Henry Cavill wants 007 role, but let's ponder Kit Harington!!
Felix the Leitercat
Posts: 52MI6 Agent
Hello ajb007 nation, been awhile since I have posted, hope all is well.
Henry Cavill created a stir a while back, openly coveting the 007 role. I think Cavill is a fine actor who would bring a lot to the part but I think Kit Harington, Game of Thrones' Jon Snow, now commander of the Night's Watch, possesses all the needed qualities to make a great James Bond. He's true Union Jack British, even related distantly to royalty going back to the Tudors, I recall reading somewhere.
Not to turn this into a Games of Thrones message board, but briefly, as Jon Snow, Harington has proven he can be rebellious, defiant of authority if he thinks his plan is better than the higher-ups, is a great warrior who can sometimes inspire others, is capable of measured thought and strategy or quick impulsive gut instinct, spur of the moment action.
He has infiltrated enemy lines, posed as one of them, bedded a female agent operative. He also has some of the Bond world weariness where every once in a while 007 is tired of the grapples with whatever philosophy or inner workings drive him to do what he does.
One thing Harington also does well in his acting is his cold realism; it's not a situation we want, but it's a situation we must deal with as it exists, regardless of likes/dislikes.
Harington also fights like Bond. He is strong, well trained but not overwhelmingly large like Arnold as Conan or supersize Cavill. He wins by skill, endurance, really goes the distance and gets bloodied like Daniel Craig, and also sees a quick unforseen advantage/opening and takes it to beat down often larger opponents--whether it's Jaws or a Wildling warrior with a battle axe, that is a lot of angry enemy to deal with. Harington has that last man standing quality often needed by 007.
I think Cavill would be fine if he toughened up, got a bit more cold blooded--he's required as Superman to be an all-powerful good guy, with Midwest Kansas family values, so Bond would obviously need a different approach, and perhaps he might shrink down from his Charles Atlas Superman physique. Bond has never had a superheavyweight boxer build, he's supposed to remain more human and believable in a fight than that. Harington would obviously have to lose the lion's mane hair and mustache, but that's hair and makeup and costuming work. l
Would enjoy hearing from ajb'ers and are there any other promising players you think who could take on the mantle from Daniel Craig, who has plenty of shelf life left, not looking to put him out to pasture by any means?!
Thanks,regards, Felix The Leitercat B-) -{
Henry Cavill created a stir a while back, openly coveting the 007 role. I think Cavill is a fine actor who would bring a lot to the part but I think Kit Harington, Game of Thrones' Jon Snow, now commander of the Night's Watch, possesses all the needed qualities to make a great James Bond. He's true Union Jack British, even related distantly to royalty going back to the Tudors, I recall reading somewhere.
Not to turn this into a Games of Thrones message board, but briefly, as Jon Snow, Harington has proven he can be rebellious, defiant of authority if he thinks his plan is better than the higher-ups, is a great warrior who can sometimes inspire others, is capable of measured thought and strategy or quick impulsive gut instinct, spur of the moment action.
He has infiltrated enemy lines, posed as one of them, bedded a female agent operative. He also has some of the Bond world weariness where every once in a while 007 is tired of the grapples with whatever philosophy or inner workings drive him to do what he does.
One thing Harington also does well in his acting is his cold realism; it's not a situation we want, but it's a situation we must deal with as it exists, regardless of likes/dislikes.
Harington also fights like Bond. He is strong, well trained but not overwhelmingly large like Arnold as Conan or supersize Cavill. He wins by skill, endurance, really goes the distance and gets bloodied like Daniel Craig, and also sees a quick unforseen advantage/opening and takes it to beat down often larger opponents--whether it's Jaws or a Wildling warrior with a battle axe, that is a lot of angry enemy to deal with. Harington has that last man standing quality often needed by 007.
I think Cavill would be fine if he toughened up, got a bit more cold blooded--he's required as Superman to be an all-powerful good guy, with Midwest Kansas family values, so Bond would obviously need a different approach, and perhaps he might shrink down from his Charles Atlas Superman physique. Bond has never had a superheavyweight boxer build, he's supposed to remain more human and believable in a fight than that. Harington would obviously have to lose the lion's mane hair and mustache, but that's hair and makeup and costuming work. l
Would enjoy hearing from ajb'ers and are there any other promising players you think who could take on the mantle from Daniel Craig, who has plenty of shelf life left, not looking to put him out to pasture by any means?!
Thanks,regards, Felix The Leitercat B-) -{
Comments
But remember anything is possible
1. Thunderball 2. FRWL 3. Casino Royale 4. TLD 5. OHMSS 6. SkyFall 7. GF 8. TSWLM 9. GE 10. FYEO
No. 24, I think you meant Kit is 5ft 8 not 6ft 8, that would make him Jaws in size?? You're giving a tough Roger Ebert thumbs down to the acting of Cavill and Harington--I recognize the names you mention, don't recall their faces, what are a few things they have been in? I enjoy a lot of the British,Irish,Canadian talents on Game of Thrones, the Tudors, the one year of Camelot, and other history oriented dramas. May have seen them in those.
Cavill to me seems huge, more Conan the Barbarian weightlifter guy than Christopher Reeve who pumped up a lot for the Superman role and looked solid and strong, but not musclebound. Again, all Bonds have had an athletic quality, even good old Roger Moore, Mr. Civilized Bond, could do the fisticuffs things when he was younger. Cavill looks like he would KO any bad guy that came his way in a physical non weapon fight.
