - and any other major Bond fan - like about the series is that it hasn't reinvented itself. Going into a Bond movie is just like seeing a brand new version of an old movie you love. I haven't always been a fan of attempts to revamp the series, like the jump cuts, slow-motion effects and CGI in Die Another Day, so I don't really care if they revamp the series or just keep going but I can understand why the bulk of movie audiences could be getting tired of it.

 

Since Brosnan's rumored departure, there have been dozens of rumors about who would replace him, with such names as Ewan MacGregor, Colin Farrell, Hugh Jackman, Dougray Scott, Orlando Bloom, Russel Crowe, Jude Law, Ioan Gruffudd and Eric Bana. In recent news, the rumors have narrowed themselves down to two contenders - Clive Owen and Daniel Craig. The rumor list also usually includes Nip/Tuck star and Doc Doom Julian McMahon but only because he can't keep his mouth shut about wanting the part. Personally, I think all three are bad choices (even Owen, though I love him as an actor). I'd go for either Christian Bale or James Purefor - who may finally get recognition after he plays the title character in V for Vendetta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, i can respect wantin to see the same character & story; i mustve watched several dozen John Wayne westerns, and its basically him in a slightly different plot; even the supporting cast often has recurring characters/actors.

 

I think you mayve hinted at somethin, tho, because while i agree that Brosnan's great, i feel he's been slightly wasted for a while now. Again, i thougt it was cool to see him with Michelle Yeoh in "Tomorrow Never Dies" but since then, eh. The plot just hasnt been what it was...i know they cant all be "Thunderball" but cmon, im supposed to walk out feeling more than being halfway sold on a BMW.

 

Youre not the first to tell me Dalton was underrated; i remember thinkin he was more American-ish and brusque (sp?) than other bonds, but again, i cant fault License to Kill, and i really dug The Living Daylights.

 

Either way, yeah, i am more excited to hear what youre saying there, about making it a bit darker, and if no Pierce, than a 007 Year One. Colin, Jackman, Ewen, Crowe etc sound like theyd be fun, id give a number of those names a go, myself, just to see how they fair.

 

...was OHMSS as bad as i remember it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OHMSS as a movie was not one of the bad ones (I reserve that term for, say, Moonraker and Diamonds Are Forever) it's just known as the bad one because it had the least memorable Bond - George Lazenby - in his only appearance.

 

Timothy Dalton was a harder-edged more realistic Bond and maybe audiences just weren't looking for that right after the silliness of most of the Roger Moore flicks. But The Living Daylights is one of my favorite Bond films. License to Kill wasn't bad either, but it strayed a little too far from the formula for my tastes. It kinda felt like they just bought a generic action script and stuck James Bond in the role of the main character. It had its moments, though.

 

I think most of the people on that list are far too well-known to play Bond. The character of James Bond should always be much bigger than the actor he's being portrayed by. He shouldn't be played by a major star like Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Ewan McGregor etc. I've also never liked the idea of Bond being played by an Australian. He's a British icon, he should be played by a Brit. And it's not really that I don't think an Australian actor could do it, it just feels like an insult to my intelligence because I know that somewhere at MGM some studio exec is saying "oh we don't need someone from Britain, just put an Australian in there - American audiences can't tell the difference."

 

Anyway, you're right Nick, Brosnan's been wasted a bit on the last few movies. He deserves a slightly harder-edged plot like GoldenEye, or the Dalton or Connery movies. So if they want to reinvent the franchise I hope they go in that direction, instead of leaning towards the glossier, dumbed down xXx option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well said. I forget Moonraker, but i recall thinkin Diamonds are Forever was ineed weak, and i can see what youre saying on the casting importance.

 

I think what makes me recall OHMSS so poorly was more the plot; as i recall, 007 setled down, got married etc, but like Pacino in Godfather III, they "pulled him back in", via assasinating her (again its been years, correct me if im wrong here)...just felt like a much bigger stray from the formula than i think ive seen, personally.

