I hate this thread, but you always come around to things you hate - Craig, TMWTGG, even NTTD eventually but maybe not the Jack White theme sing to QOS. So here goes...
I thought the rumour was ATJ had filmed a gunbarrel as an intro to an introductory press conference next year. A worthy little stunt, if true.
Regards the thread all along: please not Henry Cavill, one of the most wooden action heroes out there. He's too old and too associated with almost every franchise under the spotlight. Too much filmic baggage, can't hold a movie on his own without effects to cover his defects. Too old. Looks like a failed boxer. No finesse. Grumpy. Just plain NO.
Regards Bond 26 in general, its already taken too long to get the production rolling so if we get it, my money is on Bond 26 in 2026.
They're done with directors as well, but there doesn't seem to be one at the moment. Craig and his co-candidates were directed by Martin Campbell in their audition scenes because he was directing the film. Maybe they've secretly got one but it would seem a bit strange to me.
I seriously doubt the report is correct, but it is possible they're hiring a director for the occasion. Maybe Vic Armstrong or a former Bond main director. Unlikely, but possible.
It's possible, it's just that it seems like their style has always been to create the next film alongside a director, I don't think they've ever got down as far as casting without one. But yeah, basically we agree that the report is very probably nonsense 😊
At one good thing.....EON can't blame MGM's financial problems for any delays this time. Love 'em or hate 'em / for better or for worst Amazon has plenty of money.
Indulge me for a moment - hasn't it been about 4 years since NTTD completed filming? Is it in the realm of possibilities that they actually have something in the works, and we have just gotten complete radio silence from them + deflection?
I think that ever since the Producers got burned with all the negative publicity that resulted from those Sony email leaks during the production of Skyfall that EON really keeps a tight lid on things and do their best to control information. In this day and age of the internet, social media and the good old British Tabs so much is just made up stuff and click bait. My guess is that most of the rumors that turn out to be true emanate from EON themselves.
Obviously the next James Bond must be a good actor and have screen presence and charm, but how important is physical acting and stunts? Is it a goal to find someone who can do many of his own stunts?
The emphasis on acting ability is a bit of a red herring. It sounds good, but how important is it really for James Bond? I think not very. The best actor, by far, to ever play Bond was Timothy Dalton, yet his films were not overwhelming popular at the time, and few people cite him as their favorite—or even second favorite—James Bond. More important is screen presence, which is not the same thing as acting ability. And I agree that willingness and capability to do one’s own stunts is also of tremendous importance in order to differentiate Bond from the CGI-laden masses. Then of course there’s the screenplay itself, the director, the supporting cast, and the score. I rate all of these factors ahead of the lead’s acting ability. For me, that’s an added bonus and nothing more.
It may be hard for some people to hear this, but James Bond is not a deep character. He’s not meant to be. It’s escapism. Yes, Fleming’s Bond had some layers, but this is not high art. Fleming wasn’t just being modest when he made this point himself. The producers would do well to remember this, particularly after the melodrama of the last few films.
But Dalton's lack of popularity was one of timing - not only was the more serious take on Bond 20 years too early, but Dalton was hobbled out of the gate by a fanbase who expected Brosnan to take the role.
That said, screen presence and charisma do and should rank above acting "ability" - Connery owned the role through sheer charisma; his Bond wasn't a particularly layered one. But can there be a return to that? Much like Tom Cruise ruined the grade curve for practical stunts, I think Eon will be reluctant to return 007 to the level of two-dimensional escapism.
In my opinion the Bond actors should be good actors, but there's no need for them to be very good. They should do many of the stunts themselves and if he does all of them that would be great. They certainly can't go back to let the stunt men do almost all the stunts and some of the physical acting in the way of Roger Moore.
Most importantly, IMO, the new Bond actor needs to be able to convince the audience that they are James Bond, not a handsome model dressed up to look like Bond. That takes charisma, screen presence, convincing physicality, grace and an aura of danger. The litmus test for me is the PTS of TLD where any of the identically outfitted MI6 agents involved in that training exercise could have been Bond, when Dalton looks up at the camera you just know he IS Bond.
I genuinely like Pierce Brosnan and have enjoyed him in some movies. But this was always my feeling about him. He seemed to be playing Bond instead of embodying Bond. Just my opinion and I respect that others feel differently.
It's new years eve and I'm about to watch OHMSS. I'm thinking of what 2023 and what it has in store for us Bond fans. Will we get the name of more script writers? The director? The new MI6 regulars? Even the new James Bond? Perhaps a release date?
