@ Ricardo C.
Harry Callahan... now Clint Eastwood, in his day, would have been an awesome Bond!
@ HowardB
Agree with you – I'd like to see Daniel Craig remain in the role but hope he stops BEFORE he looks a bit too old. For me Connery and Moore did too many...
Things I hate:
1. People who hate things.
2. Irony.
3. Lists.
@ Ricardo C.
Harry Callahan... now Clint Eastwood, in his day, would have been an awesome Bond!
He almost was but he turned down the role. Personally, I am none to crazy about American's playing Bond despite my love for Eastwood. The only American I could have seen playing Bond was Gregory Peck, he wasn't American "rugged".
Ricardo: whenever you have a chance to actually reply with constructive answers, without being rude and offensive, you waste it. I won't dignify some of the incredibly rude and offensive stuff you posted with an answer. And this shall be the way from now on. This is a thread about Cavill, I'll talk about him as damn much as I please since it's the place to do so. You "salivate" (what a disgusting verb) over Craig a lot more so than I do over Cavill. You're certainly not one to judge, and you don't even have the excuse of being of the opposite sex.
I couldn't care less about someone who makes such rude remarks taking me seriously or not. Not worth the effort. FYI: I have met Craig in person. So what I'm saying about him, the opinion I have in terms of how he looks, how he comes across etc, is formed by first-hand experience too, not just by seeing him in movies. And, I am not impressed by the fact someone is a celebrity at all. I have spent my entire working life with them, I deal with them every day. They're people like everyone else. Faults are one thing, being gross is another. I won't stand for that, rudeness, lack of style in real life. EVER. People who aren't gross, but well-behaved, polite and stylish aren't fake: they just care about behaving and looking decently, unlike gross, rude, unstylish people. I thank God I have a lot of friends like that, and I've been raised like that, too. And I'm not talking celebrities, I'm talking everyday people.
Also I am sorry, it may sound harsh, but I notice woman seem to go for the fey guys. They are splashed on magazine covers, films, and television all over the world and they swoon over them. You object because you are a woman and that's natural. I think a lot guys would agree with me and a lot of woman would disagree. That's all good because that's what makes the fellas and the ladies differ.
Do you seriously think you own the benchmark for fey, or soft or unmanly? ) Sorry to disappoint you. Not one of my MALE friends likes Craig either. And I have plenty of male friends who are professional rugby players, just so we get over your "fey" statement immediately. I grew up the only girl with three brothers, so if you think I am unfamiliar with men and with sharing everyday life with them, think again. It is exactly because I am very well-acquainted with them that I very well know that being gross or rude or unstylish doesn't make a man a man, and least of all manly, at all. It is simply ridiculous to claim most men nowadays are "fey". I sure as hell have many male friends who will vehemently disagree with your statement about being splashed on covers as well. Heck, my rugby player friends have even done half-naked calendars, and they sure as hell are nowhere near "fey".
One last thing: being gross is ABSOLUTELY NOT a manly trait. Or anything that makes anyone more manly than someone else. A)Gross applies to both men and women and B ) it is just being gross, which is just and simply disgusting and has got precious nothing to do with being manly. Bottom-dwellers aren't more manly, they are just more disgusting.
And, I have read the Bond books thank you very much. Which is exactly why I say with good reason that (re-read my previous post since you always conveniently skip adjectives) dangerous is NOT BOND'S MAIN TRAIT AT ALL. As I said previously, he CAN be dangerous when he is in action, but dangerous is certainly not his main trait. He has a commanding and imposing presence, which is very different from dangerous. Once again, dangerous as main trait is for the villains, not for Bond. For Bond it is just and only one of many parts of his personality.
And with this, I'm done discussing with you. Again this is a Cavill thread so I will most certainly continue to talk about him in here. So back on topic, that is to say Cavill.
I'd prefer Bond to be played by an Englishman every time.
For me, put a few years on Cavill and he could do it: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3320/327 … 309fe1.jpg
I agree about the Englishman, and in any case Bond is not going to be played by an American any time soon. That is an old photo of his. It's from years ago. This is a more recent one:
Hello, Mr Bond.
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
Looking at that photo he appears to be a little too "boyishly handsome" at this time to play Bond (a shave and a decent haircut would help also...that beard looks really bad on him...just destroys his strong jawline and chin). On the positive side, he's one of those guys who will probably look better as he gets older and matures (like George Clooney). Just based upon facial looks from that photo I'd give him around five to seven years to mature before casting him as Bond (like anyone really cares what I think or I have a vote in this lol). He should keep up the rugby playing as a couple well placed facial scars and a broken nose would actually make him more "Bondian" looking. Beyond just how he looks however one important ingredient for a properly convincing Bond is how he "moves"....that panther like quality that Connery had and tell me Craig hasn't mimicked it in his own way...just look at the scene in CR after he gets off the plane.
Looking at that photo he appears to be a little too "boyishly handsome" at this time to play Bond (a shave and a decent haircut would help also...that beard looks really bad on him...just destroys his strong jawline and chin). On the positive side, he's one of those guys who will probably look better as he gets older and matures (like George Clooney). Just based upon facial looks from that photo I'd give him around five to seven years to mature before casting him as Bond (like anyone really cares what I think or I have a vote in this lol). He should keep up the rugby playing as a couple well placed facial scars and a broken nose would actually make him more "Bondian" looking. Beyond just how he looks however one important ingredient for a properly convincing Bond is how he "moves"....that panther like quality that Connery had and tell me Craig hasn't mimicked it in his own way...just look at the scene in CR after he gets off the plane.
Here, still recent, good haircut and no beard. (btw I think the beard looks great on him... but there again he looks great either way for me. And the hair is longer for precise filming reasons. His character in the Tudors needed both beard and longer hair because they aged him and changed the looks of everyone to update them with the fashion of those times).
I disagree he needs to wait, but to each their own. You enjoy Craig so I'm not surprised we see this differently ) It's all good, though. We've had a way too old-looking Bond for too long as far as I'm concerned. Time to cast a younger actor who can actually reboot the series and make films for a decade at least. And a broken nose is not Bond's characteristic at all! Neither Dalton, nor Brosnan nor Craig have a broken nose, what is this bizarre need to ruin Henry Cavill's face? ) Thankfully he has stopped playing rugby because of injuries, otherwise you would probably have your wish! He doesn't even have one of those perfect French noses, so his nose is good as is ) It's got imperfections, so works well. His face looks great as is, no ruining Henry's face! ) If they want scars, there's makeup for that. Nobody ever had scars so far though, and I don't see why they should add them for him. He looks exactly like James Bond should the way he is as far as I'm concerned.