Cavill was very good in The Tudors, his character Sir Charles Brandon, was right hand lord to Henry the 8th, and was a plotter, schemer, warrior general and enforcer, bedded a number of royal ladies--sometimes hotheaded, sometimes cool, wise and foolish, felt strong sense of duty and honor to his majesty. So that's a lot to draw on in my conception of what he could do as Bond, definitely more than his Mr. Congeniality Superman role.
Felix The Leitercat, thanks, regards -{ B-)
I don't think Cavill is usually much more "buildt" than some Bond actors, and he is traditional Bond height.
Clive Standen is best known for playing Rollo in HBO's Vikings, but he co-starred in Robin Hood and Camelot. He is very atheletic and carismatic and has a traditional Bond look.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1641140/
Aaron Taylor-Johnson is probably still best known for playing Kick-Ass, but he also starred in Savages, Godzilla, Anna Karenina and now Avengers: Age of Ultron.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1093951/?ref_=nv_sr_1
Under the radar guy.
I was probably a bit to critical about Cavill and Harrington's acting skills. They are no Daniel Day-Lewis', but they are OK.
Sorry I was away, I was off shopping in Sweden ...
Actually, he might work..
You are probably thinking of Richard Armitage. He was a good canidate ten years ago, but now he's 43 years old. When Craig steps down he'll be close to 50.
Finding someone to play Bond, then, is tough. People who griped about Daniel Craig's appearance discounted that there weren't too many actors today who looked like him -- his resemblance to Steve McQueen seemed the strongest qualifier. What the actor playing Bond has to do, to some degree, is redefine what a leading man looks like. People forget that that's exactly what Connery did when he was cast in the role.
I like this photo of Cary Grant and Sean Connery to illustrate. Both here are without makeup, but you can see that Connery's features are coarser and darker than Grant's, who was more like the previous generation's concept of the leading man. The differences may be subtle, but after Connery's success as Bond, it was easier for someone who looked more like Connery to become the leading man.
Again, I am judging at his qualities from a limited perspective of seeing that Camelot work, does he have a look, the fighting ability, woman getting potential, sense of mission and purpose?? Judging from his acting that I have seen he might fill the bill if you want Bond, like Craig, to come from a dark place. One thing that would concern me re: Cavill would be that he can no longer be Mr. Affable Superhero you would like to have a hamburger with, but a secret agent who will be ruthless about staying on mission and has that fateful license to kill. Cavill is impossibly good looking at times, he seems more in the Roger Moore, Pierce Brosnan, Bond with a streak of the socialite vein.
So in that context I would say Standen has natural dark qualities that Cavill does not have, but again to be fair, these guys get cast as they get cast and they don't always have a say in what they are offered and what they need to take to keep working, viable etc. If cast, I am sure Cavill would work at it hard and do a fine job. And from a cold blooded box office standpt, the Brocolli-Wilson regime knows what kind of audience Cavill is building with Man of Steel and now Superman vs Batman. Do they dare make a simple concession to the fact that Bond does compete vs the Avengers, and now Justice League of America is being planted by DC, and they'll go mega star with a prior track record for once?? Food for thought.
Felix the Leitercat, thanks, regards, B-) -{
Could talk about the vintage of a great champagne, enjoy a luxury hotel in glamorous city, turn right around and shoot Dr. No's henchman when he got the drop on him very cool and efficient like--"That's a Smith and Wesson and you've had your six" and poof went the silencer.
Sean could do the making love talk with a gal in bed and then rip her bikini bra top off and threaten to strangle her, "Now where is Blofeld?"
He had a great ability to turn the boiling hot or icy cool water on and off, quickly too, what I liked about him the most. Certainly the menace and the strong impulses underneath the surface were some of the strengths of the great Sean.
Felix the Leitercat, thanks, regards -{ B-)
Out of those two, I think I'd rather see Cavill play Bond. Kit Harington is somewhat vertically challenged. He isn't 'tall' by any stretch of the imagination, and Bond is meant to be tall - at least, above average. Fleming put Bond's height at 6' which, back in the 50s, was probably a tad bit taller than the average adult English male.
I've said years ago on this board that I'd like to see Cavill play Bond one day. He's now the right age, he's physically the right size (although he could slim down a bit) and, in my opinion, has the right looks for Bond. Now, whether he can play the role as well as his predecessors remain to be seen, but from what I've seen so far, I like his work.
I would be in favour of Standen getting the role. I don't think I've seen any of his films yet, though.
I think he's too young. He's only 24 - way too young to play Bond. Maybe in 7-10 years, after whoever succeeds Craig has had his turn.
Personally, however, I'd like to see Nicholas Hoult as Bond. He's about six months older than Taylor-Johnson, so he's still too young to take the role now. But in 7-10 years, he'd be ripe for the role.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0396558/
I think DC will make at least one Bond after SPECTRE, so the role might be open for others around 2020, making Aaron Taylor-Johnson at least 30 when DC quits Bond. Both Connery and Lazenby were in their early thirties when they got the role, so Taylor-Johnson is just old enough to be the next Bond.
Fair point. If we go by the pattern of one Bond every three years, the movie after SPECTRE will be released in 2018, and that will be Craig's swansong (although he'll be 50 in 2018!). So the film after that will be released in 2021, at which point Taylor-Johnson will be 31, and Hoult will be 32. But again, I think I'd prefer to see Nicholas Hoult as Bond over Aaron Taylor-Johnson.
In any event, I'd still like to see Cavill get his shot before it's too late. Cavill will be 38 in 2021, same age that Craig was when he made his debut in Casino Royale.
I've only just seen the trailer for that - can't wait to see the rest of it!
Forward to the Spooks movie, out next week. -{
I think he is a leftfield candidate, but also an interesting one.
But I'm not ruling myself out of the running yet, as with these two out of the picture
I must be higher up the list of possibilities.