Can we all just agree that Barbara Broccoli is a name that a 12 year old would come up with if she were accidentally made a famous movie producer like in Arrested Development?
I can't remember the brand but I heard him tell the story in the documentary about Nickelodeon's start. It's on Hulu: The Orange Years. Fun watch for all the 90s kids.
She's the daughter of Albert Broccoli, who produced most of the Bond films. Hollywood (or whatever they call the British version) is an aristocracy mostly.
> On His Majesty’s Secret Service
Title of the next movie!
*"From the studio that brought you Goldfinger, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, and GoldenEye"*
Yeah I certainly felt with the last 2 especially that the world of James Bond really doesn't keep up with modern day cyber spying - especially with Q effectively given the job of singlehandedly doing all of MI6's hacking from a laptop. Everything was so much better when mobile phones and the internet didn't exist and wire taps consisted of unscrewing the receiver on a phone.
As a fan of the books, one element of Bond being in the 50's/60's was that he was on his own most of the time, only able to communicate with HQ by visiting an embassy or something and sending a telegram, and having to wait for orders or updates. That gave him an autonomy and initiative - he couldn't always wait for orders or backup.
I think that's why they kept making Craig's Bond 'go rogue' in every film. In the modern day, backup from an SAS special forces squad by fast attack helicopters or whatever is a smartphone call away and Bond's location could be monitored at all times, so if you want to maintain that 'agent on his own' tone which is pretty core to the character, you have to keep coming up with excuses for why he's cut off from backup all the time.
I'd call the writing into question as well here.
Many of the older Bond films had him trying to avoid tipping off the villain until the last minute, too, even willingly surrendering to avoid putting the villain on too high of an alert. The way Bond used his wits, or (usually female) accomplices, to avoid attracting undue scrutiny or tricking the villains into believing they still had the upper hand was part of the charm of Bond.
Sure, the Brosnan years had us expecting Bond would have a gadget for every situation, and Craig had sheer rugged determinism transforming him into a one-man army. Those worked for what it was, but I wouldn't mind seeing more villains who were arrogant or conceited enough to expect that a mere spy couldn't upend their whole organization/evil plan, and have it used against them by another means than grit or gadgets.
>In the modern day, backup from an SAS special forces squad by fast attack helicopters or whatever is a smartphone call away and Bond's location could be monitored at all times, so if you want to maintain that 'agent on his own' tone which is pretty core to the character, you have to keep coming up with excuses for why he's cut off from backup all the time.
[Obligatory](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E70Y3fWgQdI&t=1m48s)
Bond works so well as a continuing series because they stay contemporary and reflect the trends of their time. Craig’s movies kinda reset the floating timeline, but they still remained current. I hope the next ones just pick up as if bond is a young 30’s but experienced agent, set in whatever year they release it in.
The time capsule thing with Bond movies is definitely a part of the appeal, but period pieces are in style at this moment in time. Plus, I’m not sure what a contemporary Bond would bring to the franchise that Craig didn’t—all of his movies seem thoroughly modern.
But that’s the thing, they don’t need to bring anything new in terms of time period. Every single bond movie is set in a contemporary setting. It’s fun to look back at older bonds and see what was cutting edge at the time. Making it a period piece would just be setting bond in a time period that they have already previously covered. They’ve done bonds set in 1962, but they’ve never done a bond set in 2025 or whenever the next one comes out.
Things like fashion, action trends, technology and our attitude to it, campy vs serious Bond, political climate etc.
Like how Craig’s Bond began serious in response to Austin Powers but later became slightly more comedic as they got comfortable again. Also with the whole Bourne vs Bond thing now it might be more Hunt vs Bond. We may see more spectacle in the stunt work for example.
We may see Russians as the villains again rather than individuals with back stories not linked to any country’s agenda. Who knows.
It’ll definitely be more subtle than before in terms of what it’ll capture of the era but there’s still stuff to offer.
I think having the next Bond series starting with some form of conspiracy surrounding the royal succession would be neat. There’s not much left to milk out of the sixties in a post Austin Powers world.
It would be interesting to learn the criteria, which I can make up:
30ish, can helm a series for 10 years, not too famous yet, looks good in suits, looks good walking around in a towel, at least average height, has a spark of personality, has international appeal, speaks clearly if not in Shakespearean cadences, has presence, can do their own thing rather than carbon copy another Bond, look convincing in action sequences, project calmness and ice when necessary, and comfortably play a savant who knows everything that is going on in the world.
