Should play James Bond
-
nfaust1 — 16 years ago(November 30, 2009 05:10 AM)
Let me know when you start watching the series in earnest. Am interested in what you have to day. Don't worry - I'm in the middle of season 6, so there's no way you can spoil any of it for me. Again, as I've said elsewhere, for full impact, start at the beginning and move through the season in chronological order.
-
nfaust1 — 16 years ago(December 19, 2009 06:44 PM)
Your point is well taken.
Rupert Penry-Jones could more than likely play just about anything. In MI-5, he shows an amazing range. The James Bond connection may have something to do with a kind of disappointment I've perpetually felt over the years. The films have gotten bigger, but not, in my opinion, better. Craig, too, is a good actor, but in the Bond role he seems to be playing a neanderthal in a tux. This approach bears little if any resemblance to the character Ian Fleming created. I know, movies don't have to follow the books they're based on. But still, I wonder, what's the point if the film makers feel a complete sociological makeover is necessary?
One things that draws me to Penry-Jones is how he so effortlessly conveys confusion and strength almost at the very same time. Which means that in some of the more outlandish moments on MI-5 we buy it because we buy him. Even when superhuman strength or mental computation is necessary, this actor never lets us forget his humanity. I think that's why he's so sexy. Certainly, part of it is bone structure, but not all. In the original Bond movies, the character was tainted with a slight suggestion of neurosis. When Connery goes into action mode, we see and sense his fear, anger, and even frustration. No one after Connery even seems to be trying for a character with a layer of neurotic subtext.
That's what Rupert brings to the TV show, and that's why I say he should be Bond. It is also my way of giving the actor a genuine compliment. Bond is an iconic character. Rupert is, on MI-5, equally iconic.