Empire's new Bond cover

Sharky wrote:

Even if Connery's role in THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING was a supporting one to Caine, Huston still got a terrific performance out of the man. Likewise with Lumet in THE HILL. Likewise, I was also impressed by his more tender work in ROBIN AND MARIAN, THE RUSSIA HOUSE, and FIVE DAYS ONE SUMMER.

Sure, he's no master of accents, but then neither were Richard Burton, Peter O'Toole, or George C. Scott. That doesn't take away any of the conviction they lent to their parts over the decades. While unlike those three, Sean Connery's not a great actor, but a good one. He is however a great star.

Re: LAST CRUSADE. The film being a popcorn flick doesn't preclude it from having a fine performance from Connery.

I think you are wasting your time with this guy Sharky.

David Schofield wrote:

A supporting role to Mike Caine?

In a very decent movie. Yes, and, your point being? Redford wasn't the main star in Butch Cassidy, he was equal billing, the same way McQueen was to Newman in Towering Inferno. Connery was not in a supporting role in Man Who Would Be King, he was equal billing.

David Schofield wrote:

A lousy Richard Burton OTT impersonation in THE OFFENCE he was never asked to repeat?

His performance in that film was nothing like a Burton mimic. I regard that as one of the best performances seen on screen, not just by Connery but by all actors concerned with the movie. But then, this is my opinion, and yours differs, so I doubt I will persuade you otherwise.

David Schofield wrote:

A sympathy Oscar for the worst accent ever on film?

So the only reason Connery managed to get an Oscar was out of pure sympathy. Yeah, right.....

David Schofield wrote:

Working with Spielberg in a popcorn franchise hit?

Anything terribly wrong with that?

David Schofield wrote:

And these are the highlights.

Christ, only Hitch even made Connery work hard - and I supsect that was because Connery was terrified of Hitch, propably the last time he was ever afraif of a film maker after he knew he could dominate Terence Young after Bond became a hit. After that, it was the standrd Sean Connery character in everything.

Not seen SHALAKO, THE MOLLY MAGUIRES, THE NEXT MAN, THE MAN WITH THE DEADLY LENS , FORRESTER, etc?

Connery's career, Bond aside, for all his good fortune and opportunity available to him as a result of Bond, was, I maintain, a disaster, creatively at least. I conceed, however, he has made a LOT of money.

Ok, then I'd be interested to hear which actors you rate as not being a disaster. Please tell.

jet set willy wrote:

David Schofield wrote:

Connery's career, Bond aside, for all his good fortune and opportunity available to him as a result of Bond, was, I maintain, a disaster, creatively at least. I conceed, however, he has made a LOT of money.

Ok, then I'd be interested to hear which actors you rate as not being a disaster. Please tell.

My point isn't that Connery's career was a total disaster, merely that it was without Bond.

Consider. for example, the career profile of Mike Caine who didn't have the crutch of a character like Bond nor the power behind of that in his film choices but had far greater success.

Christ, of Connery's four "finest" performances you list, three are in supporting roles - where's the great non- Bond Sean Connery movie? And his OTT Burtonesque OFFENCE was so unsuccessful nobody went to see it and he was never allowed to do that sort of thiing again. The UNTOUCHABLES did not deserve an Oscar in anybody's money, for what little value and merit those statues might have.

But my intention merely here was to contend that Connery wasn't a great actor. He was a great star. But he wasn't much of any actor. And without Bond he wasn't much of anything, really.

(Though I guess the reason Connery's films were hopeless wan't his fault. It was either the writer, or the director, or the producers fault. Isn't that the great man's usual retort?)

But I am, first and foremost, an Ian Fleming fan.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Fassbender's almost as old as Craig (and me). Probably a deal-breaker.

Mikey Assbender is only 35...nine years younger than Craig.... :drunken:

Brozza took on the role when he was pushing 41 thereabouts....

David Schofield wrote:

My point isn't that Connery's career was a total disaster, merely that it was without Bond.

Hunt for Red October and The Rock I would class as Connery's films, The Untouchables Conney was the most memorable thing in the movie, likewise in Time Bandits and Highlander, where he played minor supporting roles. For whatever strengths he had as an actor, he was often the most memorable element of a movie, even when reduced to a bit-part.

The Offence wasn't a commercial hit but I thought his performance to be superb, yet I thought you weren't bothered about commecial aspects, as you quickly dismissed Last Crusade because of its popcorn flick appeal...?

David Schofield wrote:

But I am, first and foremost, an Ian Fleming fan.

Now we are on common ground...... 8)

Not bad.

And I say that with a record of staunch heterosexuality.

The thing with Fassbender is, though, that between X-MEN: FIRST CLASS and HAYWIRE, we've practically seen his James Bond. It's kinda like Hugh Jackman. He never got the part, but you nevertheless know how he would have played it.

He does look the part, though:

Michael Fassbender for Bond 24!

