93 replies to this topic

[crashdrive]

This is my fourth post in my 'next Bond'-series. The following actor is different from my first three choices. Dominic West, Gerard Butler and Jack Davenport are actors I thought were not given the attention they deserved. Hugh Jackman however is without a doubt the most popular actor for the part. He's the winner of the Who should be the next James Bond? poll here at CBN with more than 30 % of the votes.

Pierce Brosnan will probably make just one more Bond film (Bond 21) that will be released in 2005. That means that in 2007, a new actor has to be ready to don the tux. Hugh will be 38 that year. Jackman was always a popular choice, but his attachment to the 'X-Men' franchise was a big stumbling block. In a recent interview however, Jackman says that he'll probably make just one more 'X-Men' movie before he makes way for the younger mutants. A week earlier, Jackman confessed that he was informally approached by EON whether or not he'd be interested in playing Bond. We already know the answer since he made a comment a couple of years ago that he's very keen to play the part.

And I'm sure fans will be delighted. Jackman fits the profile to a tee. Born on October 12, 1968 in Sydney, Australia, although Hugh's parents were English-born. He's 6'2 and very athletic. A very talented actor who received acclaim for his role in the musical 'Oklahoma'. This musical was so popular that Barbara Broccoli went to see Jackman perform. Was signed to the Hollywood agent CAA followed a 15-minute preview of 'Paperback Hero'. Replacing Dougray Scott as Wolverine in the film 'X-Men' made him a huge star. 'Swordfish' proved that he can handle action sequences and 'Kate and Leopold' and 'Someone Like You' showed his ability as a romantic leading man. The upcoming 'Van Helsing' will be a test whether or not Jackman can carry a franchise on his own. I'm confident he can. He's a perfect replacement for Pierce Brosnan, since he's not too expensive, but famous enough to draw interest to the franchise even without Brosnan. The way I look at it, Jackman will be a shoe-in.

For part one of my 'next Bond' series, click here; Dominic West as next Bond
For part two of my 'next Bond' series, click here; Gerard Butler as next Bond
For part three of my 'next Bond' series, click here; Jack Davenport as next Bond

[Mister Asterix]

Slight correction, you said Jackman is the winner of the CBn poll, since it is an open ended poll it would be more correct to say he is the current leader.

Jackman is a good choice, and clearly the best choice at this time. But ‘at this time’ is a key phrase. A lot can happen between now and 2006, when Eon will have to choose the next Bond if Pierce does just one more. First, Jackman could have a huge hit that makes him a mega-star, but also another candidate could emerge as the favourite. West, Butler, Davenport (as you point out), or any of the scores of those suggested by other, or even a complete unknown, could emerge as the Bond #6 front-runner.

If, for some reason, Pierce couldn’t or wouldn’t do Bond21 then Jackman is the only clear choice for the role. But three years is a long time and we shall see. I will still be out there looking for a new face to be the next 007. And I’m sure you will be too, crashdrive.

[M_Balje]

Crashdrive vergot to tell that this is his sixth thread and not his fourth thread.

This is his Fourth thread about: Paul Bettany

http://forums.comman...=&threadid=9048

This is his fift thread about: Jonathan Rhys Meyers

http://forums.comman...=&threadid=9165

My thread about Sebastian Spence

http://forums.comman...=&threadid=8693

[Roebuck]

Originally posted by Mister Asterix
Jackman is a good choice, and clearly the best choice at this time. But ‘at this time’ is a key phrase. A lot can happen between now and 2006, when Eon will have to choose the next Bond if Pierce does just one more. First, Jackman could have a huge hit that makes him a mega-star, but also another candidate could emerge as the favourite. West, Butler, Davenport (as you point out), or any of the scores of those suggested by other, or even a complete unknown, could emerge as the Bond #6 front-runner.

In the past I've made a similar point myself Mister Asterix. Unlikely as it may seem there's always the possibility of EON going for a wildcard. In '86 while fans were bandying around names like Sam Neill and Pierce Brosnan, Cubby was championing all but unknown French actor Lambert Wilson (Matrix Reloaded) for the role. Jackman himself would have been a rank outsider for the part if we were having this discussion just after TWINE was released.

