The list of possible actors for the next James Bond is wrong since it doesn't include anyone who is dangerous.

James Bond is without a doubt one of the most famous and long-lasting characters in movie history. When the role of 007 becomes available, the whole world waits its breath to see who will next wear the tuxedo and order the martini. Daniel Craig's time as Bond, which ended with No Time To Die, set a new benchmark for a spy who is more gritty and emotionally complicated. The quest for the next Bond is heating up now that Amazon MGM Studios is in charge and Denis Villeneuve is poised to direct. But the freshly released list of actors worries me a lot since it seems to put youth ahead of the deadly edge that Bond needs.

There is no doubt that selecting the proper person to play Bond is a huge job. The character needs to be charming, smart, and strong, but they also need to have a dark side and be tired of the world. This makes it even more exciting to think about where the franchise is supposedly going, Humphrey Bogart and other performers under 30. I see that people want a long-term commitment, but this age requirement seems to be taking away what makes Bond interesting in the first place.

The James Bond Shortlist That Was Reported Is Too Safe

Harris Dickinson, Tom Holland, and Jacob Elordi Don't Fit The Bill

Tom Holland, Jacob Elordi, and Harris Dickinson are the three actors who are most likely to play James Bond next, according to recent rumors. At first, I was confused and upset. I've liked all three of their work, but they don't have the right attributes to play James Bond. According to reports, Amazon is seeking for a British actor under 30, but they are also open to an Australian actor like Elordi, as they cast George Lazenby in the past.

Tom Holland is most known for playing Spider-Man, but he has also built his career on playing endearing, often odd characters. He has worked in action Movies, but I can't picture him as the tough, cynical spy. One critic said he has a "resting boyfriend face" and doesn't have the natural threat and global presence that Bond needs. Jacob Elordi, who has been in Saltburn and Euphoria, seems like a choice made only to get attention on social media. He could have the "hyper-angular face" that people like, but he doesn't have the depth or "X-factor" of charm that Bond needs. Harris Dickinson is a good actor, but he also seems like a bad choice. His prior performances don't have the kind of seriousness or threatening charm that 007 has.

This concentration on youth means that many fan favorites who would be perfect for the role, including Henry Cavill, who is now 42, are no longer considered since he was too old for the part. Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Idris Elba, two actors who have been spoken about a lot as possible winners, are also said to be out of the race because they are too old. It seems like a squandered chance to disregard actors who really get the character just to get a long-term contract.

Matthew Goode's "Dark" Bond Vision Was More Like the Original

Bond Is Meant to Be a Troubled Person

It's hard to see anybody else as Bond now, but before Daniel Craig was cast in Casino Royale, actor Matthew Goode met with producer Barbara Broccoli. This conversation gives us a better idea of what Bond really is. Goode remembered suggesting a "really dark" idea for 007 that would have taken the character "back to the books." He said that Bond should be "a drug addict and an alcoholic." He doesn't like himself. He doesn't like ladies. He hurts a lot. "He's really good at killing people."

People say that broccoli's response was courteous. "Okay. Next." Goode says he should have added "but also incredibly charming," but his main point is that Ian Fleming's original persona is very true to life. Fleming's Bond was a strong drinker, a chain smoker, and a man who was "cold and ruthless." People said he was a "blunt instrument" of the government, which means he wasn't always a kind person. Daniel Craig's performance showed some of this toughness and weakness, but Goode's pitch focuses on the character's deeper, often uncomfortable, traits.

This makes it even more interesting to think about why the company might not want to show this kind of thing now, especially when it's so tied to the character's origins. Bond's charm isn't only his smooth veneer; it's the broken guy underneath.

What The Next James Bond Needs Most

A mix of charm, danger, and the unknown

The next James Bond needs more than simply a young face. He needs an actor who can show a lifetime of experience, even if that experience is terrible and scary. Fans have always wanted actors that are "smooth with a sinister edge." People have proposed names like Tom Hardy, James Norton, Jack O'Connell, Robert Pattinson, Matthew Macfadyen, and Ṣọpẹ́ Dìrísù. All of these actors bring a lot of depth and passion to their performances.

It's clear that the best Bond actors, like Daniel Craig, weren't always the most obvious selections at the time. People were skeptical of Craig's first Casting, but he proved them wrong by playing a Bond who was both tough and weak. This means that the next Bond doesn't have to be a well-known star; they just need to have a "X-factor" that lets them become the character and make it their own.

The character needs to be able to control a space with a calm intensity that makes them both attractive and scary. He should be able to say a funny one-liner, but he should also be able to show genuine grief and ruthlessness. This balance is what makes Bond last, and it's a sign of high-quality TV and movies. I really hope that Amazon and Denis Villeneuve go past the surface-level age criteria and find an actor who can really embody the complex, often troubled character of 007.