I know he's a bit older to be playing Bond, but I'd kinda like to see John Barrowman play Bond. I feel like he could do something good with the role.
5 Actors Who Could Play James Bond Next
- Thread starter Firefilm
- Start date
He wasn't written in modern times either, he wasn't written as Martin Freeman or Jude Law. Moses wasn't written as a gun toting card carrying member of the NRA. Spider-Man wasn't written as a 27 year old with back problems.Zen Bard said:
The beauty of any interpretation of material is the interpretation. When you create you are a god. You can literally do anything you want! I can write a short story in which I've slept with the mothers of each and every escapist staff member, twice. Look at that, I just did. It was short and sweet and to the point. They're all super kinky BTW. When you write, direct, act in, or really in any way do anything creative in a movie you are in complete control. Watson wasn't written as a woman? Cast a woman! Holy Fucking Shit! You just made Watson a woman! You are a god! Bond isn't black? Cast a black man as Bond! WHAT???!!! What is this madness? Bond is suddenly black? Who knew you could do that? Whelp, he's black now, guess you better run with it.
Max Rockatansky was written as Australian. Never been played by an Australian. Bruce Wayne was written as a billionaire. Never been played by a billionaire. Superman was written as an alien. Never been played by an alien as far as we humans know.
None of these things matter. All that matters is the quality of the thing you create.
What are you talking about!? The Brosnan Bonds were raking in more and more cash with each new iteration- Die Another Day brought in a whopping $76 million more than Goldeneye did- and was the first Bond to top the $400,000,000 gross mark. I'm not saying the Craig films were unsuccessful or anything but only a fool would think the Bond movies were in any trouble when they decided to give Pierce the boot. They also haven't really scaled back the budgets of the Craig films at all either.MarsAtlas said:
Well first of all, your argument that the people who play the characters aren't the characters themselves ("Bruce Wayne wasn't played by a billionaire, Spider-Man wasn't played by a teen", etc) is a ridiculous hyperbole that completely and intentionally misses the point.2HF said:
The point is about being true to the source material.
Here's the thing about quality interpretation; it's subject to interpretation. At what point does a reimagining of a character deviate so far from the source that it just becomes a shallow gimmick to trade on a famous name?
Sure, we can write about a smart British detective and his sassy Asian lady partner solving crimes in modern Manhattan. But is that Sherlock Holmes? We can create a series about "Jimmy Bond" a suave American CIA agent played by Don Cheadle. But is that 007?
There are certain aspects to classic characters that, in my opinion (my interpretation, if you will) are canon and don't need to be changed. Bond, Holmes and Watson are British white men. Mowgli is an Indian kid raised by wolves. Detective Dee is a Chinese investigator from the Tang Dynasty. That's how they were written. That's why they've endured for all this time.
You mention creative quality. Race/gender/species flipping an already established character is about as lazy as one can get. On the other hand, if some one wants to write a NEW story about a black British super spy dealing with cyber crime and radical insurgents, that would be awesome! And hopefully that would be a cool new classic character.
Sorry, but I have to stop you there. Robert Pattinson was indeed in that godawful Twilight series of films. But after looking through this blog [http://rpattztalks.tumblr.com/] I absolutely will not see a word said bad against him. He's hilarious and seems to bumble through life perpetually stoned judging by the stuff he comes out with.Steve the Pocket said:
Does he? Someone should tell Connery (Scottish), Dalton (Welsh), Brosnan (Irish) and Lazenby (Australian) that they can't be bond any more.sternduckling51 said:
Anyways, my vote would go to Idris, also for you consideration: Karl Urban and Aidan Turner. And the captcha says "This is Sparta" soooo Gerard Butler? Could work I guess.
sternduckling51 said:
Oh I dare you to say an Irishman is British to their face!
Seriously though, I think as long as they are from The Commonwealth (+Ireland) it should be fine.