I see nothing "Panther-like" about Craig as he to me completely lacks style not to mention charm and what the French call "allure". So I think that "panther" quality may be different for us. I also don't think Connery had that naturally, that was taught to him among other things when they made him a lot more refined than he originally was. (the lorry driver comment will always make me laugh. And to think Fleming wanted Cary Grant, and Cary turned the part down... sigh. It's too bad Cary was too old because I would have enjoyed having Bond films with him immensely. He was elegance personified).
But, regarding the way Cavill moves... it's one of his best traits, and if directors say so (both directors from the Tudors and the director of "Immortals" that he filmed earlier this year have said so) I would say there's no doubt on it. Oh, those who cast him for the Dunhill ads also said they specifically chose him because he has a way of carrying himself and moving, an elegance, that is perfect for the modern gentleman. (there's even a youtube video where they say it).
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
I think he does. He's lucky enough to look younger than he actually is, but at the same time it means he has to wait a little longer for his shot at Bond. I think in about five years he would be better suited to the role. Bond should be in his mid-30s, and Cavill isn't even 30 yet.
I'm all for Cavill being Bond, because I would agree with you that he has the looks to do it. But not just yet. It's still too early for him.
I think he does. He's lucky enough to look younger than he actually is, but at the same time it means he has to wait a little longer for his shot at Bond. I think in about five years he would be better suited to the role. Bond should be in his mid-30s, and Cavill isn't even 30 yet.
I'm all for Cavill being Bond, because I would agree with you that he has the looks to do it. But not just yet. It's still too early for him.
I can see your point of view. I think it depends what angle they pick for the next few movies. Don't misunderstand me, I can see why some prefer the older look for Bond, absolutely. I just see it differently. I think the next one should actually reboot the series. The rookie Bond concept with a man who looks 50 while being 40 was pretty ridiculous IMO. I think the Craig movies will end up being stand-alone ones, like the Dalton ones (and only in that sense I see the similarity to Dalton, and I wish absolutely no ill to Craig. I'm fine with him doing Bond 23 if they make it by 2012).
I think they should do an actual reboot of the series with the next Bond, thus have a younger actor in the role and do rookie Bond for real. To then have the actor go on for a decade doing movies. Which is also why I think Cavill is perfect for it. Anyhow he is 28 so by the time Craig is finished with Bond 23 and they can cast him he will be 30 at least. Which means he'll be the right "aged" age by the time they start shooting, even if they don't reboot (I think they will, but that's another matter).
Just to see a glimpse of action, this video has Cavill doing his own stunt in Madrid while they were filming "The Cold Light of Day" (his action movie to be released next year. He's the lead in the movie).
Thanks Alessandra – I did see those more recent photos of HC but figured those Dunhill ad photos where a little more appropriate when imagining him as Bond? As has been said previously, I too see HC as Bond, just not yet.
I'm a big fan of DC myself, but then I think all the actors to play Bond have added something I like to be honest – what was DC like when you met him by the way?
And "...commanding and imposing presence..." – this is Dalton through and through for me?
On another subject – I was thinking it'd be very interesting to get Tarantino in as director, make three films back-to-back releasing one in November, the second during the summer and the final part the following November. If it worked, it'd be very cool, and if it didn't, you could simply return to old trusted formula...
Things I hate:
1. People who hate things.
2. Irony.
3. Lists.
I think he does. He's lucky enough to look younger than he actually is, but at the same time it means he has to wait a little longer for his shot at Bond. I think in about five years he would be better suited to the role. Bond should be in his mid-30s, and Cavill isn't even 30 yet.
I'm all for Cavill being Bond, because I would agree with you that he has the looks to do it. But not just yet. It's still too early for him.
I can see your point of view. I think it depends what angle they pick for the next few movies. Don't misunderstand me, I can see why some prefer the older look for Bond, absolutely. I just see it differently. I think the next one should actually reboot the series. The rookie Bond concept with a man who looks 50 while being 40 was pretty ridiculous IMO. I think the Craig movies will end up being stand-alone ones, like the Dalton ones (and only in that sense I see the similarity to Dalton, and I wish absolutely no ill to Craig. I'm fine with him doing Bond 23 if they make it by 2012).
I think they should do an actual reboot of the series with the next Bond, thus have a younger actor in the role and do rookie Bond for real. To then have the actor go on for a decade doing movies. Which is also why I think Cavill is perfect for it. Anyhow he is 28 so by the time Craig is finished with Bond 23 and they can cast him he will be 30 at least. Which means he'll be the right "aged" age by the time they start shooting, even if they don't reboot (I think they will, but that's another matter).
Just to see a glimpse of action, this video has Cavill doing his own stunt in Madrid while they were filming "The Cold Light of Day" (his action movie to be released next year. He's the lead in the movie).
At present HC only makes sense for me if they were to go with your re-booted re-boot. That would be a disaster as like it or not we are stuck with the botched re-boot idea of a superanuated rookie too old for the part (it clearly made more sense when HC was in the running) Although to some degree botched I was able to enjoy CR for the superb Bond film it is, by ignoring the rookie element, and DC although far from ideal in my eyes has a commanding prescence and has surprisingly 'owned' the role for many. I think HC may be ok at a later date. I watched the Tudors and surprisingly he reminded me of DC a lot. The same swagger, and dare I say it the same tendency to pout. I think that they may have more in common than is immediatly obvious...
Ricardo: whenever you have a chance to actually reply with constructive answers, without being rude and offensive, you waste it. I won't dignify some of the incredibly rude and offensive stuff you posted with an answer. And this shall be the way from now on. This is a thread about Cavill, I'll talk about him as damn much as I please since it's the place to do so. You "salivate" (what a disgusting verb) over Craig a lot more so than I do over Cavill. You're certainly not one to judge, and you don't even have the excuse of being of the opposite sex.