Or are you a pesimist/realist who thinks we won't get much real news?
I agree that screen presence and charisma can be more important than pure acting ability (as exemplified by Roger and Pierce’s success) but I’d say that can come with great acting ability too: as shown by Connery and Craig. And for me, being a very good actor, delivering a bit more drama or comedy by choosing the right look etc. can add an awful lot.
I think I’d also disagree that Dalton was clearly the best actor of the bunch. I wouldn’t say he’s bad or anything, but I think there are lots of repeated memes about him which aren’t perhaps entirely true, including supposedly being Welsh(!) and being a great Shakespearean actor, and personally I’d say Connery and Craig rank way above him as screen actors. They’ve given some truly great movie performances, and I can’t think of Dalton ever really giving a particularly notable one. What are his big roles? Wuthering Heights? Lion in Winter?
These are fun roles, yeah, but I'm not sure they qualify him as being the 'best actor to have played Bond'. I enjoy Flash as much as the next person, but it's not exactly Oscar-worthy stuff, is it? And if anyone's taking the supporting actor medal for it, it's Blessed 😅
(Funnily enough I think if he'd played Bond with the sensibility he brought to Flash, Fuzz and Rocketeer he might have been more successful)
Also, has Colwyn Bay been annexed?
Being born somewhere doesn't make you a native, though. If it did then we could call Boris Johnson an American and wash our hands of him 😁
Outside of the relatively small subset of people that pay attention to celebrity culture—who seem to be very much in support of Harry and Meghan—I don’t think anyone here gives a toss about them. They're going to find it very difficult to stay relevant in the States.
I think it’s all connected, though. Very few actors in modern cinema become big stars on acting ability alone. Screen presence and charisma are paramount. The same reason Dalton was not embraced as Bond is the reason why we can’t rattle off other memorable roles. Which goes back to my point that I think acting ability, while certainly not irrelevant, is pretty far down on the list of what it takes to be James Bond.
I think Moore and Brosnan had the "car salesman gene". They wanted to be stars and were very good at interviews, talk shows and the rest of that game. Dalton isn't like that I think. He wanted to be a good actor (as I'm sure the rest of them also wanted) and he wanted to be James Bond, but I don't think he wanted to be a movie star.
Well I agree that charisma and presence are hugely important and indeed paramount, yes, but I just think that the really great Bonds were excellent actors too, so I disagree that it's far down the list of important qualities. I'd certainly much rather have a top actor with great presence than one who has a comma of black hair etc. Of the last two Bonds we had one with great presence and one with great presence and acting skill, and I really preferred the second of those.
And I think if Dalton were such a good actor then we'd be able to think of some great acting performances. He's a good actor, I certainly wouldn't say he's bad at all, but perhaps just not as incredible as the received wisdom in Bond fandom would have it.
And I think he probably did want to be a movie star- if you want to be a great Shakespearian stage actor then you don't take roles in Charlie's Angels and Flash Gordon. Or indeed, James Bond 007.
In my opinion the Bond actors need to be good actors, perhaps now more than ever. Craig put the bar high. But the man playing Bond doesn't have to be a very good actor, being good is sufficient. Being a good actor is among the top three qualifications in my opinion, together with screen presence and appearance.
"And I think if Dalton were such a good actor then we'd be able to think of some great acting performances."
The initial parameter I responded to was "a particularly notable performance," which is subjective, but I think provided. But I think it must also be acknowledged that great or even notable performances are highly contingent upon opportunity. And while Dalton had one of the biggest, the fickle finger of fate decided he wasn't what the public wanted as Bond in 87/89, which hampered further opportunities.
And talent/greatness is no guarantee of a perfect track record; Connery did a lot of dreck post-Bond, both before and after his Oscar comeback in 87.
I'd say what ultimately made Dalton an interesting/distinct Bond did in fact come down to his acting ability and gravitas. That didn't line up with audience expectations as much as, say, Brosnan's blow-dried videogame version of the character.
Comments
I hate this thread, but you always come around to things you hate - Craig, TMWTGG, even NTTD eventually but maybe not the Jack White theme sing to QOS. So here goes...
I thought the rumour was ATJ had filmed a gunbarrel as an intro to an introductory press conference next year. A worthy little stunt, if true.