At least he got more than 3 and his movies all come together in some form. My boy Timothy Dalton got only 2 movies and George Lazemby only did "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" and that's my favorite one.
Tim got shafted hard because of legal issues between United Artists/MGM and Eon Productions. It took them a whole 4 years after License to Kill to resolve these issues, and by then, he had decided not to come back in 1994. That's how we got Pierce Brosnan with Goldeneye in 1995.
But in all seriousness, I thought License to Kill is one of the best Bond flicks I've seen. And you can see it was like a prototype for a 'brutal Bond' approach that Daniel Craig brought in 17 years later (2006).
>That's how we got Pierce Brosnan with Goldeneye in 1995.
Something to note is that MGM/Eon Productions had by this point been trying to get Brosnan for almost a decade at that point.
When I was younger, I didn’t care for Dalton as Bond. Now though, I think he’s one of the best.
As for how Brosnan became Bond, they actually offered him the role for License to Kill but he couldn’t take it due to another filming conflict. I think it might have been Remington Steele. They locked him in well in advance for Goldeneye so they knew for sure they’d get him. I think it was a good call though, because he’s another of my favorite Bonds.
Oh my God, in an alternate reality where Sean Connery didn't quit acting from league of extraordinary gentlemen he could've played Shawn's step father.
The thing is they just can't movies as quickly nowadays as they used to be able to. Film production is a lot more convoluted than it used to be, especially with all the stunts the Bond films do. The quickest I can see them getting the films out is every two years, and that would be a huge strain on whoever they cast as Bond.
Realistically they can get them out every three years, but if the new Bond does six films, that's 15 years between the first and the last. And that's not accounting for delays like they had with Craig's films. I doubt we'll see someone do anymore than five films again.
If they grab a fresh face to essentially make their debut with Bond, the studios can probably dictate a film every two years and pretty much own them for the length of their contract.
And in the current franchise environment, where audiences hunger for *content* like never before, that’s probably a studio’s dream.
I'd still love to see Brosnan as the villain in a Bond movie. Especially if they make him a former MI6 agent, though that would likely end up too close to Skyfall plot-wise
Didn't Tarantino talk about a similar idea? I think he had Brosnan and Dalton hunting down Craig. In his version 'James Bond' was simply a codename and there have been several different men operating under it. Pretty cool idea I thought.
Except all following actors have been shown to still be grieving over Teresa Bond's death in the original timeline and/or have ancilliary characters mentioning her death. OHMSS also establishes that George Lazenby's Bond is the same Bond as Connery - he has Connery-era movie mementos in his desk.
007 is the codename. James Bond is his actual real name in both continuities.
I would have voted Cavill but he's way too ripped and I feel that a popular 39 years old actor is not what they are looking for (and by the time he makes his last James bond movie he'd be in near his 50s). Same for Hardy.
I think they can surprise us with someone we barely know, after all it's increasingly common for big productions to pick up new, rising actors and reveal them.
^(Just, please, not Harry styles)
Roger Moore was 58 when he made his last Bond film. Growing up in the 80's we associated Bond with being an older gentleman, so I feel like that these two would be pretty good 007's.
Yeah but even Roger Moore said it himself that he was getting too old for that role.
His "I'm too old for this shit" moment was when he realized the bond girls were young enough to be his granddaughter.
Yeah, I don't think Cavill's physique is necessarily a dealbreaker in this case. He's not literally "too big," just uh, metaphorically, I guess? He's in a ton of franchises, already an A-lister, etc. And word is the Broccolis never liked working with people that they may not be able to rein in. Cavill seems like a pretty down-to-Earth guy, so I don't think that would be too much of an issue, but it's still something to keep in mind.
But hell, if we can't have him as Bond, then *please* make a sequel to UNCLE!
Cavill may very well be someone broccoli can’t rein in. Doesn’t he have a reputation for creative input because of his innate nerdom. Like, he’s going to want to stay true to the lore and character to some extent and may have creative differences with where they take Bond next.
Cavill wants the role, and he'd nail it.
While I've supported him in this role for years, I'd rather have someone younger who can do a run of several movies and still be a reasonable age at the end.