I wouldn't because they aren't. I was under the impression that Brosnan was born in Ireland but grew up in England and is a British citizen, is that not right? (by the way Lazenby is definitely not a good way of arguing that a non-Brit can be a good Bond)Wuvlycuddles said:
Anyway I think it's pretty obvious what my point was. There's a reason that James Bond featured in the 2012 olympics opening ceremony. He's a symbol of the United Kingdom and that's important to take into account when choosing an actor to play him, it's not just a case of picking a good actor.
THISJohnny Novgorod said:
I've been saying Clive Owen would make a great James Bond for years now! How the hell did Jackman and Radcliffe get on this list and not him!? I remember when I watched Shoot Em Up, saying "he would make a brilliant James Bond"
How about an older Bond? One who didn't start out in acting but managed to move into it. Someone like...
https://31.media.tumblr.com/483380cbe3100045a1367069fe03e3be/tumblr_inline_n1qgn4Ao5w1rt2en5.gif
https://31.media.tumblr.com/483380cbe3100045a1367069fe03e3be/tumblr_inline_n1qgn4Ao5w1rt2en5.gif
Wuvlycuddles said:
Welllll if they're really really old you can. Like, a hundred years old. Them ones can have British passports.
Also 'Bond novelist Anthony Horowitz'? I didn't know Horowitz wrote James Bond novels. I thought he wrote those Alex Rider novels that got like one film and then everyone realised they were actually a bit shit.
The problem with this speculation is that any film with them, especially if Craig does 1 more isn't going to be out for 6/7 years. Suddenly Radcliffe and Hoult are 31/32 years old and Jackman/Lewis/Elba are 50.
I think Radcliffe would be an awful choice but I think Hoult is perfect. Just google images of him. Dapper as fuck. Just too young but in 10 years time he would be perfect. In fact I think is 10 years time we will be more spoilt for choice. Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Jack O?Connell would also be decent choices - it's just hard to see them in the role now as they're a little boyish but they have the looks.
For now I would like someone like Hardy or Cavil. Hardy if they want to continue in Craigs image or Cavil if they want to return to the more suave versions of Bond.
I think Radcliffe would be an awful choice but I think Hoult is perfect. Just google images of him. Dapper as fuck. Just too young but in 10 years time he would be perfect. In fact I think is 10 years time we will be more spoilt for choice. Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Jack O?Connell would also be decent choices - it's just hard to see them in the role now as they're a little boyish but they have the looks.
For now I would like someone like Hardy or Cavil. Hardy if they want to continue in Craigs image or Cavil if they want to return to the more suave versions of Bond.
I must admit, the suggestion of Hoult is fairly inspired. While I wouldn't have come up with it, given a few more years under his belt I can envisage him as Bond. But the others I would say no.
Idris Elba, as well as being already at the tail end of Bond's age range, is also black. Even tho I'm a minority Brit myself, I think Bond should remain white. I cannot see Bond played by a minority actor, it would be too much of a departure. I hated Jake Gyllenhal's casting as the Prince of Persia because he doesn't look even remotely Persian (nor did his brothers, unsurprisingly). I also hated the casting of Chinese actresses in "Memoirs of a Geisha" simply because they were famous far-eastern faces. I adore Michelle Yeoh, I think she's amazing, but she isn't Japanese, she is Chinese and casting her as a Japanese character because western audiences "wouldn't tell the difference" was a bad choice.
While I realise I am in this instance "discriminating based on colour" which even by my own definition, is racist, I am not a racist. But films, theatre and the arts are not normal workplaces. While in the "real world" people should never be employed or turned away based on gender, race or whatever, film, TV, modelling, theatre and so on are not the same thing and actors *can* and *should* be chosen as appropriate to the character. I wouldn't want a man playing a female character (except Mrs. Doubtfire), or vice versa. Where it doesn't make any difference, I don't particularly care but for established characters it is an issue. I'm as opposed to white-washing minority/foreign characters as I am to tokenism and casting minority people in roles of white characters. I disagree with Elba as a choice for Bond on this basis.
