Dave Bautista reportedly cast as henchman 'Hinx' in Bond 24

MI6 wrote:

As MI6 first reported back in August, the Bond 24 production team were casting a 'classic, iconic henchman' to go up against 007 in the next adventure.

According the Latino Review, 'Guardians of the Galaxy' star and former WWE wrestler Dave Bautista has landed the role of 'Hinx'.

'Guardians' was one of the summer's biggest box-office movies and marked Bautista's debut in film as he played one of the leading superheroes. The 45 year-old American wrestler-turned-actor would not be the first former sports star who landed a Bond movie role.

The original casting notice described the role as: "Ideally over 6' 2". Hinx is the main henchman/assassin. We are looking for an imposing extremely physically fit actor. He has several fights with Bond and will have to have stunt training. He has to drive. We are looking for someone very unusual, possibly from a sports background."

Haven't seen Guardians of the Galaxy but am curious to see how a Jaws/Oddjob type henchman plays out.

He was used very well in GUARDIANS. I'm curious if EON is also gonna play him up for that kind of comedy or actually go the Oddjob/Jaws route by having him largely be silent with an occasional smile. Either way, it's nice to have a Craig film that's finally going for a more prominent henchman.

Is Hinx the Mexican version of Jinx?

CJB wrote:

Is Hinx the Mexican version of Jinx?

Hinx?

Behave yourself, Oppers.

I tried to find a worse name. It was not easy...

I think Dog Bond predicted this a while back.

A horrible name for a henchman? Yes. But I'm still glad they're finally featuring a "real" henchman in the Craig films.

I know this guy from WWE, but not from his movies (Did not see Guardians). I'm hoping for the best. He definitely has a thuggish look.

I'm just wondering if Craig tends to work better off more intellectual type villains though - like Mikkelson. he's a bit of a brute physique wise anyway, so not sure if putting two brick walls against each other will have sufficient contrast. Could end up like Thor vs. Hulk in Avengers.

I'd like to see a Dr. Kaufman style henchman. That guy was awesome and seriously underused. One of the best villains of the Brosnan era, and they only gave him less than 5 minutes....

This might work. I found myself seeing Galaxy for reasons I won't bore people with and Dave Bautista's performance took me by surprise. He was quite good. I guess wrestlers spend most of their time acting.

Control wrote:

I think Dog Bond predicted this a while back.

Yep.

https://bondandbeyond.forumotion.com/t2776-who-would-you-cast-as-the-iconic-henchman-in-bond-24

I've always liked him in WWE and prefer his casting to Rock anyday...Rock is in everything, it gets tiresome...

That makes 2 new casting-calls I'm happy with...Lea & Batista.

Salomé wrote:

I tried to find a worse name. It was not easy...

Nick Nack? Tee Hee?

bitchcraft wrote:

Salomé wrote:

I tried to find a worse name. It was not easy...

Nick Nack? Tee Hee?

Zao

Mr Kil

/thread

Elvis.

Largo's Shark wrote:

Mr Kil

/thread

I guess spelling it "Kill" would've made it too obvious.

Good ol' Pervert and Wank.

To be fair, that was likely Tamawhorey. So much of that film belonged to him.

I remember when Haggis was brought onto CASINO ROYALE and everyone credited him with "all the good bits". But when he got to do QUANTUM OF SOLACE on his own, it became apparent how ham-fisted he was. Of course, the script wasn't finished when shooting started, but I can't for a moment believe that every scene was in a raw, rough draft phase. We know Bruce Feirstein and Michael Apted's wife rewrote THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH, so between that and the low quality of the QOS script, I have to wonder if Purvis and Wade really do deserve the bad reputation that they've been saddled with. Just because your name appears as the screenwriter in the credits, that doesn't mean that you actually wrote it. Graham Yost is credited as the screenwriter of SPEED, but has freely admitted that 98% of it was written by someone else.

So I'm with MP on this one - it sounds more like Tamahori.

Many of the successful elements in Skyfall are in Purvis and Wade's previous Bond films so arguably it's the direction that's been the problem more than their screenplays. It's a difficult dynamic - Tamahori has made good films such as Once Were Warriors, but there's no doubt he was wrong for DAD.

Nice to see the return of the 'hulking henchman' ... Mr Kil was the last, I believe.

Erica Ambler wrote:

Many of the successful elements in Skyfall are in Purvis and Wade's previous Bond films so arguably it's the direction that's been the problem more than their screenplays. It's a difficult dynamic - Tamahori has made good films such as Once Were Warriors, but there's no doubt he was wrong for DAD.

I think American action films was what he was ultimately wrong for, once you look at his next two projects after Bond. He seemed to want to indulge in the zaniness of the genre, but simply wasn't fit to pull them off.

Tamahori was at his best with films exploring what it means to be a man in the modern world and its consequences, or modern man out of his element (ONCE WERE WARRIORS, MULHOLLAND FALLS, THE EDGE etc. - all solid films). You could argue that DIE ANOTHER DAY's strongest moments (Bond confined and tortured in North Korea and returning to the civilised world with a vengeance) tapped into those themes.

I did not know that. You're right in that Bond's confinement time was the strongest part of DaD.

I do think, however, that some of the director changes were what was the cause of problems with Bond in the 90's/00's. In the 60's through the 80's they had a very consistent team (sure directors changed, but they came back after a few movies away). The guys who worked on Bond during that time knew how to make a real Bond movie (music, set design, direction, title art), and it showed. In the 90's after that long break they just seemed to bring in a lot of new people who did not know what they were doing - in terms of capturing the essense of a Bond film. Campbell got closest with both of his efforts (and it's miraculous what he was able to pull off with a shoe string budget for Goldeneye). Tamahori, good though he may have been, had no clue - he was just going through the paces and checking the boxes but not capturing the essence.

Skyfall did get back to some of it, but I still think it wasn't quite right. Hopefully they get it right with Bond 24, which is for all intents and purposes the first true Bond is Bond movie of the Craig era (with all the compartment pieces and characters in place).

Now, if we could only get Barry back from the grave........

Largo's Shark wrote:

Tamahori was at his best with films exploring what it means to be a man in the modern world and its consequences, or modern man out of his element (ONCE WERE WARRIORS, MULHOLLAND FALLS, THE EDGE etc. - all solid films). You could argue that DIE ANOTHER DAY's strongest moments (Bond confined and tortured in North Korea and returning to the civilised world with a vengeance) tapped into those themes.

Tamahori did bring out the best performance by Brosnan, so there's that.