But Jackman would be the smart choice commercially. He'd bring with him a credibility with the younger demographic that EON are courting while at the same time he's not likely to alienate the core fanbase. Something fresh but not too glib.

Time will tell I suppose.

[zencat]

Jackman would be great.

[ChandlerBing]

He's got my vote.

[Harmsway]

Jackman is my choice for Bond 21. He'd do a great job - he's got the humor and the deadly edge to pull it off.

[crashdrive]

Do you really expect anyone else to win the CBN poll? He received almost twice as many votes than the second best option, which is "None of the above". The way I see it, Jackman has already won. He's by far the most popular actor to play Bond as voted by real Bond fans, not Amazon visitors or Radio Times readers.

Personally, I doubt we're going to see a new actor arrive on the scene who stands as good a chance as Jackman. Jackman not only fits the profile (hardly anyone does), but he's also willing to play the part, has enough leading man experience and isn't too expensive for EON. The chances of something like that happening again is very unlikely. If Jackman won't be able to don the tux, I'm sure an unknown actor will step in, but if everything goes according to plan, I think we can all agree that Jackman is a shoe-in.

And, as Roebuck already mentioned, times can indeed change. But from the looks of it, time is only pushing Jackman closer and closer to MI:6.

And M_Balje, I don't consider those other threads part of my 'New Bond' series. Bettany and Meyers aren't my personal favorites (West, Butler, Davenport and Jackman are), just actors who were mentioned in the press as possible Bond candidates. As for Spence, he's too short to play Bond.

But I will always keep a look-out for a new face. And the actor who has my attention now is Rupert Penry-Jones. But at the moment, I can't even consider him to be a contender for the part.

[Mister Asterix]

Originally posted by crashdrive
Do you really expect anyone else to win the CBN poll? He received almost twice as many votes than the second best option, which is "None of the above". The way I see it, Jackman has already won. He's by far the most popular actor to play Bond as voted by real Bond fans, not Amazon visitors or Radio Times readers.

I’m pretty sure he will win too, crash. But it ain’t over till it’s over, so I’m just being technical.

[crashdrive]

It ain't over till it's over. Any idea when this poll will be over? The results of the 'Radio Times'- & 'Amazon' polls received so many attention, I think it is about time to let the world know who the real fans would like to see play Bond.

[Mister Asterix]

Well, we will just have to make sure they do, crash. And I think I know how we can do that without having to end the poll that I think would be best to leave open. I won’t do it right away, but just know, I’m on top of it.

[Loomis]

Originally posted by Roebuck

Jackman would be the smart choice commercially. He'd bring with him a credibility with the younger demographic that EON are courting while at the same time he's not likely to alienate the core fanbase. Something fresh but not too glib.

Originally posted by crashdrive

I doubt we're going to see a new actor arrive on the scene who stands as good a chance as Jackman. Jackman not only fits the profile (hardly anyone does), but he's also willing to play the part, has enough leading man experience and isn't too expensive for EON. The chances of something like that happening again is very unlikely. If Jackman won't be able to don the tux, I'm sure an unknown actor will step in, but if everything goes according to plan, I think we can all agree that Jackman is a shoe-in.

I'm beginning to believe it's likely, as opposed to merely possible, that Jackman will be the next James Bond, IF Brosnan's final outing as 007 turns out to be BOND 21 (2005). However, were Brosnan to do a sixth film (which is something I do not consider by any means outside the realms of possibility), Jackman might well have become too big a star to don the tux by the time The Powers That Be found themselves looking for a replacement for Brosnan. If Brosnan were to make seven Bond films in total (again, something I feel is not entirely out of the question), by the time the 007 role finally came up for grabs, Jackman might be vying with the likes of Russell Crowe and Mel Gibson for the title of Greatest Antipodean Hollywood Megastar Ever.

Jackman is a shoe-in NOW (personally, I'd rather see Clive Owen play Bond, though). As Mister Asterix puts it: "If, for some reason, Pierce couldn

[SteelClaw]

He done a great accent in Kate & Leopold and he has the perfect looks for the part. So I'm up for it.

