Classic Bond Forum

OK, we know that she wanted Sean Bean for Goldeneye and hand-picked Craig herself, so it's clear that she has a "type" as far as Bond actors go. We've had our share of silliness in the Craig lookalike thread, but I was wondering if anyone had any serious suggestions of actors in the Bean/Craig mould who might be serious contenders to take over as Bond when Daniel Craig leaves. I can't really think of anyone at the moment.

Mrs Skywalker often watches Emmerdale.

There is an actor who plays 'Scott' Ben Freeman who could be a choice in the future. I think he is contesting a rape allegation at the moment which might not do his chances a world of good.

Here are a few pics.

Rupert Penry Jones is blonde. He might be a darkhorse next time.

I think Sean Bean would have been a better Bond than Brosnan. He has much more screen presence that made GoldenEye a bit more interesting than the next four films. Now if Dalton had stayed and we had Dalton and Bean duke it out, imagine the awesome chemistry. I never saw much chemistry between Brosnan and Bean.

Brosnan was only chosen because he was a more safe choice and they wanted to bring back Bond to the movie so they'll go with a popular (especially in the US) choice rather than the right choice. Look what happened when they did the opposite in 2006 as opposed to choosing a popular candidate, it paid off!

John Drake wrote:Rupert Penry Jones is blonde. He might be a darkhorse next time.

He reminds me of Paul Bettany.

Skywalker wrote:He reminds me of Paul Bettany.

Hmmm, Bettany as Bond? I could actually imagine Babs going for that.

stockslivevan wrote:I think Sean Bean would have been a better Bond than Brosnan. He has much more screen presence that made GoldenEye a bit more interesting than the next four films. Now if Dalton had stayed and we had Dalton and Bean duke it out, imagine the awesome chemistry. I never saw much chemistry between Brosnan and Bean.

Brosnan was only chosen because he was a more safe choice and they wanted to bring back Bond to the movie so they'll go with a popular (especially in the US) choice rather than the right choice. Look what happened when they did the opposite in 2006 as opposed to choosing a popular candidate, it paid off!

It looks like you're saying Brosnan is not the right choice in the 90's. Who do you think approved the scripts of un-serious - yet exciting action films that made up Brosnan's era?

stockslivevan wrote:Brosnan was only chosen because he was a more safe choice and they wanted to bring back Bond to the movie so they'll go with a popular (especially in the US) choice rather than the right choice. Look what happened when they did the opposite in 2006 as opposed to choosing a popular candidate, it paid off!

Yes, and choosing Brosnan paid off. If we're going to go by box-office, compare the grosses of Brosnan's films to those of the 80's Bond films. Brosnan was the right Bond at the right time, as was Craig (even though I don't personally like him as Bond). Edit: although perhaps we should wait to at least see Bond 22's box office receipts before declaring Craig to be a consistent box office draw as Bond, like Brosnan was.

Jedi007 wrote:

stockslivevan wrote:I think Sean Bean would have been a better Bond than Brosnan. He has much more screen presence that made GoldenEye a bit more interesting than the next four films. Now if Dalton had stayed and we had Dalton and Bean duke it out, imagine the awesome chemistry. I never saw much chemistry between Brosnan and Bean.

Brosnan was only chosen because he was a more safe choice and they wanted to bring back Bond to the movie so they'll go with a popular (especially in the US) choice rather than the right choice. Look what happened when they did the opposite in 2006 as opposed to choosing a popular candidate, it paid off!

It looks like you're saying Brosnan is not the right choice in the 90's. Who do you think approved the scripts of un-serious - yet exciting action films that made up Brosnan's era?

Mikey and Babs, who do you think? Besides, we could have had a more engaging actor, good scripts or bad. At least Bean proved that in GoldenEye.

stockslivevan wrote:

Jedi007 wrote:

stockslivevan wrote:I think Sean Bean would have been a better Bond than Brosnan. He has much more screen presence that made GoldenEye a bit more interesting than the next four films. Now if Dalton had stayed and we had Dalton and Bean duke it out, imagine the awesome chemistry. I never saw much chemistry between Brosnan and Bean.

Brosnan was only chosen because he was a more safe choice and they wanted to bring back Bond to the movie so they'll go with a popular (especially in the US) choice rather than the right choice. Look what happened when they did the opposite in 2006 as opposed to choosing a popular candidate, it paid off!

It looks like you're saying Brosnan is not the right choice in the 90's. Who do you think approved the scripts of un-serious - yet exciting action films that made up Brosnan's era?

Mikey and Babs, who do you think? Besides, we could have had a more engaging actor, good scripts or bad. At least Bean proved that in GoldenEye.

I don't know in what article I have read this but I do remember that crtics said that Brosnan's presence in his Bond films is what actually save the films. It seems like you're saying that Brosnan wasn't a good actor at all, and that we have to get a good actor as Bond instead of an actor who looks like Bond. I'm not exactly saying that Bond must not played by a good actor, but that's just half of the deal. I would also like to respond in one of your posts here in the forums that Craig is good-looking pre and post-Bond. Being good looking doesn't mean necessarily that you look like Bond. Do you mean that Brad Pitt, or George Clooney, or Brandon Routh can play Bond despite being good looking men? I don't think so.

Marc Warren?



Zippy

Jedi007 wrote:I would also like to respond in one of your posts here in the forums that Craig is good-looking pre and post-Bond. Being good looking doesn't mean necessarily that you look like Bond. Do you mean that Brad Pitt, or George Clooney, or Brandon Routh can play Bond despite being good looking men? I don't think so.

You got missed the point I was making. I was stating that Daniel Craig got voted as one of the best looking men BEFORE he was Bond because there was someone said something along the lines "he only got to be on that list because of he's playing Bond".

Frankly, you have to be good looking to an extent for Bond. Bond should look handsome but the actor needs to display that edge which if vital for Bond. Connery, Dalton and Craig have done well, Lazenby didn't have the acting chops to pull it off despite that he trying (I'll give him credit on that) and Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan were total softies.

I think Gene Siskel said it best "Pierce Brosnan looks like he should be James Bond's valet."

I think that Marc Warren will be chosen. He is just like Daniel. Not very well known and blond and not Bondlike.

mcbride007 wrote:

I think that Marc Warren will be chosen. He is just like Daniel. Not very well known and blond and not Bondlike.

He looks a bit like Quentin Tarantino.

I don't get the Tarantino comparison. Tarantino is a lot uglier/unkempt looking.

Kevin McKidd? He's like a more handsome Daniel Craig lookalike.

Mckidd is actually young looking(compared to Craig,anyways. )

Mckidd was good in Rome but I hope to see the traditional tall, darkly handsome Bond return after Barbara has had her fun jetting around the world with the current imposter.

MkcKidd probably isn't on Babs' radar. She goes for the "more mature" men.

I'm surprised that Babs has not offered David Caruso the part of Bond.



Where is the Drakester by the way?