The OP lists all the Bond actors and their height - assuming he's right, they ARE all over six foot tall...so that kind of blows the legs off your stance...
To be fair, the OP lists Craig with 5'10 and in my book this is below 6'
I did type "apart from Craig"....I know this requires you to read and comprehend and that its my fault for expecting you to be able to do two things at once...for that I apologise
Craig is the only official Bond actor under 6 feet tall, and I never implied otherwise. You suggested that no actress taller than Bond has been cast because the first five Bonds were so tall. My point was that they haven't cast any actresses taller than Bond and that includes Craig's Bond. I don't see how the fact that the first five bond actors blows the legs off my stance in any way.
I don't think my views are outdated and the fact that the Bond producers have cast only actresses less tall than Bond suggests they share my view.
Say, Diana Rigg was cast for OHMSS because of her looks and acting ability. Many of the "angels of death" such as the Norwegian Julie Ege were cast maninly because of their looks. Part of my point is that with a taller Bond they can cast a wider net, so to speak - they don't have to reject a beautiful and talented actress simply because she is 5'10'' or 5' 11''. She can compete for the role alongside shorter actresses and they can pick the best one.
Say, Diana Rigg was cast for OHMSS because of her looks and acting ability. Many of the "angels of death" such as the Norwegian Julie Ege were cast maninly because of their looks. Part of my point is that with a taller Bond they can cast a wider net, so to speak - they don't have to reject a beautiful and talented actress simply because she is 5'10'' or 5' 11''. She can compete for the role alongside shorter actresses and they can pick the best one.
My point is...why do they HAVE to reject an actress just because she is taller...? My other point is that your views on this are outdated....which you seem to prove with every post...
Say, Diana Rigg was cast for OHMSS because of her looks and acting ability. Many of the "angels of death" such as the Norwegian Julie Ege were cast maninly because of their looks. Part of my point is that with a taller Bond they can cast a wider net, so to speak - they don't have to reject a beautiful and talented actress simply because she is 5'10'' or 5' 11''. She can compete for the role alongside shorter actresses and they can pick the best one.
My point is...why do they HAVE to reject an actress just because she is taller...? My other point is that your views on this are outdated....which you seem to prove with every post...
It's not forbidden by law to cast an actress against a shorter leading man, it's just was and is very unusuall. Personally I find it funny that you are so upset because of something filmmakers have done and still do in almost every movie they make. And if they do, they generally try to use camera angels, cutting, perspective and other tricks to hide that fact. There are of cource exeptions, but in the real world this is how it's usually done. You may like it or dislike it or not care, but I think this is getting silly and I'm getting out of this discussion.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,924Chief of Staff
It's not forbidden by law to cast an actress against a shorter leading man, it's just was and is very unusuall. Personally I find it funny that you are so upset because of something filmmakers have done and still do in almost every movie they make. And if they do, they generally try to use camera angels, cutting, perspective and other tricks to hide that fact. There are of cource exeptions, but in the real world this is how it's usually done. You may like it or dislike it or not care, but I think this is getting silly and I'm getting out of this discussion.
Who's upset ?:) I thought this was a discussion ?
I'm asking YOU why you take the stance you do...you haven't answered for yourself...you just say what others do...but you do appear to have an issue with this and I'm just trying to find out why....if you can't answer as to why you have an issue with this, I suppose that will have to do...
I am 6'1" (185cm) and weigh 200 lbs (91 kg).
Athletic build. Dark feautures and dark brown hair. I am also the right age: 38.
I am the right height but weigh too much to resemble the literary Bond.
Those heights are bogus. Roger Moore (before Craig) was ostensibly the shortest Bond and no way 6ft 1". Easy enough to reference this by him in front of Yaphet Kotto or Christopher Lee (6ft 5/6") who was clearly at least half a foot taller than Moore when back to back with him in 'The Man with the Golden Gun'
Yep - fairly common knowledge that Moore is 6' 1". Look at a lot of the pictures of Moore with tony Curtis (5,9) and you'll see the same difference as between Moore and lee
Comments
Craig is the only official Bond actor under 6 feet tall, and I never implied otherwise. You suggested that no actress taller than Bond has been cast because the first five Bonds were so tall. My point was that they haven't cast any actresses taller than Bond and that includes Craig's Bond. I don't see how the fact that the first five bond actors blows the legs off my stance in any way.
I don't think my views are outdated and the fact that the Bond producers have cast only actresses less tall than Bond suggests they share my view.
Say, Diana Rigg was cast for OHMSS because of her looks and acting ability. Many of the "angels of death" such as the Norwegian Julie Ege were cast maninly because of their looks. Part of my point is that with a taller Bond they can cast a wider net, so to speak - they don't have to reject a beautiful and talented actress simply because she is 5'10'' or 5' 11''. She can compete for the role alongside shorter actresses and they can pick the best one.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
My point is...why do they HAVE to reject an actress just because she is taller...? My other point is that your views on this are outdated....which you seem to prove with every post...
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
It's not forbidden by law to cast an actress against a shorter leading man, it's just was and is very unusuall. Personally I find it funny that you are so upset because of something filmmakers have done and still do in almost every movie they make. And if they do, they generally try to use camera angels, cutting, perspective and other tricks to hide that fact. There are of cource exeptions, but in the real world this is how it's usually done. You may like it or dislike it or not care, but I think this is getting silly and I'm getting out of this discussion.
Who's upset ?:) I thought this was a discussion ?
I'm asking YOU why you take the stance you do...you haven't answered for yourself...you just say what others do...but you do appear to have an issue with this and I'm just trying to find out why....if you can't answer as to why you have an issue with this, I suppose that will have to do...
after all " Some make you taller ........ "
Thats very close to the literary Bonds 167 lbs...
Athletic build. Dark feautures and dark brown hair. I am also the right age: 38.
I am the right height but weigh too much to resemble the literary Bond.