 

Cant agree more about the XxX factor; i never read ay of the Ian Flemming novels, but i recall Bond being wittier than the one-liners alone, and way cooler than just "im a badass, here's a bunch of shit im gonna make explode."

 

On that note, seein a 007 fan with good taste, here's a few quick questions, wanna see what you think:

 

1) Friend of mine thought "The Thomas Crown Affair" was almost a bond movie in itself, i never saw it. You think that's about right, or no?

 

2) Are the days of recurring enemines - Jaws, Dr No etc - over for Bond? Cause i almost wanted to see more of 006, but no villians since then.

 

3) On a side note, whatd you think of The Saint, in and of itself? Ive seen people love it & hate it...

 

ok, now lets pretend this was in the "Ask SB" thread like ti prolly shoulda been. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) Yeah it was pretty Bond-ish, but I recall the Thomas Crown Affair (we're talking the Brosnan remake, right?) having a much slower pace, probably a lot slower than it should've been. The beginning was good, the ending was good, but everything in the middle was really slow, if I remember correctly.

 

2) Considering Bond usually does a pretty good job of killing his villains now, I'd say the recurring enemies are indeed over. Like superhero movies, Bond movies always benefit from a different villain, not because different villains bring a variety to the series or anything - in fact, they're all pretty similar - but different villains allow a new and usually great actor to have fun with the franchise. The recurring good guys have stayed strong, though. Throughout the Roger Moore and Timothy Dalton films, there was often an American agent named Felix Leiter who worked with Bond until he was mauled by a shark (yes, a shark) in License to Kill. The Brosnan flicks have had recurring characters like Joe Don Baker's CIA agent, and Robbie Coltrane's Russian gangster. The studio has also been trying to bring back Michelle Yeoh's character from Tomorrow Never Dies but they haven't gotten the chance yet. So, yeah, I'd say there won't be anymore recurring villains, but at least they brought Jaws back for the videogame. :D

 

3) The Saint wasn't bad. I didn't like Val Kilmer in the lead role and I thought the ending was really anti-climactic, but it had some great stuff in it.

 

By the way, OHMSS did stray from the Bond formula a bit, particularly with Bond getting married, but it's also one of the defining moments of the character. During the Connery pictures, Bond was just a womanizer. After his wife got killed in OHMSS, Bond's womanizing became more of a defense mechanism. It's touched upon a lot in some of the later movies - particularly with Dalton and Brosnan who both manage to add it into their performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jason Stathum is too much of a tough guy to be James Bond and he doesnt have the smoothness, but he'd make a great villian. Clive Owen would be awesome hes totally sexy, and British. and Daniel Craig is rumored to be an option, but I dont think hes sexy at all.

 

You know who would be interesting says Jake, Ewan McGregor, but I dont know if he could pull it off. Just interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I agree, I've always wanted to see Jason Statham in a Bond movie. He could be a villain or maybe even another 00 agent. But yes, he's too rugged for Bond. I also think Clive Owen's a little too rugged, but that's just me.

 

Ewan McGregor's always been on the rumored list. Personally, I think Ewan's been doing too many sweet, good-natured roles as of late (and I don't blame him, it's what he does best) so it'd be hard to see him have the darker edge that the Bond character needs. Plus, after Moulin Rouge, Big Fish and particularly Star Wars, he's just become too famous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts in a nutshell:

 

The series is cliched, yes, but unlike many films/franchises, that's it's strength.

 

I don't want to see any actor that I've seen before portray any character that's already part of the public consciousness. Like when Richard Lee died and they were looking for a new Professor Dumbledore, lots of people threw out Ian McCellean because of how well he played a long-white-bearded wizard in LOTR. While McCellean played two characters that were part of the public consciousness (Gandalf and Magneto), he looked so different and played them so differently, it was OK, but I wouldn't have been able to watch McCellean play Dumbledore without seeing Gandalf, no matter how good he could have played it.

