Watch, Watched, Watching: We Need This!

[Veltigar]

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Unrelated, Tom Hardy appears to be the next Bond. The Bond thread is locked as far as I can tell, and I don't have a witty title in mind so I'll just start the conversation here. Thoughts? I love it.

What, you're shitting me?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

50 minutes ago, Veltigar said:

What, you're shitting me?

It's what the Googles says.

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

It's what the Googles says.

Indeed it does.  My only quibble with it is he's already 43.  You'd think you'd want your replacement for the franchise to be younger for the longterm.

[Veltigar]

That's such a lazy piece of casting. I don't really see Hardy as Bond, but he's a great actor so he'll crush it if he's coupled to some competent creatives. Still wish they had chosen a relatively unknown face for Bond. That helps a lot to swallow the innate silliness of the franchise.

Hardy's choices keep on surprising me. It's very hard to predict his career. He probably has the pick of some of the best roles in Hollywood right now and then he chooses stuff like Venom and Bond? Bond is even weirder really, because that's going to be a commitment for at least a few movies.

If it had to be someone who is already really famous, I would have hoped for Idris Elba. Guess the world is not ready for that. 

4 minutes ago, DMC said:

Indeed it does.  My only quibble with it is he's already 43.  You'd think you'd want your replacement for the franchise to be younger for the longterm.

I like it actually. More realistic for someone of that age to receive the top rank. Plus, I think it's important to do a reset from time to time. You don't want a long series again to end with grandpa Moore. Hardy can do a few films and then change roles. 

[Zorral]

Do not like.  Not one bit. No grace or gravitas here.

Of course, there never was any.

The franchise should just wave good-bye and retire.

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

3 hours ago, DMC said:

Indeed it does.  My only quibble with it is he's already 43.  You'd think you'd want your replacement for the franchise to be younger for the longterm.

Three films in six years is doable. Besides, what's the difference between 38 and 43 these days? 

3 hours ago, Veltigar said:

If it had to be someone who is already really famous, I would have hoped for Idris Elba. Guess the world is not ready for that. 

Skyfall killed black Bond. I've said for years the name James Bond should just be an alias attached to 007. And Elba would have been perfect. 

Quote

I like it actually. More realistic for someone of that age to receive the top rank. Plus, I think it's important to do a reset from time to time. You don't want a long series again to end with grandpa Moore. Hardy can do a few films and then change roles. 

[Heartofice]

I’ve gone right off Hardy, every performance is like some odd parody of himself these days, he seems to think he has to do a funny voice and a bunch of squinty mannerisms and that makes a character.

Theres no subtly to his performances at all. 
 

Maybe he’d surprise me but he wouldn’t be a good bond. Also he’s a bit short.

[DMC]

24 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Three films in six years is doable.

Well, you'd still have to factor in actually making the first movie, which probably will be at least two years.  Anyway, I was thinking more than three movies.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

8 minutes ago, DMC said:

Well, you'd still have to factor in actually making the first movie, which probably will be at least two years.  Anyway, I was thinking more than three movies.

They could film a few movies concurrently, assuming the first one is a hit. 

Really though, I'm not sure they had many options. Craig became a massive star due to Casino Royale and his shadow will loom over his successor. Hardy is a star in his own right, he looks the part and he's a terrific actor. He just needs to know that James Bond doesn't mumble his lines. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

19 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I’ve gone right off Hardy, every performance is like some odd parody of himself these days, he seems to think he has to do a funny voice and a bunch of squinty mannerisms and that makes a character.

Theres no subtly to his performances at all. 
 

Maybe he’d surprise me but he wouldn’t be a good bond. Also he’s a bit short.

Hardy is 5'9. Craig is 5'10. 

[Nictarion]

Caught The Invisible Man reboot on HBO tonight. Liked it a lot. Very tense. Elizabeth Moss was great. 