If I did, then I wouldn't have criticized him like I have in the past. Yeah I have been rude because your arrogance deserves as much. Lastly, you find salivate a "disgusting verb" ? How prudish can you get ? )
I couldn't care less about someone who makes such rude remarks taking me seriously or not. Not worth the effort. FYI: I have met Craig in person. So what I'm saying about him, the opinion I have in terms of how he looks, how he comes across etc, is formed by first-hand experience too, not just by seeing him in movies. And, I am not impressed by the fact someone is a celebrity at all. I have spent my entire working life with them, I deal with them every day. They're people like everyone else. Faults are one thing, being gross is another. I won't stand for that, rudeness, lack of style in real life. EVER. People who aren't gross, but well-behaved, polite and stylish aren't fake: they just care about behaving and looking decently, unlike gross, rude, unstylish people. I thank God I have a lot of friends like that, and I've been raised like that, too. And I'm not talking celebrities, I'm talking everyday people.
Okay Ms. High and Mighty. You must love that view from your Ivory Tower. ) Also we are all debating about screen images, not personal encounters. Yeah I am you met Craig and you must be very close like you claim you are with all celebs. 8-)
Do you seriously think you own the benchmark for fey, or soft or unmanly? ) Sorry to disappoint you. Not one of my MALE friends likes Craig either. And I have plenty of male friends who are professional rugby players, just so we get over your "fey" statement immediately. I grew up the only girl with three brothers, so if you think I am unfamiliar with men and with sharing everyday life with them, think again. It is exactly because I am very well-acquainted with them that I very well know that being gross or rude or unstylish doesn't make a man a man, and least of all manly, at all. It is simply ridiculous to claim most men nowadays are "fey". I sure as hell have many male friends who will vehemently disagree with your statement about being splashed on covers as well. Heck, my rugby player friends have even done half-naked calendars, and they sure as hell are nowhere near "fey".
It's really hilarous how you keep refering to your friends as the beacon of truth. )
One last thing: being gross is ABSOLUTELY NOT a manly trait. Or anything that makes anyone more manly than someone else. A)Gross applies to both men and women and B ) it is just being gross, which is just and simply disgusting and has got precious nothing to do with being manly. Bottom-dwellers aren't more manly, they are just more disgusting.
Sure Alessandra. Sure. That's nice little fantasy world you live in. I know you must have worked with celebs. You act as phony as the rest of them.
And, I have read the Bond books thank you very much. Which is exactly why I say with good reason that (re-read my previous post since you always conveniently skip adjectives) dangerous is NOT BOND'S MAIN TRAIT AT ALL. As I said previously, he CAN be dangerous when he is in action, but dangerous is certainly not his main trait. He has a commanding and imposing presence, which is very different from dangerous. Once again, dangerous as main trait is for the villains, not for Bond. For Bond it is just and only one of many parts of his personality.
And once again, you fail to counter the references to the books. You can pretend such remarks didn't exist but they do. You haven't read the books. You are like a political pundit. When you see facts, you run like hell away from them.
And with this, I'm done discussing with you. Again this is a Cavill thread so I will most certainly continue to talk about him in here. So back on topic, that is to say Cavill.
I never said you can't talk about him. I find it hilarous how you worship the ground he walks on, it's pretty damn sad really.
Yeah General G. would have really found this guy a "nasty customer". )
Ricardo: whenever you have a chance to actually reply with constructive answers, without being rude and offensive, you waste it. I won't dignify some of the incredibly rude and offensive stuff you posted with an answer. And this shall be the way from now on. This is a thread about Cavill, I'll talk about him as damn much as I please since it's the place to do so. You "salivate" (what a disgusting verb) over Craig a lot more so than I do over Cavill. You're certainly not one to judge, and you don't even have the excuse of being of the opposite sex.
If I did, then I wouldn't have criticized him like I have in the past. Yeah I have been rude because your arrogance deserves as much. Lastly, you find salivate a "disgusting verb" ? How prudish can you get ? )
I couldn't care less about someone who makes such rude remarks taking me seriously or not. Not worth the effort. FYI: I have met Craig in person. So what I'm saying about him, the opinion I have in terms of how he looks, how he comes across etc, is formed by first-hand experience too, not just by seeing him in movies. And, I am not impressed by the fact someone is a celebrity at all. I have spent my entire working life with them, I deal with them every day. They're people like everyone else. Faults are one thing, being gross is another. I won't stand for that, rudeness, lack of style in real life. EVER. People who aren't gross, but well-behaved, polite and stylish aren't fake: they just care about behaving and looking decently, unlike gross, rude, unstylish people. I thank God I have a lot of friends like that, and I've been raised like that, too. And I'm not talking celebrities, I'm talking everyday people.
Okay Ms. High and Mighty. You must love that view from your Ivory Tower. ) Also we are all debating about screen images, not personal encounters. Yeah I am you met Craig and you must be very close like you claim you are with all celebs. 8-)
Do you seriously think you own the benchmark for fey, or soft or unmanly? ) Sorry to disappoint you. Not one of my MALE friends likes Craig either. And I have plenty of male friends who are professional rugby players, just so we get over your "fey" statement immediately. I grew up the only girl with three brothers, so if you think I am unfamiliar with men and with sharing everyday life with them, think again. It is exactly because I am very well-acquainted with them that I very well know that being gross or rude or unstylish doesn't make a man a man, and least of all manly, at all. It is simply ridiculous to claim most men nowadays are "fey". I sure as hell have many male friends who will vehemently disagree with your statement about being splashed on covers as well. Heck, my rugby player friends have even done half-naked calendars, and they sure as hell are nowhere near "fey".
It's really hilarous how you keep refering to your friends as the beacon of truth. )
One last thing: being gross is ABSOLUTELY NOT a manly trait. Or anything that makes anyone more manly than someone else. A)Gross applies to both men and women and B ) it is just being gross, which is just and simply disgusting and has got precious nothing to do with being manly. Bottom-dwellers aren't more manly, they are just more disgusting.
Sure Alessandra. Sure. That's nice little fantasy world you live in. I know you must have worked with celebs. You act as phony as the rest of them.
And, I have read the Bond books thank you very much. Which is exactly why I say with good reason that (re-read my previous post since you always conveniently skip adjectives) dangerous is NOT BOND'S MAIN TRAIT AT ALL. As I said previously, he CAN be dangerous when he is in action, but dangerous is certainly not his main trait. He has a commanding and imposing presence, which is very different from dangerous. Once again, dangerous as main trait is for the villains, not for Bond. For Bond it is just and only one of many parts of his personality.