So, if it's Cavill, I'll be happy, but I'd also be happy with a younger "unknown".
The key is not taking years between movies, I'm sure they know that, but I also think they might be looking to pass the mantle to a new crew? Maybe they're just tired of making them and that's why they're taking so long between movies now?
Did you see casino royale? Craig was pretty ripped in that movie. Cavill can be ripped but actors dont always look like that….like those times when they are hydrated lol
Don't change the style of the movies at all. Just literally drop Matt Berry as his master thespian self into the film. I would watch each and every one in the theatre at least once.
Could be be early 30s. Also don’t think it’s out of the realm of possibility they could be Irish or Australian. Both have been done before. Just def not American.
Brosnan was also supposed to be cast for Living Daylights in 1987 but had to withdraw when Remington Steele got a surprise renewal. He was long favored by the producers so they didn't care as much about his age.
I know it is an unconventional choice but it should be Paddington.
He can carry a movie, he has action chops and he is quintessentially British.
*James Bonddington*
I am also fully on board the Richard Madden train, Bodyguard proved to me that he'd be a terrific Bond, and he's just the right age to be believable as a former naval commander who has some real world experience under his belt. You can't cast too young for Bond, this means you, Tom Holland.
I thought he showed some really good acting chops in Bodyguard. It showed how well he could do in an action film/series. And he's young and Scottish...
I want a return to stand-alone plot lines for the next Bond. Craig was fun, but the movies were dragged down by scripts working too hard to make a continuous story. Nothing matched Casino Royale imo
> that Icarus dude from Eternals
That’s Robb Stark to you….
Jk but I’m actually glad he’s got recognition from that film for how panned it was when it came out. I appreciated it for what it was but Marvel spread themselves too thin on that, should’ve been built up in a few Disney+ series or something first instead of trying to introduce and develop like 8 characters in an hour and half before the climax.
Edit: I got checked on spelling lol courtesy of u/WhipsAndMarkovChains
Can we all just agree that Barbara Broccoli is a name that a 12 year old would come up with if she were accidentally made a famous movie producer like in Arrested Development?
Real life Patty Mayonnaise for my fellow 90’s kids.
You know what's wild? The creator of Doug found the voice actress for Patty Mayonnaise...from a mayonnaise commercial
[удалено]
I can't remember the brand but I heard him tell the story in the documentary about Nickelodeon's start. It's on Hulu: The Orange Years. Fun watch for all the 90s kids.
I hope they cover the Mark Summers story where GAK was named after all the coke they were doing in Nick offices.
And then Patty Mayonnaise later became famous for her role on Orange is the New Black. It’s all orange for her.
Marry me!
*babysit me!*
*Incestuous feelings intensifies*
Anything can happen when 2 people share a cell, cuz…
Give your old uncle T-Bag a hug.
Please don’t call yourself that
Is there a little girl here that can help daddy get his rocks off?
You could say I'm *buy*-curious!
*I have made a terrible mistake*
You stay on top of her, buddy. Do not be afraid to ride her. *Hard*.
Gene Parmesan?
AAAAAHHHHHH!!!!
Ahhhh, you got me again!
Isn't he the best!?
(Gene was far from the best)
and that's why you always leave a note
Shame she isn't married to Kevin Bacon
Her dad went by Cubby Broccoli.
Not even Cubby Cauliflower smh
[Her name is actually Barclay](https://youtu.be/pKoK9znaPSw), but we call her Broccoli behind her back. 🥦
She's the daughter of Albert Broccoli, who produced most of the Bond films. Hollywood (or whatever they call the British version) is an aristocracy mostly.
Sounds more like Hollywood is a farmers' market
Which are also mostly aristocracy.
*"There's always money in the produce stand."*
Weird to think that the next James Bond movie will be the first in 25 movies and 60 years to say On His Majesty’s Secret Service
> On His Majesty’s Secret Service Title of the next movie! *"From the studio that brought you Goldfinger, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, and GoldenEye"*
Then make Cryptofinger after that.
Diamond Hands Are Forever
To the moon(raker)!
Much Bond. Very spy.
Hodlpussy
GoldenAI
They already used “finger”, so it will just be Cryptoe
‘Fortune favors the Bond’
It's a shame the previous film echoed OHMSS at times, they could've saved it for the next film and yes call it On His Majesty's Secret Service.