 

So...if Christian Bale might make a great Bond, but I'm not going to be able to see him as Bond without seeing Bruce Wayne after I watch the new Batflick. It's a shame, but that's how I feel. Jackman would look completely different as Bond than he does as Logan, but I just can't see him play Bond. Clive Owen - Not classically handsome enough. Jude Law - doesn't look liek he could handle himself in a tough spot, it's wouldn't be convincing. It's a tough call.

 

Damn, that was a bigger nutshell than I expected to type.

Edited by Jack's Meandering Thoughts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

well I like the Bonds...wouldnt mind seeing Brosnan stay another film, maybe 2. I was just saying if they do get a new one, I'd like to see someone least expected, for the very reasons JAX just said...dont want a familair face as 007.

 

If Bale got Batman after a Bond flick then it would have fit...for Bond anyways, but that would throw off having a Double O batman. I agree whole heartedly reference Jude Law, I dont see pretty boy pulling off a top notch agent... though he didnt do too bad in Enemy at the Gates as a sniper. But I guess the russian war makes everyone ugly.

 

Daniel Craig is begging for the part, and Clive Owen doesnt seem to want it. Only problem I see with Craig, is that I see Mr. Bean for some reason, every time I look at him.

 

Dominic West would be a quieter face who could take the role, but his look isnt as suave as it could be, a lil more rugged than usual.

 

I like Hugh Jackman, I think he can pull off the charm bit as Bond, but I don't think he would best replace Pierce.

 

If Liam Neeson wasn't branded as Qui Gon Jinn... then he wouldnt be so bad a pick.

 

Nick Moran from lock stock would be alright, if he buffed up a little and worked on charm.

 

Max Ryan might do the trick, he's prolly most familair from League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.

 

Now... I read someone a good while ago, that singer Robbie Williams contemplated fighting for the role... if anyone can dig up some 411 on that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont think Christian Bale would make a good Bond but thats just me I totally dont see him in the part, I just cant picture it, plus he's doing Batman. And Im a firm believer that you shouldnt play Batman and Bond and be the main star in the crap remake of Psycho lol Just my opinion(said with french accent)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I believe the latest contenders for Bond are Clive Owen(King Arthur/ Sin City) and Julian McMahon (Charmed/ Fantastic 4). There's even been talk of taking Bond back to his younger days, w/ Orlando Bloom as the new 007?!

Edited by Darth Fett
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the latest contenders for Bond are Clive Owen(King Arthur/ Sin City) and Julian McMahon (Charmed/ Fantastic 4). There's even been talk of taking Bond back to his younger days, w/ Orlando Bloom as the new 007?!

 

 

A series of books is being published now that follows the adventures of a teenage Bond, meant for teenage readers - no crazy spy stuff or stupid crossovers with characters from the movies, just plain old teenage adventure stuff (kinda like Young Indy, I guess). I'm fairly certain it was a movie-version of that that Bloom was being considered for, but that fell through anyway. Though there are talks of letting Martin Campbell restart the Bond series with a younger Bond - like Batman Begins or The Sum of All Fears did for their respectives series - Bloom has never been linked to that part. Owen has consistently denied ever being talked to about the role, but I wouldn't put it past them to go after him for it. As for McMahon, I've never heard anything official about him being considered, most of the rumors about him being on the list were started by him. He's made no secret of the fact that he badly wants the role and thinks he should get it. I personally, think he's wrong for it and would be better suited as a Bond villain (or, say, Dr Doom) but that's just me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you say

 

A series of books is being published now that follows the adventures of a teenage Bond, meant for teenage readers

 

do you mean...

 

jbjr01.jpgjbjr02.jpgjbjr03.jpg

jbjr04.jpgjbjr05.jpgjbjr06.jpg

jbjr07.jpgjbjr08.jpgjbjr09.jpg

jbjr10.jpgjbjr11.jpgjbjr12.jpg

 

Because if so, let's be honst with ourselves. Is Orlando Bloom a good enough actor to take on a role as meaty as this one?

Edited by Jack's Meandering Thoughts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...