Regards the thread all along: please not Henry Cavill, one of the most wooden action heroes out there. He's too old and too associated with almost every franchise under the spotlight. Too much filmic baggage, can't hold a movie on his own without effects to cover his defects. Too old. Looks like a failed boxer. No finesse. Grumpy. Just plain NO.
Regards Bond 26 in general, its already taken too long to get the production rolling so if we get it, my money is on Bond 26 in 2026.
They're done with directors as well, but there doesn't seem to be one at the moment. Craig and his co-candidates were directed by Martin Campbell in their audition scenes because he was directing the film. Maybe they've secretly got one but it would seem a bit strange to me.
I seriously doubt the report is correct, but it is possible they're hiring a director for the occasion. Maybe Vic Armstrong or a former Bond main director. Unlikely, but possible.
It's possible, it's just that it seems like their style has always been to create the next film alongside a director, I don't think they've ever got down as far as casting without one. But yeah, basically we agree that the report is very probably nonsense 😊
Yes, we agree on that.
At one good thing.....EON can't blame MGM's financial problems for any delays this time. Love 'em or hate 'em / for better or for worst Amazon has plenty of money.
Indulge me for a moment - hasn't it been about 4 years since NTTD completed filming? Is it in the realm of possibilities that they actually have something in the works, and we have just gotten complete radio silence from them + deflection?
Don’t think so……time is a healer isn’t it. Fresh start and all that.
I think that ever since the Producers got burned with all the negative publicity that resulted from those Sony email leaks during the production of Skyfall that EON really keeps a tight lid on things and do their best to control information. In this day and age of the internet, social media and the good old British Tabs so much is just made up stuff and click bait. My guess is that most of the rumors that turn out to be true emanate from EON themselves.
Obviously the next James Bond must be a good actor and have screen presence and charm, but how important is physical acting and stunts? Is it a goal to find someone who can do many of his own stunts?
The emphasis on acting ability is a bit of a red herring. It sounds good, but how important is it really for James Bond? I think not very. The best actor, by far, to ever play Bond was Timothy Dalton, yet his films were not overwhelming popular at the time, and few people cite him as their favorite—or even second favorite—James Bond. More important is screen presence, which is not the same thing as acting ability. And I agree that willingness and capability to do one’s own stunts is also of tremendous importance in order to differentiate Bond from the CGI-laden masses. Then of course there’s the screenplay itself, the director, the supporting cast, and the score. I rate all of these factors ahead of the lead’s acting ability. For me, that’s an added bonus and nothing more.
It may be hard for some people to hear this, but James Bond is not a deep character. He’s not meant to be. It’s escapism. Yes, Fleming’s Bond had some layers, but this is not high art. Fleming wasn’t just being modest when he made this point himself. The producers would do well to remember this, particularly after the melodrama of the last few films.
But Dalton's lack of popularity was one of timing - not only was the more serious take on Bond 20 years too early, but Dalton was hobbled out of the gate by a fanbase who expected Brosnan to take the role.
That said, screen presence and charisma do and should rank above acting "ability" - Connery owned the role through sheer charisma; his Bond wasn't a particularly layered one. But can there be a return to that? Much like Tom Cruise ruined the grade curve for practical stunts, I think Eon will be reluctant to return 007 to the level of two-dimensional escapism.
In my opinion the Bond actors should be good actors, but there's no need for them to be very good. They should do many of the stunts themselves and if he does all of them that would be great. They certainly can't go back to let the stunt men do almost all the stunts and some of the physical acting in the way of Roger Moore.
Most importantly, IMO, the new Bond actor needs to be able to convince the audience that they are James Bond, not a handsome model dressed up to look like Bond. That takes charisma, screen presence, convincing physicality, grace and an aura of danger. The litmus test for me is the PTS of TLD where any of the identically outfitted MI6 agents involved in that training exercise could have been Bond, when Dalton looks up at the camera you just know he IS Bond.
I genuinely like Pierce Brosnan and have enjoyed him in some movies. But this was always my feeling about him. He seemed to be playing Bond instead of embodying Bond. Just my opinion and I respect that others feel differently.
It's new years eve and I'm about to watch OHMSS. I'm thinking of what 2023 and what it has in store for us Bond fans. Will we get the name of more script writers? The director? The new MI6 regulars? Even the new James Bond? Perhaps a release date?
Or are you a pesimist/realist who thinks we won't get much real news?
I agree that screen presence and charisma can be more important than pure acting ability (as exemplified by Roger and Pierce’s success) but I’d say that can come with great acting ability too: as shown by Connery and Craig. And for me, being a very good actor, delivering a bit more drama or comedy by choosing the right look etc. can add an awful lot.
