It's two film in, what do you think of Ben Wishaw as Q?
My personal opinion is that I think it is a genius bit of casting. The last time we saw Craig and Wishaw on screen together prior to this, Wishaw has just popped a cap into DC and legged it.
To move to a younger Q had to be the right thing to do. As poor John Cleese found out, to have an old chap doing it just meant someone impersonating Desmond LLewelyn. Having a younger person to do it moves with the times. Younger people are, in the main, more tech savvy. Our new Q is probably some Oxbridge graduate who was whipped up by MI6 due to his prodigious skills.
Having someone younger than Bond who is clearly senior to him makes a far more interesting vehicle for some great dialogue. You can see, especially in Spectre, that although Q is a higher rank than Bond, he also idolises him. Isn't that more interesting than an old codger telling him off all the time?
I hated him in SF, but I loved him in SP. His character just didn't make any sense at all in SF. Why would M hire an immature and inexperienced kid to be the head of Q-Branch? He doesn't prove himself either. In SP he proves himself to be an adult. But M in SF made so many mistakes that I agreed with Mallory that it was time for her to step down.
Same; nothing wrong with his performance in Skyfall but with the writing of the character. There's no reason why the character can't be young and intelligent without trying to be a parody of today's tech-savvy youth.
Yes, I agree he's excellent. One of the best aspects of SP, IMO, is the great chemistry Bond's supporting cast all have with one another. That said, I think Eon should guard against turning the films into full-blown ensemble pieces.
This is spot-on. I loved the supporting cast as a combo but feel that Bond gets a little lost in SP at the end. It made me wonder whether Craig needs to freshen his take on Bond up a bit; he's a lot better when he's cold and bitter like in QoS (rather than self-pitying in SF). I don't mind them trying to add some humour but the humour needs to fit with Craig's style.
What I particularly love about both Mr Wishaw as Q2 and Miss Harris as EMP is I get the same happy feeling and start smiling when they appear on screen as their characters as much as the much missed Mr Llewellyn and Ms Maxwell. I feel a little bit different about Ralph Finnes as M-Malry, because he brings something new to the position with his M. - Menace. We have seen that Mallory is as capable with firearms and combat as Bond or EMP. Something we never got to see any of the previous M's do.
I think it's an interesting dynamic; M is now not greatly older than Bond so they've probably had similar experiences and lived/worked in the same political climates.
It will be interesting to see how long they run with him as Q. How will he handle the transition to middle age and older age depending on how long they keep him. Desmond was able to handle the computerized gadgets well because it wasn't commonplace at that time. Will Whishaw be able to pull off the geeky computer wizard style Q at age 45,50,50+?
I don't see why not; Whishaw is only twelve years younger than Craig but has a very boyish face so can capitalise on that for a little while longer. There's older actors who have been playing boyish charm for years.
If Ben wants to stay with the roll. It would be very interesting to see it
unfold. As at the minute he's younger than Bond, but after another actor or two
He'd be the older guy. I'm certain this would be very interesting for an actor to
Play with -{
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Yes, I agree he's excellent. One of the best aspects of SP, IMO, is the great chemistry Bond's supporting cast all have with one another. That said, I think Eon should guard against turning the films into full-blown ensemble pieces.
This is spot-on. I loved the supporting cast as a combo but feel that Bond gets a little lost in SP at the end. It made me wonder whether Craig needs to freshen his take on Bond up a bit; he's a lot better when he's cold and bitter like in QoS (rather than self-pitying in SF). I don't mind them trying to add some humour but the humour needs to fit with Craig's style.
I felt the humour was a good fit and that Daniel handled it well. I totally see that Bond should not be an ensemble piece.The problem is that with actors this good the temptation is to use them more (as with JD as M) perhaps a focus on one per film.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Yes, I agree he's excellent. One of the best aspects of SP, IMO, is the great chemistry Bond's supporting cast all have with one another. That said, I think Eon should guard against turning the films into full-blown ensemble pieces.
This is spot-on. I loved the supporting cast as a combo but feel that Bond gets a little lost in SP at the end. It made me wonder whether Craig needs to freshen his take on Bond up a bit; he's a lot better when he's cold and bitter like in QoS (rather than self-pitying in SF). I don't mind them trying to add some humour but the humour needs to fit with Craig's style.
I felt the humour was a good fit and that Daniel handled it well. I totally see that Bond should not be an ensemble piece.The problem is that with actors this good the temptation is to use them more (as with JD as M) perhaps a focus on one per film.
I feel that DC is best suited to spikier humour like CR; maybe something darker like some of the lines TD got in LTK.
It is hard when they have good actors in the ensemble and JD was fab as M. However Brosnan was still the 'star' whereas Craig kind of disappears near the end of Spectre. I think there is a balance between making the most of great actors and making sure that Bond is the main attraction, whereas in SP it felt as if the supporting cast were much better and more interesting, because they're the ones who have to pick up the pieces if Bond fails. There's no reason why all the supporting cast can't have their moment/get their one-liner but Bond does need to be the best thing in it. I love GoldenEye but Sean Bean is so good in that that I didn't really care about Bond.
I think he's a great Q. One of my few (only?) bragging points in this forum (or life?) is that I suggested Ben Wishaw as Q several weeks before his casting was announced. I believe I was the first here on the forum to suggest that piece of casting :007)
Comments
I think so, he might turn into a more geeky version of James May and his man lab lol
"Better make that two."
Great post. Exactly my thoughts.
Same; nothing wrong with his performance in Skyfall but with the writing of the character. There's no reason why the character can't be young and intelligent without trying to be a parody of today's tech-savvy youth.
This is spot-on. I loved the supporting cast as a combo but feel that Bond gets a little lost in SP at the end. It made me wonder whether Craig needs to freshen his take on Bond up a bit; he's a lot better when he's cold and bitter like in QoS (rather than self-pitying in SF). I don't mind them trying to add some humour but the humour needs to fit with Craig's style.
I think it's an interesting dynamic; M is now not greatly older than Bond so they've probably had similar experiences and lived/worked in the same political climates.
I don't see why not; Whishaw is only twelve years younger than Craig but has a very boyish face so can capitalise on that for a little while longer. There's older actors who have been playing boyish charm for years.
unfold. As at the minute he's younger than Bond, but after another actor or two
He'd be the older guy. I'm certain this would be very interesting for an actor to
Play with -{
I felt the humour was a good fit and that Daniel handled it well. I totally see that Bond should not be an ensemble piece.The problem is that with actors this good the temptation is to use them more (as with JD as M) perhaps a focus on one per film.
I feel that DC is best suited to spikier humour like CR; maybe something darker like some of the lines TD got in LTK.
It is hard when they have good actors in the ensemble and JD was fab as M. However Brosnan was still the 'star' whereas Craig kind of disappears near the end of Spectre. I think there is a balance between making the most of great actors and making sure that Bond is the main attraction, whereas in SP it felt as if the supporting cast were much better and more interesting, because they're the ones who have to pick up the pieces if Bond fails. There's no reason why all the supporting cast can't have their moment/get their one-liner but Bond does need to be the best thing in it. I love GoldenEye but Sean Bean is so good in that that I didn't really care about Bond.