Who do you want for Bond 7?

I think what also hurt Timothy Dalton–especially in the U.S.–was that he had the specter of Pierce Brosnan looming over him. Most people wanted Brosnan as Bond and he was thisclose to getting the role and then it was taken away from him at the literal 12th hour. As a result, Dalton could never shake that he was the #2 choice no matter what Cubby Broccoli said.

The other things that hurt Dalton was the overloaded meat grinder that was the summer of '89 film schedule which got Licence To Kill criminally overlooked. And then of course the six-year delay due to lawsuits killed the rest of his tenure.

Dalton was a good Bond but really unlucky.

7 Likes

And not just any TV shows. We’ve been watching The Saint on Plex, and it’s remarkable how closely his performance as Simon Templar aligns with his later performance as James Bond. Something Roger Moore had going for him was that he was a known quantity playing a character with traits similar to Bond’s (at least as moviegoers had come to expect thus far). Pierce Brosnan benefited from the same “known quantity” element.

6 Likes

I’ve been thinking more about the question of whether the next Bond should be played by a known actor, and I’ve realised that something else in my thinking has changed.

I’ve been arguing against the idea of casting an unknown for a while now. Historically, though, part of my preference for an actor without much baggage came from the fact that, for the first five actors I saw as Bond, Bond was the role I knew them from first. They were Bond to me before they were anything else. Craig was different, because I’d already seen him in several films and had actually sought out Layer Cake specifically because of his performance.

But the more films I watch, the more familiar faces I see turning up, and the less this bothers me. It would be wonderful if every actor were Gary Oldman and could completely disappear into every character they play, but that’s simply not how most actors work.

The revelation I’ve had is that I’m actually becoming much more comfortable with seeing the actor playing the character. I may have seen them play completely different characters before, and that’s OK. I don’t necessarily need to forget that I’m watching [actor’s name]. I just need to believe that, in this particular film, they’re James Bond.

I think that’s a subtle distinction, but it’s changed how I look at casting. I’m no longer worrying about whether an actor has too much of an existing identity for me to accept them as Bond. I’m more interested in whether they can bring the qualities I want to the role and make me believe in their interpretation of the character.

And I think there’s another reason why an established actor makes sense. We’re living in a much more uncertain time when it comes to box office performance. The IP alone isn’t necessarily enough to carry a franchise anymore. A proven lead, surrounded by a credible supporting cast, gives an audience something else to trust.

Bond doesn’t necessarily need an unknown actor who can become Bond in the public imagination. He may benefit from an actor who already has an audience, has demonstrated that they can carry a film, and is ready to take on the role.

Perhaps the ideal isn’t an actor I don’t recognise. Perhaps it’s an actor I recognise, but can still believe as Bond.

5 Likes

The known name thingy is a two-edged sword: it might have landed us with Hugh Grant or Hugh Jackman - or in a really weird world with Robbie Williams.

Perhaps somebody intervened with the gods of farce after Robbie’s first film and they agreed to turn back time so we got a lesser known Bond but now we’re stuck with this world and the gods of farce can’t stop ROTFL…

3 Likes

I strongly believe IP is the only thing to carry anything these days.

Robert Downey jr. as Iron Man = box office gold.

In any non IP movie? Flop.

Hugh Jackman as Wolverine. Hugh Jackman in any other film (only „The Greatest Showman“, as a sleeper and not as an instant success, is the exception of the rule here).

Heck, Brosnan as Bond. Craig as Bond (except his other IP…)

We need a great actor. Maybe someone who got prepackaged as Bond like Moore or Brosnan. But I prefer an unknown who can breakout as Bond.

3 Likes

And yet the box office disaster stories of the year are around Star Wars and DC, while the box office success stories (not the highest grosses overall) are original movies from first-time directors.

Bond is coming from a strong place compared to the other franchises. The years of waiting make it feel like an event, and it hasn’t been diluted with years of spin-offs and substandard movies. But success is not guaranteed. Hiring Denis Villeneuve is a good first step in building faith with the audience, but I feel they could benefit from a leading man we know can carry a film.

5 Likes

Well, I would argue that the IP flops this year did not have strong enough IP or were already, as you say, diluted.

Bond has the advantage of not having flooded the market (gee, I never thought not getting a new one for years is great!). But it has the disadvantage of losing the young audience which now has grown up without their generation‘s Bond (so far).

Still, the IP remains attractive. Putting a famous actor into it would probably bring in that actor‘s fanbase - but who else?

This was what Cubby was afraid of: Mel Gibson as Bond sells tickets, but not more in the long run, and the Bond IP has to step back, remaining in the shadow of the star.

The difference these days: there are no huge stars made anymore, the big ones are from decades ago.

Lots of flash in the pan-stardom, but burned out stardom will not help Bond either.

5 Likes

Still not convinced that Villeneuve is the right man for the job after Dune 2…

4 Likes

https://collider.com/james-bond-casting-search-next-round-of-auditions-happening-now/

Given the source it’s probably a guess but still thought I’d share.

4 Likes

I agree with Richard Osman, who coincidentally has provided a recurring role for Bond no.5

I say like I’ve been quiet about my preference for Jack Lowden

IMG_0184

3 Likes

If true I would be thrilled.

Lowden has the chops to play dramatic AND light and funny. Also, he is not the pretty boy but a man.

Oh, please, make this happen.

3 Likes

I’m not familiar with Lowden’s work. Just another rumour at this stage. Whoever gets the role has to convince the audience they were the best possible choice in the world, especially considering how long this discussion has been had since Craig left.

4 Likes

It started LONG before Craig actually left. It’s just what they do on a slow news day. It’s more Richard Osman is a more credible source than we usually get.

4 Likes

That’s all this is.

4 Likes

He would be so good.

3 Likes

Yes, please.

4 Likes

I’d be happy if he got the bag. Slow Horses is great and I remember him making an impression when I saw Dunkirk. But agreed, too early to know. It’s just nice knowing things are actually moving again. I can’t believe the last time cameras rolled on a Bond film was 2019.

5 Likes

I`d say definitely much too old for Amazon…and who thinks we will go blonde again?

2 Likes

He clearly dyes it.

Also 3 - 4 films without delays is not a pipe dream when you aren’t panicking where to get money every two films.

5 Likes

Enough time has passed to relaunch the series, especially considering the way NTTD ended. At this point, for better or worse, I just want the show back on the road. I do think Craig will be hard to beat but the series can’t die with his Bond. A new approach can excite the fanbase in a different way, and it’s logical that’s the path they’ll take.

3 Likes