91 replies to this topic

[Zorin Industries]

I can see DANIEL "Harry Potter" RADCLIFF doing the 007 role

Yes, if he could act, was remotely bankable (the pitiful Potter films would have made money with Jimmy Krankie in the lead role - and let's just see if Radcliffe is ever a box office hit post Potter.... I can't see it myself), if he could act, didn't come across like a virginal sixth former trying to smoke a fag in everything he publically does, if he could act, if he didn't get the biggest (and only) major role in his life by industry "default" and if he could act.

I am always wary of an actor who was only suitable for any role when he was eleven and has made nothing of it since.

[Royal Dalton]

the pitiful Potter films

Is that what you told David Heyman?

Jimmy Krankie as Harry Potter would have been fandabbydozy, though.

What a missed opportunity!

[Zorin Industries]

the pitiful Potter films

Is that what you told David Heyman?

Jimmy Krankie as Harry Potter would have been fandabbydozy, though.

What a missed opportunity!

Complete with a Dumbledore / husband in real life to a fictional woman-boychild vibe... it's what the series needed... edge!!

[WC]

Isn't Jimmy Krankie about 61 in real life? And here I thought we were talking about a Bond in his (her?) early 30s.

[danslittlefinger]

I feel sorry for the guy whomever it will be.

Big shoes to fill.

Maybe Sam Worthington?

[The Ghost Who Walks]

I can see DANIEL "Harry Potter" RADCLIFF doing the 007 role

I remember Brosnan saying that too, but I never want to see him in the part myself. I think he's a fairly dull actor, to tell the truth, and has none of the elements Bond needs to have IMO.

Sam Worthington looks the part, but will be a superstar soon. I don't want big stars in the part, makes it harder to buy the actor as being Bond and only Bond when you see the film. I had only seen Craig in Tomb Raider before CR, and could not even remember his part in that one, so he was 100 percent Bond for me when the film came out.

[Zorin Industries]

I can see DANIEL "Harry Potter" RADCLIFF doing the 007 role

I remember Brosnan saying that too, but I never want to see him in the part myself. I think he's a fairly dull actor, to tell the truth, and has none of the elements Bond needs to have IMO.

Sam Worthington looks the part, but will be a superstar soon. Bond for me when the film came out.

Really? I don't think TERMINATOR BORE will raise his star power and the world has still yet to hear about him....

[Harry Fawkes]

Con & Laz debuted as Bond at the ages of 31 & 30 respectively. & then came Granpa Rodge, who became Bond at the age he should've quit the role. The 3 actors who followed him made their Bond debuts at 40 (Timmy), 42 (Brozza) & 38 (Danny), at an average of 40.

Personally, I feel No. 7 should make his Bond debut in his early 30s, say between 30-34, ideally at 33-something. He will be just right for the role then. And he can continue till he is around 42-43 and bow out without becoming Uncle Bond. If it is Henry Cavill who succeeds Danny, he should debut in 16-17, when he will be 33-34, IMO a good age to debut as Bond.

What do you think?

And how about an older Bond girl to accompany a 33-34 yr old Bond? Say a Bond girl who's at least 5 yrs older than Bond? Never happened before. Yeah, Honor Blackman was 4 yrs older than Con in Goldfinger, & Diana Rigg was a year older than Laz, but I'm talking about a 34-something Bond with a 40 yr old Bond girl. That would be interesting alright. What are the chances of this happening? And how do you picture such an interaction? And who would you pick as a 34 yr old Bond and a 40 yr old Bond girl?

The only way that idea would go down well with me would be if they were to decided to make John Pearson's James Bond The Authorised Biography.

You could have Connery as the old Bond telling the story to a writer and a couple of youngish Bonds going through the life story.

Well, something like that anyway.

[MkB]

If I may add a selfish / self-centered consideration: I'm 31, so if the next Bond (presumably in no sooner than 5 years at least) is in his late 20s or early 30s, he'll be considerably younger than me.

And honestly, I'm in no hurry to see a Bond younger than me!

[Harry Fawkes]

If I may add a selfish / self-centered consideration: I'm 31, so if the next Bond (presumably in no sooner than 5 years at least) is in his late 20s or early 30s, he'll be considerably younger than me.

And honestly, I'm in no hurry to see a Bond younger than me!

I'm older than you

[Scrambled Eggs]

If I may add a selfish / self-centered consideration: I'm 31, so if the next Bond (presumably in no sooner than 5 years at least) is in his late 20s or early 30s, he'll be considerably younger than me.

And honestly, I'm in no hurry to see a Bond younger than me!