I think I’d also disagree that Dalton was clearly the best actor of the bunch. I wouldn’t say he’s bad or anything, but I think there are lots of repeated memes about him which aren’t perhaps entirely true, including supposedly being Welsh(!) and being a great Shakespearean actor, and personally I’d say Connery and Craig rank way above him as screen actors. They’ve given some truly great movie performances, and I can’t think of Dalton ever really giving a particularly notable one. What are his big roles? Wuthering Heights? Lion in Winter?
Exactly! 🤣 Are we supposed to pretend Prince Barin wasn't a big role?!
Also, has Colwyn Bay been annexed?
Dalton was also pretty great in both Hot Fuzz and Penny Dreadful. I've heard he's very good in Doom Patrol but haven't checked it out yet.
These are fun roles, yeah, but I'm not sure they qualify him as being the 'best actor to have played Bond'. I enjoy Flash as much as the next person, but it's not exactly Oscar-worthy stuff, is it? And if anyone's taking the supporting actor medal for it, it's Blessed 😅
(Funnily enough I think if he'd played Bond with the sensibility he brought to Flash, Fuzz and Rocketeer he might have been more successful)
Also, has Colwyn Bay been annexed?
Being born somewhere doesn't make you a native, though. If it did then we could call Boris Johnson an American and wash our hands of him 😁
Why do you think we sent him there in the first place? 😅
You got to keep Dalton, Brosnan and Craig at least- hopefully they make up for it!
Are the Americans comfortable with having Harry and Meghan over there? Because I'm sure the British are missing them a lot!
Outside of the relatively small subset of people that pay attention to celebrity culture—who seem to be very much in support of Harry and Meghan—I don’t think anyone here gives a toss about them. They're going to find it very difficult to stay relevant in the States.
I think it’s all connected, though. Very few actors in modern cinema become big stars on acting ability alone. Screen presence and charisma are paramount. The same reason Dalton was not embraced as Bond is the reason why we can’t rattle off other memorable roles. Which goes back to my point that I think acting ability, while certainly not irrelevant, is pretty far down on the list of what it takes to be James Bond.
I think Moore and Brosnan had the "car salesman gene". They wanted to be stars and were very good at interviews, talk shows and the rest of that game. Dalton isn't like that I think. He wanted to be a good actor (as I'm sure the rest of them also wanted) and he wanted to be James Bond, but I don't think he wanted to be a movie star.
Well I agree that charisma and presence are hugely important and indeed paramount, yes, but I just think that the really great Bonds were excellent actors too, so I disagree that it's far down the list of important qualities. I'd certainly much rather have a top actor with great presence than one who has a comma of black hair etc. Of the last two Bonds we had one with great presence and one with great presence and acting skill, and I really preferred the second of those.
And I think if Dalton were such a good actor then we'd be able to think of some great acting performances. He's a good actor, I certainly wouldn't say he's bad at all, but perhaps just not as incredible as the received wisdom in Bond fandom would have it.
And I think he probably did want to be a movie star- if you want to be a great Shakespearian stage actor then you don't take roles in Charlie's Angels and Flash Gordon. Or indeed, James Bond 007.
In my opinion the Bond actors need to be good actors, perhaps now more than ever. Craig put the bar high. But the man playing Bond doesn't have to be a very good actor, being good is sufficient. Being a good actor is among the top three qualifications in my opinion, together with screen presence and appearance.
Lazenby proved you can be a good Bond without being a good actor. Although, he had a special look and "common man" charisma to compensate.
"And I think if Dalton were such a good actor then we'd be able to think of some great acting performances."
The initial parameter I responded to was "a particularly notable performance," which is subjective, but I think provided. But I think it must also be acknowledged that great or even notable performances are highly contingent upon opportunity. And while Dalton had one of the biggest, the fickle finger of fate decided he wasn't what the public wanted as Bond in 87/89, which hampered further opportunities.
And talent/greatness is no guarantee of a perfect track record; Connery did a lot of dreck post-Bond, both before and after his Oscar comeback in 87.
I'd say what ultimately made Dalton an interesting/distinct Bond did in fact come down to his acting ability and gravitas. That didn't line up with audience expectations as much as, say, Brosnan's blow-dried videogame version of the character.
In my opinion Dalton is a really good actor, but as far as I know not on the level where he gets nominated to the Oscars, Cannes etc.