[ithanos]

1 minute ago, Nictarion said:

Caught The Invisible Man reboot on HBO tonight. Liked it a lot. Very tense. Elizabeth Moss was great. 

Cool, I've been putting off watching this for some time, but everyone who's seen it seems to have a good opinion of it.

 

Finished my rewatch of Stargate Universe and felt sad when it ended. It's not perfect but is still very enjoyable. That it was cancelled, after building a strong 2nd season from where it could've gone on to develop greater seasons and stories, still irks.

Like a few others I've been following the Aug-Sept Covid Derby of TV shows. Pre-race favourites The Boys were coming in off a stellar first year. Coming out of the Kripke stables there was speculation Kripke may have finally found a thoroughbred replacement for 15yr perennial placer, Supernatural. And it looks like one of the Natural's jockeys may get a chance to ride the younger stablemate next year.

In the yearling stakes, Lovecraft Country seems a strong contender with good pedigree. And from the off-track establishments we've been restricted from gathering in came word of a possible dark horse in Raised by Wolves. Little is known of Wolves' pedigree but we can't dismiss anything trained under legendary greyhound trainer, R.Scott.

At the halfway point it's looking dividends for The Boys. Lovecraft Country a couple lengths behind with her jockey having difficulty keeping the filly on a straight path - what's up with that? And bringing up the rear is Raised by Wolves, confirming the adage you don't bring a greyhound to the horsetrack.

With a few furlongs to go, anything can happen - few can forget that tragic fall by Firefly in the 2003 Derby when victory looked certain, until a Fox scampered across its path dashing the hopes of pundits.

[DireWolfSpirit]

Hardy as the new Bond sounds fantastic, looking forward to seeing that.

[polishgenius]

11 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Really though, I'm not sure they had many options. Craig became a massive star due to Casino Royale and his shadow will loom over his successor. Hardy is a star in his own right, he looks the part and he's a terrific actor. He just needs to know that James Bond doesn't mumble his lines. 

 

 

Every bond actor becomes a massive star the instant they become Bond and their shadow always looms over the next one. On the one hand I think this means the concern over Hardy being too famous isn't really necessary- he would instantly have become so- but on the other I also disagree that Craig's fame limited their options only to other stars.


I do share HoI's concern that Hardy's become a parody of himself in the last few years. Hardy has for a long while been in a group with Idris Elba and Michael Fassbender that were hotly tipped to be Bond but all of them seemed to have aged out of consideration - since it turns out they actually hadn't I'd have preferred either one of the other two, who have been more consistent actors recently.

[Heartofice]

11 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Hardy is 5'9. Craig is 5'10. 

I think they are both too short to be Bond to be honest. And controversial opinion, but I also don't think Craig has been a good Bond either. It worked in Casino Royale where he was a rough around the edges rookie Bond, but I never bought him in the role since (hasn't helped I haven't really enjoyed any of those movies either)

[Veltigar]

13 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Skyfall killed black Bond. I've said for years the name James Bond should just be an alias attached to 007. And Elba would have been perfect. 

 

How did it kill Black Bond? 

Oh wait is it 

Spoiler

the Home Alone stuff?

They'd be better of ignoring everything after Casino Royal anyways. A shitty streak that has been.

12 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Hardy is 5'9. Craig is 5'10. 

+ Aren't most major actors midgets anyways?

1 hour ago, polishgenius said:

 

 

Every bond actor becomes a massive star the instant they become Bond and their shadow always looms over the next one. On the one hand I think this means the concern over Hardy being too famous isn't really necessary- he would instantly have become so- but on the other I also disagree that Craig's fame limited their options only to other stars.

You see, that's the whole point. Someone like Pierce Brosnan or Daniel Craig who were basically nobodies before Bond getting famous as Bond actually helps the character. When I see Pierce or Craig now, I always think James Bond, no matter how many volcanoes are blowing up or how silly their southern accent is.

With Hardy I'll be seeing Bond and I'll be like "Oh, good to see Bane again"

They should have gone for someone more up and coming.