[crashdrive]

Loomis, since when do you prefer Clive Owen over Hugh Jackman? I thought you agreed that Owen doesn't have the looks nor the sexappeal to play Bond, not to mention the fact that his star is rising as rapidly as Jackman's with films like 'King Arthur'. It's very possible Jackman could be a too big a star to play Bond in 2007, but you gotta admit that the numbers are on his side. He wants to play Bond (I haven't heard Owen made a similar comment), he has been approached by EON, the fans seem to love him, he'll be out of 'The X-Men' franchise before shooting of Bond 22 starts and he has already been approached. Nothing is set in stone, but after Brosnan, EON and especially MGM probably want an established well-known actor to fill the gap left by Brosnan's departure. Jackman is the only and the best choice who fits this description.

[Loomis]

Originally posted by crashdrive

Loomis, since when do you prefer Clive Owen over Hugh Jackman? I thought you agreed that Owen doesn't have the looks nor the sexappeal to play Bond, not to mention the fact that his star is rising as rapidly as Jackman's with films like 'King Arthur'.  

To be honest, I don't particularly wish to see Jackman cast as Bond (although I'd continue to be a Bond fan and try to be first in the queue for each new film even if they hired Robbie Williams, or for that matter Robbie Coltrane, to play 007). From the films of Jackman I've seen, he strikes me as too much the bland, boring "pretty boy", and I feel that even Hugh Grant would be able to inject more darkness and danger into Bond. However, an actor is only as good as his material, co-stars, director and so on, so I don't wish to come across as slamming Jackman too much. He might well be a great Bond if given the opportunity (I don't see his nationality as a problem), but I certainly wouldn't be thrilled to hear that he'd landed the role.

I think I've always preferred Owen to Jackman. I agree that Jackman's looks and sex appeal are more obvious, and that Jackman would currently seem to have a much better chance of getting the job, but that doesn't stop me preferring Owen, in the same way as I acknowledge that someone like Stephen Hopkins appears a more likely candidate than John McTiernan to direct a Bond film, but would rather see McTiernan land the gig.

Why do I favour Owen over Jackman? Without wishing to seem snobbish, I feel Owen to be a braver, much less obvious and "populist" choice than Jackman. He looks like he'd be the Dalton Mark II to Jackman's Brosnan Mark II. I can picture Jackman giving us a fun-for-all-the-family superhero spy, and Owen giving us a cold, angst-ridden secret agent ripped from the pages of Fleming. (Although I freely admit that such assumptions are really quite groundless. For all I know, Owen has a great talent for broad comedy, and might relish the idea of playing 007 with more silliness than Moore ever dreamed of. Nonetheless, Owen is my preferred choice, not Jackman.)

I concur that Owen's star, like Jackman's, is rising, but if I were a betting man I'd wager that Jackman will be by far the bigger name in Hollywood by the time the Bond role is next up for grabs, not only by virtue of his looks but also because of the fact that he is making a name for himself in comic book movies and franchise fodder (SWORDFISH, the X-MEN flicks and VAN HELSING). Sure, KING ARTHUR may go through the roof at the box office and make Owen the hottest thing since sliced bread, but smart money says Jackman is the one who's on course to become a megastar of a leading man. I won't be surprised if five years from now, maybe sooner, Jackman is up there alongside Carrey, Crowe, Cruise, Gibson, Hanks, Travolta and the rest.

Originally posted by crashdrive

It's very possible Jackman could be a too big a star to play Bond in 2007, but you gotta admit that the numbers are on his side. He wants to play Bond (I haven't heard Owen made a similar comment), he has been approached by EON, the fans seem to love him, he'll be out of 'The X-Men' franchise before shooting of Bond 22 starts and he has already been approached. Nothing is set in stone, but after Brosnan, EON and especially MGM probably want an established well-known actor to fill the gap left by Brosnan's departure. Jackman is the only and the best choice who fits this description.  

Again, I make the point that it's by no means clear that BOND 21 will be Brosnan's last. If BOND 21 is released in 2005 and does well (and there's no reason why it wouldn't, although it may not do as well as DIE ANOTHER DAY), it's entirely possible that Brosnan will be asked back for BOND 22 and that he will accept the offer. With BOND 22 hitting screens in 2007 or 2008, Jackman may well by that stage be beyond the reach of Bond (and other, less famous candidates may by the end of this decade have emerged as better options).