And once again, you fail to counter the references to the books. You can pretend such remarks didn't exist but they do. You haven't read the books.
And with this, I'm done discussing with you. Again this is a Cavill thread so I will most certainly continue to talk about him in here. So back on topic, that is to say Cavill.
I never said you can't talk about him. I find it hilarous how you worship the ground he walks on, it's pretty damn sad really.
Yeah General G. would have really found this guy a "nasty customer". )
In the Tudors he did play a nasty customer in Charles Brandon.
Nasty when needed,sauve when needed,tough when needed and all done believably and stylish whereas OLD Dan just seemed needy,
In the Tudors he did play a nasty customer in Charles Brandon.
Nasty when needed,sauve when needed,tough when needed and all done believably and stylish whereas OLD Dan just seemed needy,
In the Tudors he did play a nasty customer in Charles Brandon.
Nasty when needed,sauve when needed,tough when needed and all done believably and stylish whereas OLD Dan just seemed needy,
I am talking about a remark made at first glance.
Well at first glance of the picture you are on about I would say dark horse,doe not need to try and look tough but if push comes to shove would rip your tonsils out without batting an eyelid I
say this because he looks like a couple of forces friends in this picture and they are exactly like this.
In the Tudors he did play a nasty customer in Charles Brandon.
Nasty when needed,sauve when needed,tough when needed and all done believably and stylish whereas OLD Dan just seemed needy,
I am talking about a remark made at first glance.
Well at first glance of the picture you are on about I would say dark horse,doe not need to try and look tough but if push comes to shove would rip your tonsils out without batting an eyelid I
say this because he looks like a couple of forces friends in this picture and they are exactly like this.
I am talking about the response to Bond's picture in From Russia With Love when SMERSH had their meeting. General G, or someone else at the meeting, said Bond looked like "A Nasty Customer". This certaintly isn't the only impression that Bond had given people in the books. I don't think many people would provoke that reaction in general but if you're going cast someone as James Bond, then you best be sure he would probably look close enough to that image in the novels. I don't think Cavill comes close to having that image.
Well at first glance of the picture you are on about I would say dark horse,doe not need to try and look tough but if push comes to shove would rip your tonsils out without batting an eyelid I
say this because he looks like a couple of forces friends in this picture and they are exactly like this.
I am talking about the response to Bond's picture in From Russia With Love when SMERSH had their meeting. General G, or someone else at the meeting, said Bond looked like "A Nasty Customer". This certaintly isn't the only impression that Bond had given people in the books. I don't think many people would provoke that reaction in general but if you're going cast someone as James Bond, then you best be sure he would probably look close enough to that image in the novels. I don't think Cavill comes close to having that image.
I think he does a lot more than some of the other actors who have played 007 and I am not just on about the current one,some of the others would not give off could be a nasty piece of work vibe yet they still made good Bonds,sadly OLD Dan imo does not do either.
Well at first glance of the picture you are on about I would say dark horse,doe not need to try and look tough but if push comes to shove would rip your tonsils out without batting an eyelid I
say this because he looks like a couple of forces friends in this picture and they are exactly like this.
I am talking about the response to Bond's picture in From Russia With Love when SMERSH had their meeting. General G, or someone else at the meeting, said Bond looked like "A Nasty Customer". This certaintly isn't the only impression that Bond had given people in the books. I don't think many people would provoke that reaction in general but if you're going cast someone as James Bond, then you best be sure he would probably look close enough to that image in the novels. I don't think Cavill comes close to having that image.
I think he does a lot more than some of the other actors who have played 007 and I am not just on about the current one,some of the others would not give off could be a nasty piece of work vibe yet they still made good Bonds,sadly OLD Dan imo does not do either.
He looks tougher than Brosnan or Moore but that's isn't saying much. )
superdaddy wrote:
In the Tudors he did play a nasty customer in Charles Brandon.
Nasty when needed,sauve when needed,tough when needed and all done believably and stylish whereas OLD Dan just seemed needy,
That is exactly what he did in the Tudors. On the fact he's a great actor there are no doubts, since people who actually have the competence to say so (screenwriters, directors, producers and other actors) keep saying that about him. He's got the perfect looks to be Bond and he clearly can convey the right attitude. Of course he isn't the only one who has those characteristics, but since this is a thread about him and I firmly believe he's got all the qualities to be a great Bond...
Ricardo: you have always been rude. And not just to me. Don't even try and make it look like I'm the one who caused something that is your characteristic.
And by the way: don't you DARE even trying to imply that I'm phony or that I don't do what I actually do for a living or that I'm lying about people I've met. People I care about know who I am and what I do... and nothing you say changes that. You know nothing about me and you are in absolutely no position to say things like that. That is beyond offensive and completely out of place. Unbelievable. I'm sorry to see the only thing you have to counter others' arguments is trying to defame them as people. On that note: how DARE you calling me pathetic just because I happen to appreciate an actor you do not appreciate (and hilariously you don't appreciate him WITHOUT having seen him in anything. It's funny, really). Who exactly do you think you are to establish the canons of how it is appropriate for me to express judgment on an actor and man I like? And, the only one who looks a certain way here is just you: when people disagree with you, or say things you don't like, you only counter with insult/mockery and rudeness.
And once again, you fail to counter the references to the books. You can pretend such remarks didn't exist but they do. You haven't read the books. You are like a political pundit. When you see facts, you run like hell away from them.
It is YOU acting as if you have truth in your pocket when you don't, and acting as if you're the sole knower of all that is manly and acting as if you're the sole real person here. Actually, acting as if you're the sole person referring to facts. Except you don't even know the facts. Like you didn't about Cary Grant or Rock Hudson and Hollywood. My reply was to YOU acting as if you're the benchmark for real man and manhood which is of course certainly not the case. And it was a reply to you offering only insult and rudeness in return. Per your usual habits.
