Forget Bond, James Bond, as the name that matters most right now is that of the actor who'll be playing 007 in Bond 26. It's been five years since No Time To Die's ending saw the death of Daniel Craig's version of the character, and almost a decade since the actor first announced that would be his last time donning the tuxedo.
That means the wait for James Bond 26, and the next 007 actor, is guaranteed to be the longest in franchise history (the longest gap between movies is currently six years, which has happened twice: from Licence to Kill to GoldenEye, and from Spectre to No Time To Die). However, with Denis Villeneuve attached to direct, and Steven Knight writing the script, things are getting closer to the 26th Bond movie becoming a reality.
The major hurdle right now is casting the next James Bond actor, about which there has been a lot of speculation over the years. That has intensified in recent weeks, with an announcement expected to be forthcoming sooner rather than later, and reports that the process was down to just four actors who were doing final screen tests. And while we know most of those names, it does mean that arguably the best contender has now been ruled out.
Per reports, the final James Bond candidates include Jack Lowden, Callum Turner, Josh O'Connor, and a mysterious fourth actor who hasn't yet been named, with most recent speculation honing in on Turner specifically. However, it's also been reported that Jacob Elordi and Jack O'Connell are not in the mix [via THR], and the latter name missing out is particularly disappointing, because I think he'd be absolutely perfect for taking the franchise forward.
Denis Villeneuve's Bond movie represents an opportunity to reinvent the character for a new generation, and it needs someone who can find the right balance between 007's traditional charm, the more gritty and emotionally complex interpretation of Craig's era, and something brand new at the same time. It requires someone who can convince as a suave spy, but also carries a genuine sense of danger and unpredictability, and O'Connell ticks every one of those boxes.
Like many, certainly in the UK, I first got to know O'Connell via his role as James Cook in Skins, where he was the immediate, obvious standout among the second generation cast thanks to a heady mixture of charisma, recklessness, and vulnerability, even at a young age. Those qualities are particularly relevant to Bond, a character whose confidence and apparent fearlessness often conceal considerably darker emotions and his own weaknesses.
Identify the cover art while scratching off as little foil as possible.
Sign in to claim your place on the leaderboard!
After that, he went on to prove he can handle more physically demanding roles, including in the movies Unbroken and '71. They showed he absolutely has the action chops required for Bond, especially in the modern era, without losing anything in terms of his dramatic range and emotional performance.
More recently, O'Connell has demonstrated an extraordinary ability to command the screen without playing traditionally sympathetic characters. His performance as Remmick in Sinners was electric, showcasing his ability to combine unsettling menace with an almost irresistible charisma. Meanwhile, his portrayal of Jimmy Crystal in 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple demonstrated that he can make even the most disturbing characters genuinely captivating.
That versatility is exactly what Bond 26 needs. There's actually a very good argument he'd be better casting for a Bond villain (and if that's the route they go down, I won't complain), but that's exactly what makes him such an interesting pick for Bond. He can do cold or captivating in equal measure, and taking some of that maniacal presence and distilling it down into a restrained 007 with some occasional explosive bursts could be fascinating to watch.
It's not as though the competition for Bond 26 is particularly weak. Callum Turner has the conventional leading-man appeal, Jack Lowden has demonstrated considerable range in Slow Horses, and Josh O'Connor has become one of Britain's most exciting dramatic performers.
However, O'Connell arguably offers something that none of these actors can quite replicate: an unpredictable combination of physical intensity, rough-edged charisma, and genuine on-screen danger. Or put in more simple terms, he's the only one I can realistically imagine being involved in a proper scrap, while still having enough charm to carry the role.
Turner, Lowden, and O'Connor all have strong acting credentials and dramatic range, and you'd back Amazon MGM (and Villeneuve) to get it right, so any of them will no doubt end up being great in the role, even if whoever gets it will be at least somewhat divisive (as was Craig back in the day). But their performances don't suggest the same blend of qualities that O'Connell brings. He can be charming without appearing overly polished, intimidating without becoming cartoonishly villainous, and emotionally vulnerable without undermining his characters' toughness.
That combination could be particularly valuable under Villeneuve's direction. The filmmaker behind Dune and Blade Runner 2049 has repeatedly demonstrated an interest in complicated protagonists operating within visually spectacular worlds. O'Connell would be an excellent fit for that approach, offering a Bond who feels like a dangerous, damaged human being rather than an untouchable action hero, and it'd be great if we were the one to get the gig for Bond 26, but that moment now seems to have passed.
"Bond 26" is the hitherto untitled 26th entry in the long-running spy action series following the titular James Bond and his adventures working for M16.