The window of opportunity for casting Jackman as Bond would seem to be very short. If BOND 21 (2005) is Brosnan's last hurrah, then Jackman may indeed be a shoe-in, but it's my guess that if Jackman isn't hired to play Bond in 2007 (perhaps "secured to play Bond" would be a better way of putting it), he won't ever be hired to play Bond.

[doublenoughtspy]

He's on the cover of this week's Entertainment Weekly, this week's USA Weekend (with a poster of him inside) - there is no doubt Hugh Jackman is the most well known of the Bond contenders.

I saw X-Men 2 this evening, and Jackman is great. AS WOLVERINE. I just don't think of Bond when I see him.

Yes, I've seen Kate & Leopold. He can do romance.

But as others have pointed out - between X-Men and Van Helsing - his star may be too big.

I would much rather see Clive Owen than Jackman. I concur with Loomis.

For those of you who think he isn't good looking enough - I don't agree.

I've seen him in the BMW films, and the Second Sight detective series (where Saunders, aka Thomas Weatly, plays his boss) - and I just think BOND!!! every frame I see him in.

I also agree with the people who are pointing out that everything depends on whether Pierce does a 6th or even 7th.

I would say Jackman and Owen might be out of the running then.

[1q2w3e4r]

Owen might be. Jackman = $$$

[crashdrive]

Normally I would post my 300 word long reply why I don't agree with you, but your views seem to be so totally different from mine (Hugh Grant inject more darkness and danger??) that I wouldn't know where to begin. I guess it's best we just agree to disagree.

It's very possible Brosnan will make Bond 22, but even then I think Jackman is the most likely candidate for the part. He definately won't be too old (whereas Owen probably will) and don't underestimate the fact that Jackman is very eager to play Bond. Maybe he's willing to cutdown his usual fee (as Brosnan did for 'GoldenEye').

I thought Jackman showed exception skill as an actor in 'The X Men' movies, 'Kate and Leopold' and his two Aussie movies. Of course Owen has a far more interesting resume, but I just think his appearance isn't suitable to play Bond. Timothy Dalton was both a respected serious actor, but also a goodlooking man. Owen however, although definately not ugly, probably wouldn't be believable as the sexy womanizer Bond should be. If Jackman won't be able to replace Brosnan, I'd prefer Dominic West ('The Wire'), Rupert Penry-Jones ('Charlotte Gray'), Gerard Butler ('Timeline') & Christian Bale ('American Psycho').

[Loomis]

Originally posted by crashdrive

your views seem to be so totally different from mine (Hugh Grant inject more darkness and danger??) that I wouldn't know where to begin. I guess it's best we just agree to disagree.

No problem. All of us hold different views on all aspects of Bond.

However, to (hopefully) clarify mine, Owen is Jackman's senior by only four years, and I really don't see his looks as a problem. He is no more and no less handsome than Dalton, IMO, and Bond is not supposed to look like a male model. Owen has star quality, which to me is more important than physical perfection (there lies my objection to Jackman, but then I found SWORDFISH and X-MEN deeply boring films anyway - I'll take your word for it, crashdrive, that Jackman has shone in other movies). I agree that Jackman would seem a more likely candidate even if Brosnan were to make a sixth Bond film, but once again I point out that that doesn't stop me preferring Owen. As for Hugh Grant, he's able to play more than just his trademark role of the upper class twit, and darkness and danger are certainly not beyond him. Grant has perhaps a more interesting resume than any of the actors often mentioned as a possible Bond: http://us.imdb.com/Name?Grant,+Hugh

[crashdrive]

Originally posted by Loomis
(Owen) is no more and no less handsome than Dalton, IMO[/B]

How is it possible that your views have changed so much? In the thread The Next James Bond?, I provided you with a link to his GQ photoshoot. After looking at the pictures, you said the following: "from his GQ photoshoot, Owen doesn't look remotely like a good choice for Bond. In fact, he looks like he should be playing a thuggish wide boy in "EastEnders" (apologies to non-Brits who don't know what I'm on about here). Dammit, Owen's no better looking than I am!"
What has changed? In this thread I also commented on your Owen/ Dalton theory, so I won't do it now.