To put it a slightly different way, blacks aren't even the largest minority in Britain. Indians and those from the Indian subcontinent are (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh). So why not make Bond Indian? Or Chinese? I would class every person, minority or otherwise, as British as anyone else. But an Indian or Chinese James Bond would be just as inappropriate as a black one. I would however go watch an Idris Elba spy movie quite gladly, given a different name. Or just make him 008 or something.
Radcliffe - Just no. I don't think he is a bad actor, far from it. He's a rising, British star outside of HP films for good reason. But he's not a man's man quite frankly.
Jackman - For the same reason he's leaving Wolverine behind, and like Elba, he's already on Bond's old side. At best there might be one or two films out of him (with a three year cycle). Bond actor's should start in their early-mid 30s thru their late 40s, between 3-5 films. Also, I think he's got a bit too much star power now. Hugh Jackman would be a bigger deal than Bond.
Lewis - Don't know who he is, but he doesn't look the part. Can't say much more on that.
Idris Elba, as well as being already at the tail end of Bond's age range, is also black. Even tho I'm a minority Brit myself, I think Bond should remain white. I cannot see Bond played by a minority actor, it would be too much of a departure. I hated Jake Gyllenhal's casting as the Prince of Persia because he doesn't look even remotely Persian (nor did his brothers, unsurprisingly). I also hated the casting of Chinese actresses in "Memoirs of a Geisha" simply because they were famous far-eastern faces. I adore Michelle Yeoh, I think she's amazing, but she isn't Japanese, she is Chinese and casting her as a Japanese character because western audiences "wouldn't tell the difference" was a bad choice.
While I realise I am in this instance "discriminating based on colour" which even by my own definition, is racist, I am not a racist. But films, theatre and the arts are not normal workplaces. While in the "real world" people should never be employed or turned away based on gender, race or whatever, film, TV, modelling, theatre and so on are not the same thing and actors *can* and *should* be chosen as appropriate to the character. I wouldn't want a man playing a female character (except Mrs. Doubtfire), or vice versa. Where it doesn't make any difference, I don't particularly care but for established characters it is an issue. I'm as opposed to white-washing minority/foreign characters as I am to tokenism and casting minority people in roles of white characters. I disagree with Elba as a choice for Bond on this basis.
To put it a slightly different way, blacks aren't even the largest minority in Britain. Indians and those from the Indian subcontinent are (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh). So why not make Bond Indian? Or Chinese? I would class every person, minority or otherwise, as British as anyone else. But an Indian or Chinese James Bond would be just as inappropriate as a black one. I would however go watch an Idris Elba spy movie quite gladly, given a different name. Or just make him 008 or something.
Radcliffe - Just no. I don't think he is a bad actor, far from it. He's a rising, British star outside of HP films for good reason. But he's not a man's man quite frankly.
Jackman - For the same reason he's leaving Wolverine behind, and like Elba, he's already on Bond's old side. At best there might be one or two films out of him (with a three year cycle). Bond actor's should start in their early-mid 30s thru their late 40s, between 3-5 films. Also, I think he's got a bit too much star power now. Hugh Jackman would be a bigger deal than Bond.
Lewis - Don't know who he is, but he doesn't look the part. Can't say much more on that.
That's not strictly true. MGM practically went bankrupt a few years ago and couldn't afford to produce the movie alone. So they got other production companies involved, raised the stakes with sponsorship (heineken beer f.ex) and made Skyfall on a smaller budget. Interestingly, Skyfall was the first Bond movie to break the billion dollar barrier alone.MarsAtlas said:
The "other guy" just happens to be the best actor on the entire list. Elba just seems like a random token choice, Harry Potter is a plonk, Jackman is too raw and Hoult is how about noJohnny Novgorod said:
captcha: black gold. Told ya ...