 

EDIT: Or Idris Elba who would be awesome. He has the perfect balance of style and menace. I like the thuggishness of Craig Bond and I think Fasbender would not be a match for that part. Hardy is less on the style aspect. Idris could do both. 

52 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I think they are both too short to be Bond to be honest. And controversial opinion, but I also don't think Craig has been a good Bond either. It worked in Casino Royale where he was a rough around the edges rookie Bond, but I never bought him in the role since (hasn't helped I haven't really enjoyed any of those movies either)

He had the unfortunate luck to be stuck in a very bad streak of movies. Casino Royale is by far the best Bond film ever and I love Craig because of it, but all his other films have been aggressively bad to mediocre. Pierce had a much better run imo. That hurts Craig a little, even though he can't help it that the writing sucked for the others. 

[Heartofice]

9 minutes ago, Veltigar said:

He had the unfortunate luck to be stuck in a very bad streak of movies. Casino Royale is by far the best Bond film ever and I love Craig because of it, but all his other films have been aggressively bad to mediocre. Pierce had a much better run imo. That hurts Craig a little, even though he can't help it that the writing sucked for the others. 

It is true he has been unlucky. I also think that he just doesn't really exude Bond to me. His face always looks like he's concentrating on squeezing monkey nuts with his buttocks. He does also have the look of a shaved chimp, an elderly shaved chimp. I'm being quite unkind on him, but I do like him as an actor outside of Bond.

[DMC]

1 hour ago, Veltigar said:

Aren't most major actors midgets anyways?

I blame Scientology.  

1 hour ago, Veltigar said:

Someone like Pierce Brosnan or Daniel Craig who were basically nobodies before Bond getting famous as Bond actually helps the character.

I dunno, when I saw Casino Royale I was like "oh, it's that dude from Elizabeth, Road to Perdition, and Munich."  Obviously those didn't make him a big star, but he wasn't a complete unkown or nobody to me.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

3 hours ago, polishgenius said:

Every bond actor becomes a massive star the instant they become Bond and their shadow always looms over the next one. On the one hand I think this means the concern over Hardy being too famous isn't really necessary- he would instantly have become so- but on the other I also disagree that Craig's fame limited their options only to other stars.
 

I didn't mean Craig's fame, I meant that he made the best Bond film ever, and that would be hard for a no name actor to follow.

Quote

I do share HoI's concern that Hardy's become a parody of himself in the last few years. Hardy has for a long while been in a group with Idris Elba and Michael Fassbender that were hotly tipped to be Bond but all of them seemed to have aged out of consideration - since it turns out they actually hadn't I'd have preferred either one of the other two, who have been more consistent actors recently.

He has a bit. Post-Inception Hardy probably would have been ideal.

And while I'm a big fan of Fassbender, Idk if I can see him as Bond.

3 hours ago, Heartofice said:

I think they are both too short to be Bond to be honest. And controversial opinion, but I also don't think Craig has been a good Bond either. It worked in Casino Royale where he was a rough around the edges rookie Bond, but I never bought him in the role since (hasn't helped I haven't really enjoyed any of those movies either)

Craig looks a thousand times more like a secret agent that Connery or Brosnan. Who cares if he's a few inches shorter than them? He actually looks like he could win a fight. Connery looks like he couldn't do 25 push ups, yet he knocks people out with a single blow to the shoulder.....

 

 

[Heartofice]

4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Craig looks a thousand times more like a secret agent that Connery or Brosnan. Who cares if he's a few inches shorter than them? He actually looks like he could win a fight. Connery looks like he couldn't do 25 push ups, yet he knocks people out with a single blow to the shoulder.....

Can't disagree with the first bit. However it means that Craig looks like someone you wouldn't want to mess with or meet in a dark alley. He looks like a thug. Classic Bond is suave and sophisticated, a charming ladies man, but with an edge. Craig just has the edge and doesn't really manage the rest of it.