[Loomis]

Whoops. I was hoping that you wouldn't bring that up. I guess I prefer Owen because for some reason I really can't get excited about the idea of Jackman playing Bond. As I've already stated, Jackman strikes me as too much the bland, boring "pretty boy", as well as a safe, predictable choice. I believe that an actor like Owen, or maybe Paul Bettany, might do a much better job of conveying darkness, aggression and intelligence, rather than coming across as a male model with nothing upstairs.

As for Owen's looks, well, with the right training regime, clothes, makeup, lighting and so on, he'd be good to go. Having seen THE BOURNE IDENTITY, I'd say that The Powers That Be could do a lot worse than cast him as 007.

[crashdrive]

Personally I feel that Bonds good looks are essential to his succes. Both as a franchise (audience like to look at a handsome leading man) and as a secret agent (seducing women is Bonds strength). Casting an actor with a average appearance would betray the essence of the character. Timothy Dalton was just as square jawed and handsome as his predecessors, but he didn't have the sexappeal. Owen and Bettany however lack in both departments. In 'The Bourne Identity', Owen was adequate (as a lowkey contract killer), but can you see him seducing women? I sure as hell can't. And Bettany strikes me more as a Roger Moore type (Bettany usually plays the comedic character) than the Timothy Dalton type.

I think you underestimate Jackman (or over estimate the Bond franchise). I think Jackman is easily in Brosnan's league before Pierce got the Bond gig. Sure he's not an original choice, but Brosnan wasn't an original choice either. Jackman is probably the only actor who fits the profile, is willing AND has the resume. No other actor has all the qualities audiences demand from Bond. Some of them may have either a better resume or are more versatile, but Jackman is the only allrounder. And after Brosnan, I have a feeling both audiences, MGM and EON want an allrounder.

And even if you don't care for Hugh Jackman, there are still a couple of actors who have the right height, place-of-birth, age and resume: Edward Atterton ('Children of the Dune'), Christian Bale ('American Psycho'), Gerard Butler ('Timeline'), Jack Davenport ('The Talented Mr. Ripley'), Rupert Penry Jones ('Charlotte Gray'), Jeremy Northam ('Enigma'), James Purefoy ('Resident Evil'), Dougray Scott ('Mission: Impossible 2'), Rufus Sewell ('Dark City'), Dominic West ('Chicago') & Greg Wise ('Sense and Sensibility')

[Loomis]

Maybe I am underestimating Jackman. You're certainly doing a terrific job of selling him, crashdrive. Perhaps he'd be an excellent Bond, and he's definitely the outstanding candidate at present.

Certainly, if I had hiring power on the Bond franchise I'd cast him over Owen in a heartbeat, since he'd be the overwhelmingly smarter choice commercially. However, as a fan I'd prefer the next Bond actor to be someone who in many ways would be a brave, non-obvious choice. I agree with you to an extent that "audience like to look at a handsome leading man" and "seducing women is Bonds strength", but while I acknowledge that Jackman is perhaps more strikingly good-looking than Owen (as is Brosnan), I'd say that Owen is more than handsome enough to be convincing as a seducer. And personality counts for a lot - look at Bogart! Personally, I don't think Moore and Dalton were especially stunning, and Connery looked absolutely terrible in some films (chiefly DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER), but then as a straight male I'm probably not best qualified to judge.

I'd still sooner see Owen don the tux than Jackman. Jackman would be my third choice, after Dougray Scott.

Of the other actors you mention, I think The Powers That Be would be crazy not to keep an eye on Jack Davenport. A few years from now, he might well have developed into THE perfect candidate.

[rubixcub]

Anyone here seen "Gosford Park"? Every successive viewing of that film makes me think more and more of Owen as James Bond, maybe ever more so than Jackman. True he's not as classically good-looking as other candidates, but his manner, his strength, his machismo, his 'cool', his presence, his coldness all make me think of James Bond.