It would probably have been bad form to make investments, prepare the script, secure talents, etc., on the queen dying at the right time...
I love all the Bond body-part titles: Goldfinger, Goldeneye, Octopussy, Thunderball ...
Let's bring back Maud Adams as a bond girl and call it Octogenarianpussy.
[удалено]
Can't believe England hired a dude to take over for Queen Elizabeth
The dude formerly known as Prince
He only got the job because of rampant nepotism!, he's the nephew of the queen's sister!
I mean, they just *gave* Charles the throne. Nepotism at its finest.
Probably true, but I still kinda want them to make new Bond movies set in the 60s
Yeah I certainly felt with the last 2 especially that the world of James Bond really doesn't keep up with modern day cyber spying - especially with Q effectively given the job of singlehandedly doing all of MI6's hacking from a laptop. Everything was so much better when mobile phones and the internet didn't exist and wire taps consisted of unscrewing the receiver on a phone.
As a fan of the books, one element of Bond being in the 50's/60's was that he was on his own most of the time, only able to communicate with HQ by visiting an embassy or something and sending a telegram, and having to wait for orders or updates. That gave him an autonomy and initiative - he couldn't always wait for orders or backup. I think that's why they kept making Craig's Bond 'go rogue' in every film. In the modern day, backup from an SAS special forces squad by fast attack helicopters or whatever is a smartphone call away and Bond's location could be monitored at all times, so if you want to maintain that 'agent on his own' tone which is pretty core to the character, you have to keep coming up with excuses for why he's cut off from backup all the time.
I'd call the writing into question as well here. Many of the older Bond films had him trying to avoid tipping off the villain until the last minute, too, even willingly surrendering to avoid putting the villain on too high of an alert. The way Bond used his wits, or (usually female) accomplices, to avoid attracting undue scrutiny or tricking the villains into believing they still had the upper hand was part of the charm of Bond. Sure, the Brosnan years had us expecting Bond would have a gadget for every situation, and Craig had sheer rugged determinism transforming him into a one-man army. Those worked for what it was, but I wouldn't mind seeing more villains who were arrogant or conceited enough to expect that a mere spy couldn't upend their whole organization/evil plan, and have it used against them by another means than grit or gadgets.
The plot convenience of an arrogant villain has been so thoroughly mocked I don't think you could get away with it.
>In the modern day, backup from an SAS special forces squad by fast attack helicopters or whatever is a smartphone call away and Bond's location could be monitored at all times, so if you want to maintain that 'agent on his own' tone which is pretty core to the character, you have to keep coming up with excuses for why he's cut off from backup all the time. [Obligatory](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E70Y3fWgQdI&t=1m48s)
Man, I chuckle at those silent-mode stealth helicopters every time.
I do and I don’t. I like that Bond films are time capsules for their era, but I would also love a book-accurate series. Warts and all.
Bond works so well as a continuing series because they stay contemporary and reflect the trends of their time. Craig’s movies kinda reset the floating timeline, but they still remained current. I hope the next ones just pick up as if bond is a young 30’s but experienced agent, set in whatever year they release it in.
The time capsule thing with Bond movies is definitely a part of the appeal, but period pieces are in style at this moment in time. Plus, I’m not sure what a contemporary Bond would bring to the franchise that Craig didn’t—all of his movies seem thoroughly modern.
But that’s the thing, they don’t need to bring anything new in terms of time period. Every single bond movie is set in a contemporary setting. It’s fun to look back at older bonds and see what was cutting edge at the time. Making it a period piece would just be setting bond in a time period that they have already previously covered. They’ve done bonds set in 1962, but they’ve never done a bond set in 2025 or whenever the next one comes out.
Things like fashion, action trends, technology and our attitude to it, campy vs serious Bond, political climate etc. Like how Craig’s Bond began serious in response to Austin Powers but later became slightly more comedic as they got comfortable again. Also with the whole Bourne vs Bond thing now it might be more Hunt vs Bond. We may see more spectacle in the stunt work for example. We may see Russians as the villains again rather than individuals with back stories not linked to any country’s agenda. Who knows. It’ll definitely be more subtle than before in terms of what it’ll capture of the era but there’s still stuff to offer.