Yes, he certainly does look the part. But I doubt he'll get the role. By the time Craig's through, Fassbender will be around the bend.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Yes, he certainly does look the part. But I doubt he'll get the role. By the time Craig's through, Fassbender will be around the bend.

Moore, Dalton, and Brosnan were all cast after they hit forty. If Craig is out by 2017, then Fassbender is still in the right age zone for Bond.

Harmsway wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Yes, he certainly does look the part. But I doubt he'll get the role. By the time Craig's through, Fassbender will be around the bend.

If Craig is out by 2017, then Fassbender is still in the right age zone for Bond.

A sizable if. Hey, I hope it happens, but I just don't think it will. Micolli will go younger.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Harmsway wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Yes, he certainly does look the part. But I doubt he'll get the role. By the time Craig's through, Fassbender will be around the bend.

If Craig is out by 2017, then Fassbender is still in the right age zone for Bond.

A sizable if. Hey, I hope it happens, but I just don't think it will. Micolli will go younger.

Supect you're right.

I'tll be macho-pretty 6' plus, darkish, early 30s, next time.

Everything Craig isn't. And F'bender never will be

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Harmsway wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Yes, he certainly does look the part. But I doubt he'll get the role. By the time Craig's through, Fassbender will be around the bend.

If Craig is out by 2017, then Fassbender is still in the right age zone for Bond.

A sizable if.

A likely "if," I'd say. That would give Craig two more Bond films post-SKYFALL. That's more than enough.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Micolli will go younger.

It's possible, but they didn't even go that young when they were casting "rookie Bond," so I'm far from convinced this is the case. Casting for Bond has always skewed older, and I see no reason to believe it won't continue with the next fella.

No doubt Fassbender would make an interesting Bond. But he's already turning into an A-list leading man, and EON would never go for that. Moore and Brosnan may have been A-list TV actors, but certainly not cinema stars when they took the part. Craig was nowhere near A-list status in 2005.

And thankfully Henry Cavill didn't get the role. Bond should not be in his early/mid-20s. Cavill would've made Brosnan look like Chuck Norris in comparison. He may become a decent successor to Christopher Reeve and Brandon Routh, but certainly not the Bonds.

GeneralGogol wrote:

No doubt Fassbender would make an interesting Bond. But he's already turning into an A-list leading man, and EON would never go for that. Moore and Brosnan may have been A-list TV actors, but certainly not cinema stars when they took the part. Craig was nowhere near A-list status in 2005.

Yep. And this is why Fassbender won't get the part. Much like Hugh Jackman, he's just a bit too big. He's already playing a major role in blockbuster franchises.

We'll get someone who's lesser-known and, well, cheaper.

Harmsway wrote:

We'll get someone who's lesser-known and, well, cheaper.

That's how Craig started out too...but I'm sure he's no longer the poor man's Bond :face:

Harmsway wrote:

We'll get someone who's lesser-known and, well, cheaper.

Sounds like Roy Hodgson for England manager.

If Fassbender isn't an option, how about Tom Hiddleston?



He'd need a haircut and a bit of colour in him, but after seeing him as Loki in THOR and THE AVENGERS, I think he merits consideration.

Of course, he is attached to the Marvel franchise, so maybe he'll be too big a name by the time the role of Bond opens up.

Looks like a wimp.

He's in character as Loki in that picture, and Loki is very passive-aggressive.

Better pictures;

https://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=yPb&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&q=tom%20hiddleston&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=knaiT_jjPO2YiAfnkdDkCA&biw=1366&bih=664&sei=lHaiT-XCK4ramAWbl5XwBw

Prisoner Monkeys wrote:

He's in character as Loki in that picture, and Loki is very passive-aggressive.

Better pictures;

https://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=yPb&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&q=tom%20hiddleston&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=knaiT_jjPO2YiAfnkdDkCA&biw=1366&bih=664&sei=lHaiT-XCK4ramAWbl5XwBw

Sorry, this guy looks way less suitable than Craig does or ever did.

Then again, so have plenty of the other candidates I have seen put forward here and elsewhere

The (very funny) scene in Avengers Assemble in which Loki gets his ass handed to him on a plate by the Hulk may count against Hiddleston in the 'future Bond' stakes .

The White Tuxedo wrote:

"The name's Bond. James Bond."

I sincerely hope it isn't

The picture icould be potentially ironic in that for once some is doing an impression of Michael Sheen.....

Blunt Instrument wrote:

The (very funny) scene in Avengers Assemble in which Loki gets his ass handed to him on a plate by the Hulk may count against Hiddleston in the 'future Bond' stakes .

I think Hiddleston may count against Hiddleston in the "Future Bond" stakes. That picture that White Tuxedo posted makes Hiddleston look as if he should be playing Paul Reiser's character in a big-screen adaptation of the 80's hit television show MY TWO DADS (except in the modern day version the two "dads" are actually lovers and were married in a commitment ceremony).