Toyboy Bond. It's an idea whose time has come.

[dee-bee-five]

Henry Cavill doesn't need to prove himself to anyone, least of all people on a website. He's bloody good in The Tudors (best thing in it, to be honest).

And I think he's in no need of proving himself to Eon, from what I understand...

[MkB]

Hey!

That's not what I meant! My point is: Bond is a schoolboy fantasy, someone you want to be "when you're grown up" (even when you're, obviously, quite grown up). My feeling is that with a Bond younger than me, the fantasy would be weird/awkward. Maybe I'm wrong, I'd be interested to hear the opinion of the older Bond fans here!

PS: duly noted, Harry! This way, whatever the age of Bond, my Harry Fawkes fantasy will live on

[The Ghost Who Walks]

I can see DANIEL "Harry Potter" RADCLIFF doing the 007 role

I remember Brosnan saying that too, but I never want to see him in the part myself. I think he's a fairly dull actor, to tell the truth, and has none of the elements Bond needs to have IMO.

Sam Worthington looks the part, but will be a superstar soon. Bond for me when the film came out.

Really? I don't think TERMINATOR BORE will raise his star power and the world has still yet to hear about him....

Avatar. Clash of the Titans. Possibly Green Lantern, or if not that, some other superhero veichle (I'd not be surprised if he was rumoured to play Wonder Woman at this point). This guy would have to struggle to NOT become huge.

I do hope I'll disagree with you about "Terminator Bore"...

Edited by The Ghost Who Walks, 26 May 2009 - 03:36 PM.

[Zorin Industries]

Henry Cavill doesn't need to prove himself to anyone, least of all people on a website. He's bloody good in The Tudors (best thing in it, to be honest).

And I think he's in no need of proving himself to Eon, from what I understand...

The only guy to put the '007' in the seventh Bond without a doubt....(put that on your teaser poster fan-art lovers) and debuting in the 50th year of James Bond onscreen....

[Ghostboy]

I wish to believe that Daniel Craig will stop aging and never leave his role as Bond, and therefore never disappointing me :-)
If there has to be a new Bond, than it'll be me!
Until that day, Craig stays.
Good day!

[Loomis]

Henry Cavill doesn't need to prove himself to anyone, least of all people on a website.

"People on a website" being.... what? The lowest form of humanity?

And I think he's in no need of proving himself to Eon, from what I understand...

Well, he allegedly got to The Final Four™, but then so did Craig, Alex O'Lachlan (who now goes by the name Alex O'Loughlin, oddly enough) and Sam Worthington. What matters is who will get to the final four next time, and there is no guarantee that Cavill will ever again find himself in the running for Bond.

And, sorry, but if Cavill were so bloody marvellous then he'd have got the gig for CASINO ROYALE, the only Bond film to date that could have starred someone in his 20s (well, barring, uh, OHMSS, which did star an actor in his 20s). But they went with Craig, and why? Because Craig was the superior choice. If anything, Craig was rather too old for the Bond of CR (don't forget that the script was written for a 28-year-old 007), but he was such a patently great option that they ended up picking him, and rightly so.

[Golden Claw]

OK, now some people are exaggerating here. A 35-yr old Bond with a 40-something Bond girl is any day better than the Electra Complex we see in many Bond films.

[Aris007]

I can see DANIEL "Harry Potter" RADCLIFF doing the 007 role

Hell no!

[Skudor]

I'd tend to agree that the ideal age for a new Bond is in the first half of their 30s. However, to me both Connery and Lazenby looked older at their respective young ages than most modern actors do at the same age. Probably to do with having lived a bit etc. So, no baby-faced 30 year olds please. The look and maturity of the actor is more important than the actual age.

[Zorin Industries]

Henry Cavill doesn't need to prove himself to anyone, least of all people on a website.

"People on a website" being.... what? The lowest form of humanity?

And I think he's in no need of proving himself to Eon, from what I understand...

Well, he allegedly got to The Final Four™, but then so did Craig, Alex O'Lachlan (who now goes by the name Alex O'Loughlin, oddly enough) and Sam Worthington. What matters is who will get to the final four next time, and there is no guarantee that Cavill will ever again find himself in the running for Bond.

Oh I would imagine he would most certainly be "in the running". It was allegedly between him and Craig, not the other two mentioned with one party pushing for one and another for the other actor.

[Skudor]

Henry Cavill doesn't need to prove himself to anyone, least of all people on a website.

"People on a website" being.... what? The lowest form of humanity?

And I think he's in no need of proving himself to Eon, from what I understand...