The one failing to understand what I posted here is you. I did counter your statement, exactly using the books. Now let's have a good laugh about you saying I'm the one running away from facts when YOU are, and you dismiss facts as "gossip" whenever they don't suit what you want to think. Once again, I HAVE read the books and more than once, thank you very much. What part of, and I will bold it again "dangerous is not Bond's main trait" don't you get? I DID say it IS a part of his personality and that he can get dangerous while he's on a mission. JUST AND ONLY a part of his personality though! Not his main trait at all. It is one of many other parts he has and not the preponderant trait. Dangerous being the main trait is for villains, not for Bond. And the books certainly DO NOT make "dangerous" the main trait of Bond's personality. Not at all. Since you instead made dangerous the main claim and point of how Bond should look, when talking about actors, I replied accordingly. The fact once again you can only offer insult and or "oh you are not who you say you are. Oh you did not read what you say you read" in an argument speaks for itself.
There is no excuse for rudeness like yours, the end. It's unfortunate to see how you think you're the only one who owns the truth and the only one who lives in reality. The world doesn't end where you live. There's much more to it. And, I'm no prude at all. You confuse being prudish with making appropriate lexical choices. Salivate is a disgusting verb because of the imagery and action that is associated with it, not because it is vulgar. There are many other ways of expressing the same concept that don't resort to saliva getting out of your mouth, which is, in fact, disgusting to think about. That's got nothing to do with being prudish. It's just disgusting.
And from now on, I'll just ignore you since I don't think being insulted and offended by you adds anything interesting to the forum at all. I apologize to others who had to skip through this.
Even Connery looked a bit too young in his late 20s, guys man up in their 30s as Cavill will.
Seth Rogan for Bond, Al? ) Oh no, he's American.
That would be correct NP. By the way, do you still look totally like Henry? Because remember, I'm hopping on a plane to London... )
) ) ) no Americans in the role unless we get to a day when there are no more available British actors who have got the acting chops, the looks and the style to be Bond. Which, hopefully, will never be the case )
I'm a big fan of DC myself, but then I think all the actors to play Bond have added something I like to be honest – what was DC like when you met him by the way?
He was talking to the owner of the place I was at in NYC, and I knew the owner (my friends and I actually went there because we're friends with the owner). I hadn't noticed Craig at all, I only did because he was talking to this guy (very pleasant guy, French). Craig was nice enough. Nothing sensational but he's a nice enough fella. Can't really expect him to be warm to an utter stranger as I was to him, LOL. I have absolutely nothing against him personally, as I have said many times. I conversed briefly with him, not like we discussed life ) But he was surely nice enough. Guess I got him in a good mood, seen some of his reactions in public ) Physically speaking though, in person I found him worse than on screen. Again, I wouldn't have even noticed him if it wasn't for the fact he was talking to the owner of the place. I found him really bland, and he doesn't attract me (I'm sure I don't attract him either ), what I mean is this is obviously a very personal perception). He has got, though, very nice eye color. That I will give to him. The color of his eyes is really nice. I don't find him sexy or charming, but again, those are things that especially in person work very differently from one individual to the other. As in, you either "click" and see something in someone or you don't. Also he isn't big or built at all in person (or at least he wasn't back then, this was in between CR and QoS), he's pretty damn thin. And, ahem, I don't think he's 5' 11'. I'm just average height, not tall, I was wearing high heels and I'm 5' 10' with heels, and he wasn't taller than me. I may have wrongly perceived because of the heels I guess, but that's what it looked like.
And "...commanding and imposing presence..." – this is Dalton through and through for me?
I agree on that. Dalton really had that type of presence. As does Cavill There are some scenes in the Tudors where he isn't engaging in battle or anything, he's just talking to the King, and he makes Henry VIII - who is the protagonist and is always berating others - look "small" compared to himself, if that makes sense? But yes, among those we have already seen as Bond, I believe Dalton is the one who better represented that big Bond feature. I didn't like TLD much, mainly because I never got to care about the plot and the Bond girl much, but while being too violent/dark IMO for Bond, I always enjoy LTK (I just rewatched it, actually). I LOVE Pam Bouvier and she and Lupe are possibly one of the best-ever Bond girl duo IMO. And, Dalton sure has the Bond looks and style. I like both him and Brosnan, though if I had to pick I'd pick Brosnan. And in terms of looks/charm, definitely Brosnan. But I enjoy both and I think Dalton did a good job as Bond.
At the Moment I'd take anyone over Craig ) and give the Boot to the RE-BOOT
) ) ) )
I watched the Tudors and surprisingly he reminded me of DC a lot. The same swagger, and dare I say it the same tendency to pout. I think that they may have more in common than is immediatly obvious...
I am unsure whether to be horrified or happy about this ) On the one side, I see no similarity whatsoever between them (Cavill doesn't pout? I can't recall any scene with Charles Brandon "pouting" either, but I will check again, I want to understand what part of the character we perceive differently). As far as the swagger, I think Cavill is very elegant, while being imposing, and having some of that "smug" attitude when he plays Brandon. And I don't see those qualities in Craig. That's me though, and it's perfectly understandable that others see things in Craig that I do not see of course. All that said, on the other side, if people who managed to appreciate Craig see similarities, it can only be good for Cavill.. more fans for him as Bond, and more people who would like to see him in the role So yeah, I'm torn between horror and happiness )
"Are we on coms?" (if you don't know where this is from... you've missed some really good stuff! )
And by the way: don't you DARE even trying to imply that I'm phony or that I don't do what I actually do for a living or that I'm lying about people I've met. People I care about know who I am and what I do... and nothing you say changes that. You know nothing about me and you are in absolutely no position to say things like that. That is beyond offensive and completely out of place. Unbelievable. I'm sorry to see the only thing you have to counter others' arguments is trying to defame them as people.
Oh I DARE ! Oh, I am quaking in my shoes ! ) Frankly, I could believe you would work with celebs and I would take you more seriously had you not inflated your opinions so much like your the big wheel of the entertainment industry. You really had the guall to say would help pick the next Bond. Wow. I have come across arrogant people on the net, some that have a right to have at least some ego, but you are just...sad.
On that note: how DARE you calling me pathetic just because I happen to appreciate an actor you do not appreciate (and hilariously you don't appreciate him WITHOUT having seen him in anything. It's funny, really). Who exactly do you think you are to establish the canons of how it is appropriate for me to express judgment on an actor and man I like? And, the only one who looks a certain way here is just you: when people disagree with you, or say things you don't like, you only counter with insult/mockery and rudeness.
