Why Henry Cavill Will Likely Never Play James Bond According To Casino Royale Director

Casino Royale director Martin Campbell explains why Henry Cavill will most likely never be James Bond. Campbell was the director when Pierce Brosnan first became James Bond in 1995’s GoldenEye, and was also the man at the helm when Daniel Craig took on the 007 mantle in 2006’s Casino Royale. When Brosnan became Bond, he had long been the consensus pick to be the next 007, but things were different ahead of Casino Royale, when there was no consensus pick, and multiple young stars were in the running, including the eventual winner Craig, along with future Man of Steel star Cavill.

Now that Craig has served his time as Bond, leaving the role open for Bond 26, Cavill’s name is again being tossed around as a potential 007, but Casino Royale director Campbell doesn’t think Cavill will ever win the role, and he has a very specific reason why. Speaking to Express, Campbell outlined the one big reason he thinks Cavill’s Bond-playing days have passed him by. Check out what the director had to say in the space below:

By the time Daniel got to [No Time To Die] really he was at an age where one more would have been too old for him. I think they sign on for three Bonds, I’m not absolutely 100 per cent certain of that. I know with Pierce he had to sign on to three when we did him. So that’s going to take, what, six years of your life maybe? I suspect Daniel [had] the same deal. And the next guy’s going to have to do that. … Henry’s 40, so by the time he’s done the third one he’s going to be 50 and anything beyond that’s two, three years per Bond. He’s in good shape Henry, he’s a good guy. He did very well in the audition, but ironically he was too young.

Henry Cavill Could Still Star In Bond 26…As A Lazenby-Like One-Off

The current favorite to play James Bond in the next series entry is Aaron Taylor-Johnson, an actor who is reported to have already met for the coveted role. Cavill meanwhile remains one of the other betting favorites, and did confirm last year in an interview with the Happy Sad Confused podcast that he still has interest in at least discussing Bond with producer Barbara Broccoli and Mike G. Wilson. But if it’s true what Campbell says about Cavill being too old to play Bond, it’s unlikely Broccoli and Wilson would have interest in meeting with the Superman actor.

There is however a way Cavill could still slip in and play James Bond despite being relatively long-in-the-tooth, and that’s if the powers-that-be at EON and MGM were to set aside long-standing precedent and sign him up for one movie only. Official Bond history of course contains only a single one-and-done 007, George Lazenby, who took over for Sean Connery in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service before Connery returned in Diamonds Are Forever. Since then, all Bonds have done at least two movies, and the last two Bonds each served extended tenures, as stipulated by the contracts they had to sign.

EON obviously has good reasons why they seek to sign their Bond actors on for multiple movies, but it’s not necessarily written in stone that they must forever adhere to this tradition. Given how prevalent multiverses have become in films, and how audiences as a result are being conditioned to accept multiple actors playing the same character, now indeed might be the perfect time to re-introduce the idea of a one-and-done Bond. Casino Royale runner-up Cavill then could be 007 in Bond 26, and someone else could get a chance in the movie after that, as a means of keeping things fresh.

Source: Express