Well, he allegedly got to The Final Four™, but then so did Craig, Alex O'Lachlan (who now goes by the name Alex O'Loughlin, oddly enough) and Sam Worthington. What matters is who will get to the final four next time, and there is no guarantee that Cavill will ever again find himself in the running for Bond.

Oh I would imagine he would most certainly be "in the running". It was allegedly between him and Craig, not the other two mentioned with one party pushing for one and another for the other actor.

I guess Wilson likes them young and pretty, eh!

[Zorin Industries]

Henry Cavill doesn't need to prove himself to anyone, least of all people on a website.

"People on a website" being.... what? The lowest form of humanity?

And I think he's in no need of proving himself to Eon, from what I understand...

Well, he allegedly got to The Final Four™, but then so did Craig, Alex O'Lachlan (who now goes by the name Alex O'Loughlin, oddly enough) and Sam Worthington. What matters is who will get to the final four next time, and there is no guarantee that Cavill will ever again find himself in the running for Bond.

Oh I would imagine he would most certainly be "in the running". It was allegedly between him and Craig, not the other two mentioned with one party pushing for one and another for the other actor.

I guess Wilson likes them young and pretty, eh!

No. Not quite.

[Loomis]

Oh. He likes muscular thirtysomething rough trade, then, does he?

Not that the next Bond must be a Craig clone (far from it, in fact - I think it was Cubby who said that Moore being so different to Connery worked precisely because there was "clear blue water" between their portrayals of Bond), but wouldn't it seem pretty jarring to have Craig replaced by Cavill, being as how Cavill is so much younger than him and on top of that looks even younger than he is? (I mean, he's still being put forward for teenage roles, e.g. TWILIGHT.)

Bringing on Cavill after Craig would make Cavill's first Bond outing look like another first-mission reboot, even though it would obviously not be intended as such.

[007Bond007]

i agree, but depending on the actor in his mid thirties who wants to play him.

I can see DANIEL "Harry Potter" RADCLIFF doing the 007 role

Yes, if he could act, was remotely bankable (the pitiful Potter films would have made money with Jimmy Krankie in the lead role - and let's just see if Radcliffe is ever a box office hit post Potter.... I can't see it myself), if he could act, didn't come across like a virginal sixth former trying to smoke a fag in everything he publically does, if he could act, if he didn't get the biggest (and only) major role in his life by industry "default" and if he could act.

I am always wary of an actor who was only suitable for any role when he was eleven and has made nothing of it since.

yes i too was thinking of this, but regardless if he can act, i bet you that he will end up being bond in 15 years.i dont want him to play bond though, in my oppinion he may ruin the whole franchise.

[Tybre]

Oh. He likes muscular thirtysomething rough trade, then, does he?

Not that the next Bond must be a Craig clone (far from it, in fact - I think it was Cubby who said that Moore being so different to Connery worked precisely because there was "clear blue water" between their portrayals of Bond), but wouldn't it seem pretty jarring to have Craig replaced by Cavill, being as how Cavill is so much younger than him and on top of that looks even younger than he is? (I mean, he's still being put forward for teenage roles, e.g. TWILIGHT.)

Bringing on Cavill after Craig would make Cavill's first Bond outing look like another first-mission reboot, even though it would obviously not be intended as such.

Cavill looks very much his age. That's a big part of why they rejected the author's suggestion of Cavill for Edward Cullen.

Spoiler

Doesn't look like a perpetual 17-year-old to me.

I will agree having someone looking live Cavill after Craig would be a bit jarring though.

Edited by Tybre, 21 July 2009 - 01:11 PM.

[Zorin Industries]

i bet you that he will end up being bond in 15 years.i dont want him to play bond though, in my oppinion he may ruin the whole franchise.

Yes, well don't bet THAT much money on it.

Eon like actors. And as Daniel Radcliffe isn't one - nor has he starred in ONE film of non-Potter consequence, we can safely assume he might get overlooked.

[Zorin Industries]

i bet you that he will end up being bond in 15 years.i dont want him to play bond though, in my oppinion he may ruin the whole franchise.

Yes, well don't bet THAT much money on it.

Eon like actors. And as Daniel Radcliffe isn't one - nor has he starred in ONE film of non-Potter consequence, we can safely assume he might get overlooked.

[Mercator]

Aber the memory must consider this
Harry Potter is the biggest franchise. Daniol Radkliffe is perfect for future Bond (when he is older, naturally) because the box office of Potter could met with Bond and hav the biggest success,no?

[DamnCoffee]

No...