Your defintion of "appreciate" is really not the same as others. I think the word obessed is more like it.
The one failing to understand what I posted here is you. I did counter your statement, exactly using the books. Now let's have a good laugh about you saying I'm the one running away from facts when YOU are, and you dismiss facts as "gossip" whenever they don't suit what you want to think. Once again, I HAVE read the books and more than once, thank you very much. What part of, and I will bold it again "dangerous is not Bond's main trait" don't you get? I DID say it IS a part of his personality and that he can get dangerous while he's on a mission. JUST AND ONLY a part of his personality though! Not his main trait at all. It is one of many other parts he has and not the preponderant trait. Dangerous being the main trait is for villains, not for Bond. And the books certainly DO NOT make "dangerous" the main trait of Bond's personality. Not at all. Since you instead made dangerous the main claim and point of how Bond should look, when talking about actors, I replied accordingly. The fact once again you can only offer insult and or "oh you are not who you say you are. Oh you did not read what you say you read" in an argument speaks for itself.
That still remains a grand total of zero quotes or even references you have used from the books. Fleming himself described Bond as a "thug in a dinner jacket". I could go on all day about how wrong you are when it comes to the novels' depiction of Bond. Bond is dangerous. He's a killer but he's not a monster. The villians he fights are monsters.
There is no excuse for rudeness like yours, the end. It's unfortunate to see how you think so high of yourself (if someone is high and mighty here, that's you, not me) as to think you're the only one who owns the truth and the only one who lives in reality. The world doesn't end where you live. There's much more to it. And, I'm no prude at all. You confuse being prudish with making appropriate lexical choices. Salivate is a disgusting verb because of the imagery and action that is associated with it, not because it is vulgar. There are many other ways of expressing the same concept that don't resort to saliva getting out of your mouth, which is, in fact, disgusting to think about. That's got nothing to do with being prudish. It's just disgusting.
Your the one that puts your opinions above others by either A. Stating what your friends think as facts like they are the official committee of public opinion or B. Constantly declaring some personal experience which you seem to think automatically invalidates a counter-point. I have not declared myself of an authority of anything really. I am just a random, dumpy, slob barking on the net.
As for salivate, one of the definitions:
Display great relish at the sight or prospect of something.
What is so "disgusting" about that ? 8-)
And from now on, I'll just ignore you since I don't think being insulted and offended by you adds anything interesting to the forum at all. I apologize to others who had to skip through this.
Please darling ! They kids hate it when we fight !
Looking through various posts,In a way I'm glad AJB Members don't have a say in any Bond Projects.Depending On the Thread.
H Cavill (among others ) is too good looking to be Bond
Bond should have a receding Hairline
Moores Bonds were Too full of jokes, So a lot of Members want !
An Ugly Bond with Receding Hair and No One-Liners. I may be wrong But didn't we have that with QOS. )
And to try and stop a backlash, This shouldn't be taken Too Seriously :v
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Looking through various posts,In a way I'm glad AJB Members don't have a say in any Bond Projects.Depending On the Thread.
H Cavill (among others ) is too good looking to be Bond
Bond should have a receding Hairline
Moores Bonds were Too full of jokes, So a lot of Members want !
An Ugly Bond with Receding Hair and No One-Liners. I may be wrong But didn't we have that with QOS. )
And to try and stop a backlash, This shouldn't be taken Too Seriously :v
You finally get it ! I will finally admit my real choice for the next Bond ! Current teen heart throb and major box office superstar...
There has been WAY TOO MANY odious odors made here by Ricardo C. Alias, Rick Roberts, a former member who was dismissed for inflamatory name calling and all around obnoxious and disruptive behaviour.
Knock the crap off Rick, er Ricardo. We've known who you were from the beginning but were willing to let bygones be. Your recent behaviour has once again proven to be your undoing. It's too bad because you're an informative poster.
I wish you a happy new year and good luck, but unfortunately your account has been suspended. (once again)
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,992Quartermasters
There has been WAY TOO MANY odious odors made here by Ricardo C. Alias, Rick Roberts, a former member who was dismissed for inflamatory name calling and all around obnoxious and disruptive behaviour.
Knock the crap off Rick, er Ricardo. We've known who you were from the beginning but were willing to let bygones be. Your recent behaviour has once again proven to be your undoing. It's too bad because you're an informative poster.
I wish you a happy new year and good luck, but unfortunately your account has been suspended. (once again)
I knew it had to be him...and I also knew it was only a matter of time B-)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
A whole thread, several walls of text and larger-than-life pics to tell the internet that you hate Craig but have wet dreams about a boy called Cavill?
Borders on spam.
The fact that a member whose posts I not always enjoyed but were very often very informative (one of the main reasons I visit these boards) was suspended because he frowned in an argumentative way at the ravings of an obsessed mind, makes a mildly ridiculous affair a sad one.
-{
I've seen angels fall from blinding heights.
But you yourself are nothing so divine.
Comments
Harry Callahan... now Clint Eastwood, in his day, would have been an awesome Bond!
@ HowardB
Agree with you – I'd like to see Daniel Craig remain in the role but hope he stops BEFORE he looks a bit too old. For me Connery and Moore did too many...
1. People who hate things.
2. Irony.
3. Lists.
He almost was but he turned down the role. Personally, I am none to crazy about American's playing Bond despite my love for Eastwood. The only American I could have seen playing Bond was Gregory Peck, he wasn't American "rugged".
For me, put a few years on Cavill and he could do it: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3320/3277834510_7deb309fe1.jpg
1. People who hate things.
2. Irony.
3. Lists.
I couldn't care less about someone who makes such rude remarks taking me seriously or not. Not worth the effort. FYI: I have met Craig in person. So what I'm saying about him, the opinion I have in terms of how he looks, how he comes across etc, is formed by first-hand experience too, not just by seeing him in movies. And, I am not impressed by the fact someone is a celebrity at all. I have spent my entire working life with them, I deal with them every day. They're people like everyone else. Faults are one thing, being gross is another. I won't stand for that, rudeness, lack of style in real life. EVER. People who aren't gross, but well-behaved, polite and stylish aren't fake: they just care about behaving and looking decently, unlike gross, rude, unstylish people. I thank God I have a lot of friends like that, and I've been raised like that, too. And I'm not talking celebrities, I'm talking everyday people.