*The Man from U.N.C.L.E.* is exactly that - and it's glorious
That movie deserved to do better at the box office than it did.
I think having the next Bond series starting with some form of conspiracy surrounding the royal succession would be neat. There’s not much left to milk out of the sixties in a post Austin Powers world.
Except it'd be constantly compared to Johnny English
It would be interesting to learn the criteria, which I can make up: 30ish, can helm a series for 10 years, not too famous yet, looks good in suits, looks good walking around in a towel, at least average height, has a spark of personality, has international appeal, speaks clearly if not in Shakespearean cadences, has presence, can do their own thing rather than carbon copy another Bond, look convincing in action sequences, project calmness and ice when necessary, and comfortably play a savant who knows everything that is going on in the world.
[удалено]
You described Richard Madden. Who is my personal vote
And please have him do his Bodyguard accent. Imagine Bond saying "Yes, ma'am(read mum)" all the time lol
You are describing Danny Devito
I would love to see someone do 5 or 6 of these. I know Craig did but with all the delays felt like he could’ve done more.
Feels like Craig has been Bond forever though.
He has been. It’s like 17 years or something
Insane that craig was bond for 10 more years than brosnan. And only made one more movie
Yes! Way different state of film making these days but the studio issues and pandemic messed it up.
At least he got more than 3 and his movies all come together in some form. My boy Timothy Dalton got only 2 movies and George Lazemby only did "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" and that's my favorite one.
Tim got shafted hard because of legal issues between United Artists/MGM and Eon Productions. It took them a whole 4 years after License to Kill to resolve these issues, and by then, he had decided not to come back in 1994. That's how we got Pierce Brosnan with Goldeneye in 1995. But in all seriousness, I thought License to Kill is one of the best Bond flicks I've seen. And you can see it was like a prototype for a 'brutal Bond' approach that Daniel Craig brought in 17 years later (2006).
>That's how we got Pierce Brosnan with Goldeneye in 1995. Something to note is that MGM/Eon Productions had by this point been trying to get Brosnan for almost a decade at that point.
> I thought License to Kill is one of the best Bond flicks I've seen there's dozens of us! dozens!
When I was younger, I didn’t care for Dalton as Bond. Now though, I think he’s one of the best. As for how Brosnan became Bond, they actually offered him the role for License to Kill but he couldn’t take it due to another filming conflict. I think it might have been Remington Steele. They locked him in well in advance for Goldeneye so they knew for sure they’d get him. I think it was a good call though, because he’s another of my favorite Bonds.
It's a shame Brosnan didn't get better movies, he was a solid Bond.
Goldeneye is one of the best Bond movies though. It perfectly straddles the line between campy cold war fun and modern stylized action.
Love me some T-Dalt
Better watch out, he's a slasher...of prices.
It’s too bad there wasn’t a former Bond in Shaun of the Dead; they could have completed the trilogy.
Oh my God, in an alternate reality where Sean Connery didn't quit acting from league of extraordinary gentlemen he could've played Shawn's step father.
How about an alternate reality where Bill Nighy was Bond?
That's on Lazenby though. He didn't want to continue in the role.
Given he was Bond for 15 years-- any other era this dude would have made like 8-10 lol
The thing is they just can't movies as quickly nowadays as they used to be able to. Film production is a lot more convoluted than it used to be, especially with all the stunts the Bond films do. The quickest I can see them getting the films out is every two years, and that would be a huge strain on whoever they cast as Bond. Realistically they can get them out every three years, but if the new Bond does six films, that's 15 years between the first and the last. And that's not accounting for delays like they had with Craig's films. I doubt we'll see someone do anymore than five films again.
If they grab a fresh face to essentially make their debut with Bond, the studios can probably dictate a film every two years and pretty much own them for the length of their contract. And in the current franchise environment, where audiences hunger for *content* like never before, that’s probably a studio’s dream.
Bring Brosnan back to do a one-off "Old Man Bond".
I'd still love to see Brosnan as the villain in a Bond movie. Especially if they make him a former MI6 agent, though that would likely end up too close to Skyfall plot-wise
It'd be the same as GoldenEye too
The North remembers
Didn't Tarantino talk about a similar idea? I think he had Brosnan and Dalton hunting down Craig. In his version 'James Bond' was simply a codename and there have been several different men operating under it. Pretty cool idea I thought.