Now not long ago I was one of the loudest voices trumpeting Jackman as Brosnan's successor, but my support is waning a bit. Trouble is, I'm starting to have difficulty picturing him as James Bond. I need to see pictures of him in a suit, or a tux with bow tie. Also, he needs to age a bit. Last time I can remember thinking he looked Bondian was at the Golden Globes a year or two ago. I think his hair was even styled like a young Connery!

Some stats that may be of importance: Owen was born in October 1965, Jackman in October 1968. In 2007, Owen will turn 42 and Jackman will turn 39. If Brosnan does a sixth, I would say that effectively takes Owen out of the running. If Brosnan quits after the next one, Owen still has a chance. The question then is whether Jackman will be too young at 38, since the last three Bonds were all in their early forties when they started. It probably doesn't make much of a difference, in fact it might help. Starting the actor out when he's under 40 might encourage more longevitiy with the role (would allow him to get in another film before he's in his mid-fifties and too old for it).

Dave

[1q2w3e4r]

Next Bond cast should be in his middle or late thirties. They need to start pushing them out the door at 45. This roger thing of going on till one's using a walker is outragious. I've seen Gosford Park. Didn't sell me on Owen. I think the people most sold on him have been watching him in those BMW commericals.

Jackman's better suited. Got a good presence, and a lot like a young Connery.

[crashdrive]

Originally posted by Loomis
Jackman would be my third choice, after Dougray Scott.

Well, I hate to be a gravedigger, but remember when you said the following; "Scott is indeed "scary looking". I get the feeling that he'd be the perfect James Bond for one or two pictures, like Dalton, and then he'd be out."
Of course I don't have to tell you EON probably won't hire a 'scary looking' Bond, but do you personally really want one? Even if it means he'll only make two pictures? And I don't think EON would ever hire an actor for just two films. I believe they have to sign a three-film-deal even to be considered. My best case scenario is casting a great actor who will stick around for at least four years who audiences and fans alike will accept. I think Jackman fits this profile perfectly.

As for Jack Davenport, I've been a big supporter for over three years now of the idea of casting Davenport as Bond. Check out my thread Jack Davenport as next Bond.

[Loomis]

Originally posted by crashdrive

Well, I hate to be a gravedigger, but remember when you said the following; "Scott is indeed "scary looking". I get the feeling that he'd be the perfect James Bond for one or two pictures, like Dalton, and then he'd be out."
Of course I don't have to tell you EON probably won't hire a 'scary looking' Bond, but do you personally really want one? Even if it means he'll one make two pictures?  

Well, I stand by what I wrote. I agree that EON probably won't hire a "scary looking" Bond, but maybe I overrated Scott's scariness - after all, his is hardly the sort of face small children run screaming from. And he's surely one of the top candidates for 007. I doubt that The Powers That Be would be as keen to sign him up as they would be to hire Jackman, but I imagine Scott's high on their list, higher even than Owen. Personally, I'd be quite happy with Scott as Bond, regardless of the number of pictures he made.

[Bondpurist]

Jackman's my last choice any day of the year

[Loomis]

Well, I'm no Jackman pusher, BP, but I'd prefer him over the likes of Christian Bale, Gerard Butler, Rupert Everett, Ewan McGregor, Rufus Sewell and Robbie Williams. I agree with crashdrive that Jackman is currently the most obvious choice for the role for various reasons, but I personally would be none too thrilled were he to be cast as Bond.

[doublenoughtspy]

rubixcub you put into words why I want Owen to be James Bond.

"his manner, his strength, his machismo, his 'cool', his presence, his coldness all make me think of James Bond."

I concur. Everytime I see him I just think "My god, what this guy could do as Bond."

I also agree that he would be Dalton Mk 2, whereas Jackman would be Brosnan Mk2.

The producers have to weigh many things. But the biggest thing to consider with Jackman is if he still has other franchise interests.

They don't want Hugh Jackman, star of the X-Men, star of the Van Helsing series, and oh yea, when he's not busy with those two he does a Bond movie.

They want a name - but they want the person to become a huge star because of Bond. He's said he'll do 3 X-Men movies and then make way for younger stars. I find that slightly hard to believe that he will turn down the huge paychecks they will inevitibly throw at him to return.