Do you seriously think you own the benchmark for fey, or soft or unmanly?
One last thing: being gross is ABSOLUTELY NOT a manly trait. Or anything that makes anyone more manly than someone else. A)Gross applies to both men and women and B ) it is just being gross, which is just and simply disgusting and has got precious nothing to do with being manly. Bottom-dwellers aren't more manly, they are just more disgusting.
And, I have read the Bond books thank you very much. Which is exactly why I say with good reason that (re-read my previous post since you always conveniently skip adjectives) dangerous is NOT BOND'S MAIN TRAIT AT ALL. As I said previously, he CAN be dangerous when he is in action, but dangerous is certainly not his main trait. He has a commanding and imposing presence, which is very different from dangerous. Once again, dangerous as main trait is for the villains, not for Bond. For Bond it is just and only one of many parts of his personality.
And with this, I'm done discussing with you. Again this is a Cavill thread so I will most certainly continue to talk about him in here. So back on topic, that is to say Cavill.
I agree about the Englishman, and in any case Bond is not going to be played by an American any time soon.
Hello, Mr Bond.
Here, still recent, good haircut and no beard. (btw I think the beard looks great on him... but there again he looks great either way for me. And the hair is longer for precise filming reasons. His character in the Tudors needed both beard and longer hair because they aged him and changed the looks of everyone to update them with the fashion of those times).
I disagree he needs to wait, but to each their own. You enjoy Craig so I'm not surprised we see this differently
I see nothing "Panther-like" about Craig as he to me completely lacks style not to mention charm and what the French call "allure". So I think that "panther" quality may be different for us. I also don't think Connery had that naturally, that was taught to him among other things when they made him a lot more refined than he originally was. (the lorry driver comment will always make me laugh. And to think Fleming wanted Cary Grant, and Cary turned the part down... sigh. It's too bad Cary was too old because I would have enjoyed having Bond films with him immensely. He was elegance personified).
But, regarding the way Cavill moves... it's one of his best traits, and if directors say so (both directors from the Tudors and the director of "Immortals" that he filmed earlier this year have said so) I would say there's no doubt on it. Oh, those who cast him for the Dunhill ads also said they specifically chose him because he has a way of carrying himself and moving, an elegance, that is perfect for the modern gentleman. (there's even a youtube video where they say it).
I think he does. He's lucky enough to look younger than he actually is, but at the same time it means he has to wait a little longer for his shot at Bond. I think in about five years he would be better suited to the role. Bond should be in his mid-30s, and Cavill isn't even 30 yet.
I'm all for Cavill being Bond, because I would agree with you that he has the looks to do it. But not just yet. It's still too early for him.
I can see your point of view. I think it depends what angle they pick for the next few movies. Don't misunderstand me, I can see why some prefer the older look for Bond, absolutely. I just see it differently. I think the next one should actually reboot the series. The rookie Bond concept with a man who looks 50 while being 40 was pretty ridiculous IMO. I think the Craig movies will end up being stand-alone ones, like the Dalton ones (and only in that sense I see the similarity to Dalton, and I wish absolutely no ill to Craig. I'm fine with him doing Bond 23 if they make it by 2012).
I think they should do an actual reboot of the series with the next Bond, thus have a younger actor in the role and do rookie Bond for real. To then have the actor go on for a decade doing movies. Which is also why I think Cavill is perfect for it. Anyhow he is 28 so by the time Craig is finished with Bond 23 and they can cast him he will be 30 at least. Which means he'll be the right "aged" age by the time they start shooting, even if they don't reboot (I think they will, but that's another matter).
Just to see a glimpse of action, this video has Cavill doing his own stunt in Madrid while they were filming "The Cold Light of Day" (his action movie to be released next year. He's the lead in the movie).
http://www.telemadrid.es/?q=noticias%2Fmadrid%2Fnoticia%2Fpersecucion-de-la-pelicula-en-la-zona-centro
I'm a big fan of DC myself, but then I think all the actors to play Bond have added something I like to be honest – what was DC like when you met him by the way?
And "...commanding and imposing presence..." – this is Dalton through and through for me?
On another subject – I was thinking it'd be very interesting to get Tarantino in as director, make three films back-to-back releasing one in November, the second during the summer and the final part the following November. If it worked, it'd be very cool, and if it didn't, you could simply return to old trusted formula...
1. People who hate things.
2. Irony.
3. Lists.
At present HC only makes sense for me if they were to go with your re-booted re-boot. That would be a disaster as like it or not we are stuck with the botched re-boot idea of a superanuated rookie too old for the part (it clearly made more sense when HC was in the running) Although to some degree botched I was able to enjoy CR for the superb Bond film it is, by ignoring the rookie element, and DC although far from ideal in my eyes has a commanding prescence and has surprisingly 'owned' the role for many. I think HC may be ok at a later date. I watched the Tudors and surprisingly he reminded me of DC a lot. The same swagger, and dare I say it the same tendency to pout. I think that they may have more in common than is immediatly obvious...
If I did, then I wouldn't have criticized him like I have in the past. Yeah I have been rude because your arrogance deserves as much. Lastly, you find salivate a "disgusting verb" ? How prudish can you get ?
Okay Ms. High and Mighty. You must love that view from your Ivory Tower.
It's really hilarous how you keep refering to your friends as the beacon of truth.
Sure Alessandra. Sure. That's nice little fantasy world you live in. I know you must have worked with celebs. You act as phony as the rest of them.
And once again, you fail to counter the references to the books. You can pretend such remarks didn't exist but they do. You haven't read the books. You are like a political pundit. When you see facts, you run like hell away from them.
I never said you can't talk about him. I find it hilarous how you worship the ground he walks on, it's pretty damn sad really.
Yeah General G. would have really found this guy a "nasty customer".
Nasty when needed,sauve when needed,tough when needed and all done believably and stylish whereas OLD Dan just seemed needy,
I am talking about a remark made at first glance.
Seth Rogan for Bond, Al?
Roger Moore 1927-2017
say this because he looks like a couple of forces friends in this picture and they are exactly like this.
I am talking about the response to Bond's picture in From Russia With Love when SMERSH had their meeting. General G, or someone else at the meeting, said Bond looked like "A Nasty Customer". This certaintly isn't the only impression that Bond had given people in the books. I don't think many people would provoke that reaction in general but if you're going cast someone as James Bond, then you best be sure he would probably look close enough to that image in the novels. I don't think Cavill comes close to having that image.