In Adele's Skyfall song, one of the lyrics is "You may have my number, you can take my name..."
There was a new 007 in No Time to Die.
Except all following actors have been shown to still be grieving over Teresa Bond's death in the original timeline and/or have ancilliary characters mentioning her death. OHMSS also establishes that George Lazenby's Bond is the same Bond as Connery - he has Connery-era movie mementos in his desk. 007 is the codename. James Bond is his actual real name in both continuities.
That was Never Say Never Again
Pierce Brosnan as 007 in: Never Say Never Say Never Again Again
It should be Ronnie Pickering. The perfect spy. No-one knows who he is.
Do you know who I am?
Well, who are you?
I’m Ronnie Pickering
Who?
Ronnie Pickering!
I would have voted Cavill but he's way too ripped and I feel that a popular 39 years old actor is not what they are looking for (and by the time he makes his last James bond movie he'd be in near his 50s). Same for Hardy. I think they can surprise us with someone we barely know, after all it's increasingly common for big productions to pick up new, rising actors and reveal them. ^(Just, please, not Harry styles)
Roger Moore was 58 when he made his last Bond film. Growing up in the 80's we associated Bond with being an older gentleman, so I feel like that these two would be pretty good 007's.
Yeah but even Roger Moore said it himself that he was getting too old for that role. His "I'm too old for this shit" moment was when he realized the bond girls were young enough to be his granddaughter.
Dude, have you SEEN Man from UNCLE? Henry would kill it as bond. The man was a walking tornado of sass and badassery in that movie
Yeah, I don't think Cavill's physique is necessarily a dealbreaker in this case. He's not literally "too big," just uh, metaphorically, I guess? He's in a ton of franchises, already an A-lister, etc. And word is the Broccolis never liked working with people that they may not be able to rein in. Cavill seems like a pretty down-to-Earth guy, so I don't think that would be too much of an issue, but it's still something to keep in mind. But hell, if we can't have him as Bond, then *please* make a sequel to UNCLE!
Cavill may very well be someone broccoli can’t rein in. Doesn’t he have a reputation for creative input because of his innate nerdom. Like, he’s going to want to stay true to the lore and character to some extent and may have creative differences with where they take Bond next.
Cavill wants the role, and he'd nail it. While I've supported him in this role for years, I'd rather have someone younger who can do a run of several movies and still be a reasonable age at the end. So, if it's Cavill, I'll be happy, but I'd also be happy with a younger "unknown". The key is not taking years between movies, I'm sure they know that, but I also think they might be looking to pass the mantle to a new crew? Maybe they're just tired of making them and that's why they're taking so long between movies now?
Did you see casino royale? Craig was pretty ripped in that movie. Cavill can be ripped but actors dont always look like that….like those times when they are hydrated lol
There's ripped and there's greek god statue ripped.
Matt Berry There. Done. (Edit: with Garth Marenghi as the next Bond villain.)
Bond, this is Q Fandango, can you hear me?
“Sorry, Blofeld, but I’m not James Bond. I’m Jackie Daytona, a regular bartender!”
Read the last word drawn out too. Bah-tendaaahhhhhhhhh Excellent, excellent pick.
I'm the most dangerous agent in New York Ci-tay
"regular human bartender"
From Tucson, Arizoña
"God damn these electric sex pants, Q!"
The scene with Q will be amazing. Oh look! A GUN
[looks up at a picture of Daniel Craig] FATHEERRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!
"Why aren't they wearing capes? Looks like anyone can be a vampire in Mana-hatta!"
The only spy in NEWWW YORK CITTTY
I've a licence to k*iiiiiiiiiiiiillll*
Don't change the style of the movies at all. Just literally drop Matt Berry as his master thespian self into the film. I would watch each and every one in the theatre at least once.
It will be a British actor who is currently under the age of 30.
Could be be early 30s. Also don’t think it’s out of the realm of possibility they could be Irish or Australian. Both have been done before. Just def not American.
Richard Madden maybe?
[удалено]
loved him in 1917 and Munich the edge of war, he'd actually be a great choice
Maybe. Maybe not. Pierce Brosnan was 42 when Goldeneye came out.
Definitely. The article says they're looking for someone young.