He looks tougher than Brosnan or Moore but that's isn't saying much.
That is exactly what he did in the Tudors. On the fact he's a great actor there are no doubts, since people who actually have the competence to say so (screenwriters, directors, producers and other actors) keep saying that about him. He's got the perfect looks to be Bond and he clearly can convey the right attitude. Of course he isn't the only one who has those characteristics, but since this is a thread about him and I firmly believe he's got all the qualities to be a great Bond...
Ricardo: you have always been rude. And not just to me. Don't even try and make it look like I'm the one who caused something that is your characteristic.
And by the way: don't you DARE even trying to imply that I'm phony or that I don't do what I actually do for a living or that I'm lying about people I've met. People I care about know who I am and what I do... and nothing you say changes that. You know nothing about me and you are in absolutely no position to say things like that. That is beyond offensive and completely out of place. Unbelievable. I'm sorry to see the only thing you have to counter others' arguments is trying to defame them as people. On that note: how DARE you calling me pathetic just because I happen to appreciate an actor you do not appreciate (and hilariously you don't appreciate him WITHOUT having seen him in anything. It's funny, really). Who exactly do you think you are to establish the canons of how it is appropriate for me to express judgment on an actor and man I like? And, the only one who looks a certain way here is just you: when people disagree with you, or say things you don't like, you only counter with insult/mockery and rudeness.
It is YOU acting as if you have truth in your pocket when you don't, and acting as if you're the sole knower of all that is manly and acting as if you're the sole real person here. Actually, acting as if you're the sole person referring to facts. Except you don't even know the facts. Like you didn't about Cary Grant or Rock Hudson and Hollywood. My reply was to YOU acting as if you're the benchmark for real man and manhood which is of course certainly not the case. And it was a reply to you offering only insult and rudeness in return. Per your usual habits.
The one failing to understand what I posted here is you. I did counter your statement, exactly using the books. Now let's have a good laugh about you saying I'm the one running away from facts when YOU are, and you dismiss facts as "gossip" whenever they don't suit what you want to think. Once again, I HAVE read the books and more than once, thank you very much. What part of, and I will bold it again "dangerous is not Bond's main trait" don't you get? I DID say it IS a part of his personality and that he can get dangerous while he's on a mission. JUST AND ONLY a part of his personality though! Not his main trait at all. It is one of many other parts he has and not the preponderant trait. Dangerous being the main trait is for villains, not for Bond. And the books certainly DO NOT make "dangerous" the main trait of Bond's personality. Not at all. Since you instead made dangerous the main claim and point of how Bond should look, when talking about actors, I replied accordingly. The fact once again you can only offer insult and or "oh you are not who you say you are. Oh you did not read what you say you read" in an argument speaks for itself.
There is no excuse for rudeness like yours, the end. It's unfortunate to see how you think you're the only one who owns the truth and the only one who lives in reality. The world doesn't end where you live. There's much more to it. And, I'm no prude at all. You confuse being prudish with making appropriate lexical choices. Salivate is a disgusting verb because of the imagery and action that is associated with it, not because it is vulgar. There are many other ways of expressing the same concept that don't resort to saliva getting out of your mouth, which is, in fact, disgusting to think about. That's got nothing to do with being prudish. It's just disgusting.
And from now on, I'll just ignore you since I don't think being insulted and offended by you adds anything interesting to the forum at all. I apologize to others who had to skip through this.
That would be correct NP. By the way, do you still look totally like Henry? Because remember, I'm hopping on a plane to London...
He was talking to the owner of the place I was at in NYC, and I knew the owner (my friends and I actually went there because we're friends with the owner). I hadn't noticed Craig at all, I only did because he was talking to this guy (very pleasant guy, French). Craig was nice enough. Nothing sensational but he's a nice enough fella. Can't really expect him to be warm to an utter stranger as I was to him, LOL. I have absolutely nothing against him personally, as I have said many times. I conversed briefly with him, not like we discussed life
I agree on that. Dalton really had that type of presence. As does Cavill
Oh I DARE ! Oh, I am quaking in my shoes !
Your defintion of "appreciate" is really not the same as others. I think the word obessed is more like it.
That still remains a grand total of zero quotes or even references you have used from the books. Fleming himself described Bond as a "thug in a dinner jacket". I could go on all day about how wrong you are when it comes to the novels' depiction of Bond. Bond is dangerous. He's a killer but he's not a monster. The villians he fights are monsters.
Your the one that puts your opinions above others by either A. Stating what your friends think as facts like they are the official committee of public opinion or B. Constantly declaring some personal experience which you seem to think automatically invalidates a counter-point. I have not declared myself of an authority of anything really. I am just a random, dumpy, slob barking on the net.
As for salivate, one of the definitions:
What is so "disgusting" about that ? 8-)
Please darling ! They kids hate it when we fight !
H Cavill (among others ) is too good looking to be Bond
Bond should have a receding Hairline
Moores Bonds were Too full of jokes, So a lot of Members want !
An Ugly Bond with Receding Hair and No One-Liners. I may be wrong But didn't we have that with QOS.
And to try and stop a backlash, This shouldn't be taken Too Seriously :v
You finally get it ! I will finally admit my real choice for the next Bond ! Current teen heart throb and major box office superstar...
MICKEY ROONEY !
Bucket of cold water for lovebirds Alessandra and Ricardo C...
Roger Moore 1927-2017
You're so sweet! :x But... No way. If I am to have him, that has to be for real :v
LMAO NP... that's for me and you, you mean, since you are the spitten image of Cavill?
Knock the crap off Rick, er Ricardo. We've known who you were from the beginning but were willing to let bygones be. Your recent behaviour has once again proven to be your undoing. It's too bad because you're an informative poster.
I wish you a happy new year and good luck, but unfortunately your account has been suspended. (once again)
I knew it had to be him...and I also knew it was only a matter of time B-)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Borders on spam.
The fact that a member whose posts I not always enjoyed but were very often very informative (one of the main reasons I visit these boards) was suspended because he frowned in an argumentative way at the ravings of an obsessed mind, makes a mildly ridiculous affair a sad one.
-{
But you yourself are nothing so divine.
Just next in line.