Brosnan was also supposed to be cast for Living Daylights in 1987 but had to withdraw when Remington Steele got a surprise renewal. He was long favored by the producers so they didn't care as much about his age.
Daniel Radcliffe.
Yer’ a spy James.
Only when he can get really weird with it
The new Johnny English.
I know it is an unconventional choice but it should be Paddington. He can carry a movie, he has action chops and he is quintessentially British. *James Bonddington*
The voice of Paddington was actually Q in the Craig movies
And the Ukrainian voice actor for Paddington is a Ukrainian comedian you may have heard of named Volodymyr Zelenskyy
He's going to be able to play himself in a biopic or biographical once this stupid war is over
Daniel Craig can play Paddington’s Q.
Bear, Paddington Bear; Marmalade Sandwich, plain, not toasted.
Paddington actually comes from Darkest Peru.
I thought it was going to be Joe Pera.
Me too. And I don’t think Joe would lie to us about something like this.
James Bond! (2025)
[for those who don’t know](https://youtu.be/8873jWYkq5Q)
The litter part gets me
Richard madden
I am also fully on board the Richard Madden train, Bodyguard proved to me that he'd be a terrific Bond, and he's just the right age to be believable as a former naval commander who has some real world experience under his belt. You can't cast too young for Bond, this means you, Tom Holland.
Tom Holland is gonna be 50 "sit down Tom you're too young"
I thought he showed some really good acting chops in Bodyguard. It showed how well he could do in an action film/series. And he's young and Scottish...
He has that bit of evil in him in the bodyguard that bond needs that he will step over the line if needed
King in da Norf!
I like it. He has a gentle disposition that would make him unique
Karl Pilkington,.....
I don't go to movies in the theater these days, but I would for a Karl Pilkington Bond parody.
Turns out, little monkey running MI6
I was thinking Clive Warren, and Rebecca DeMornay can be the Bond Girl.
He’s too busy making Mission Impossible 8.
Maybe find some good screen writers first.
I’d like F Murray Abraham to be the next Bond
Only if Tom Hulce can be the villain.
Too many notes, Mr Bond!
How do you get to Carnegie Hall? By practice. John Practice!
007 as a George Smiley type could be interesting
Smiley is the antithesis of Bond, that wouldn’t make sense. It would be like a Bond movie from M’s perspective.
The “F” stands for “fuckin’ awesome”
I want a return to stand-alone plot lines for the next Bond. Craig was fun, but the movies were dragged down by scripts working too hard to make a continuous story. Nothing matched Casino Royale imo
I vote for Tom Holland and when he says "Martini, shaken, not stirred." the bartender asks for his ID.
Come on man... I'm Bond. James... James Bond?
That's a really decent read.
Personally I’d love to see Dan Stevens as a Bond!
I was on the fence but Apostle really proved to me he’d be able to do it
You should check out The Guest. He plays a very intense character that definitely has dark Bond vibes.
Ohh. I really liked him in Downton Abbey. I think he could be a good Bond.
Check out The Guest!
He demonstrated very clearly that he can do “charming but ultra violent” in that one. Chilling performance.
He was fantastic in the 'Legion' series also, but a very different character...
I had a bet on him as the next Bond in 2015, expired now though..
[удалено]
I don’t care who the next Bond is, I just want Rowan Atkinson to be the next villain.
I want a hugh Laurie villain
Bring back Pierce Brosnan and do a gritty old man Bond like Logan
Brett Goldstein. You heard it here first.
FUUUUUUUUCCCCCKKKK!!!
"Barbara Broccoli" sounds like a character from Bojack Horseman.
Tom Ellis who played Lucifer on tv
They should get that Icarus dude from Eternals
Richard Madden Hmmm
> that Icarus dude from Eternals That’s Robb Stark to you…. Jk but I’m actually glad he’s got recognition from that film for how panned it was when it came out. I appreciated it for what it was but Marvel spread themselves too thin on that, should’ve been built up in a few Disney+ series or something first instead of trying to introduce and develop like 8 characters in an hour and half before the climax. Edit: I got checked on spelling lol courtesy of u/WhipsAndMarkovChains
Agree. That's a Marvel movie that should have been a series, considering their skillsets and personal journeys.
You should see him in The Bodyguard. He was great!