Who should be the next James Bond? A few out-of-the-box ideas

NEW YORK (AP) — The bond, James Bond, market is heating up.

For almost a year, Denis Villeneuve has been on tap to direct the next 007 installment, the first since Daniel Craig exited the role. Producers Amy Pascal and David Heyman have been lined up since March 2025. The big missing piece: Who’ll play the guy in the tux?

The casting process — the first that isn’t being overseen by the Broccoli family, which relinquished creative control to Amazon MGM last year — has been typically secretive. That hasn’t stopped rampant speculation about who’ll be the next Bond.

The oddsmakers have a few favorites, among them Callum Turner, Jacob Elordi and Aaron Taylor-Johnson. But our task here, today, is to open up the possibilities. This is the first time in more than two decades that a new Bond is being minted. We should have some fun with it, and cast a wide net.

So let's take a martini shaker to the favorites. Here are some out-of-the-box candidates, ranked from least plausible to kinda legitimate.

What? Are you telling me you wouldn’t watch Steve Buscemi as James Bond? It would instantly become the most anticipated movie of the year. The people are already clamoring for it. If the pope can be American, so too can James Bond.

It’s already become quite clear that there isn’t much Hüller can’t do. She can do the most serious of dramas (“The Zone of Interest,” “Anatomy of a Fall”) and a wide range of comedies (the recent “Project Hail Mary,” “Toni Erdmann”). More than most movie stars today, she has the seductive, deadly melancholy of Bond — plus she’d deliver a great 007 karaoke scene.

Producers reportedly want a younger Bond, but an older one might actually give them more new ground to cover. This is a franchise past 50, so a 007 in their 60s is hardly farfetched. Laurie has dabbled in spy thrillers (most notably the John le Carré adaptation “The Night Manager”). We know from “House” that he has a terrific bedside manner in life-or-death situations. And he’s a comic genius who can wear a suit.

Again: You’re telling me you wouldn’t watch this? Buster Bluth, Forky, James Bond. It’s a seamless trajectory.

West auditioned for Bond when Craig was ultimately cast, but I don’t see why the 56-year-old isn't still a good option. He has the charm and the roguish smile that would make him a legitimate heir to Sean Connery. He’s played a British spy before, in, um, Rowan Atkinson’s “Johnny English Reborn.” And we already associate him, thanks to “The Wire,” with real police work. Imagine if an actor from “The Wire” got the role and it wasn’t Idris Elba.

OK, now we’re getting serious. I think Pierre, the 31-year-old British actor, is such an overwhelmingly natural fit that I’m surprised he hasn’t already been cast. As much as I’d like to see some less obvious candidates (I didn’t even mention Melissa McCarthy or Sacha Baron Cohen), Pierre’s suave poise makes him an ideal James Bond. Watch “Rebel Ridge” and tell me he doesn’t have all the ingredients. Unless Buscemi steps forward, Pierre should get the role.

FILE - Hugh Laurie appears at the opening gala of the London Film Festival in London on Oct. 2, 2019. (Photo by Joel C Ryan/Invision/AP, File)

FILE - Aaron Pierre poses for a portrait on Thursday, Aug. 29, 2024, in Los Angeles. (AP Photo/Chris Pizzello, File)

This combination of photos shows the actors who have portrayed James Bond, from left, Sean Connery, David Niven, George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan, and Daniel Craig. (AP Photo)

FILE - Steve Buscemi attends Peacock's "Bupkis" premiere in New York on April 27, 2023. (Photo by Charles Sykes/Invision/AP, File)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House rejected a resolution Thursday requiring President Donald Trump to withdraw U.S. forces from the war with Iran unless Congress authorizes military action. It was the latest such vote that fell short of passage as Republicans largely continue to support Trump's operation.

Democrats voiced concern that the United States is becoming further entrenched in another lengthy conflict in the Middle East. They promised to keep raising the issue through more war powers votes in the coming weeks.

The 213-214 vote came one day after a similar effort failed in the Senate. The U.S. and Israel struck Iran on Feb. 28, and a fragile ceasefire is now in its second week.

Democrats overwhelmingly supported the attempt to rein in Trump's use of military force.

“We're standing at the edge of a cliff and Congress must act before the president pushes off,” said New York Rep. Gregory Meeks, the ranking Democrat on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. “Every day we delay, we inch closer to a conflict with no exit ramp.”

Republicans tried to cast the effort as hypocritical.

Florida Rep. Brian Mast, the committee chairman, said Congress never voted on a war powers resolution when the U.S. attacked Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen in 2024 while Democrat Joe Biden was president.

“When Joe Biden was responding to merchant marine vessels being attacked, it was OK. No war power needed. It went on for about a year,” Mast said. “President Trump responds — war power, war power, war power. ... That's the hypocrisy.”

Under the War Powers Act of 1973, Congress must declare war or authorize use of force within 60 days — a deadline in the Iran war that will arrive at the end of April. The law provides for a potential 30-day extension, but lawmakers have made clear that they want the Republican administration to soon lay out a plan for the war's end.

While the House vote failed, it gave Democrats an opportunity to highlight some of the most negative effects of the war: the billions of dollars spent, the death of at least 13 service members, the soaring gas prices and fissures with long-standing allies who do not support Trump's actions.

“Gas prices at home are up to $7 in my home state, and families are hurting," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash. “Another 10,000 U.S. troops are being sent in to join 50,000 already stationed in the Middle East with absolutely no strategy, no plan and no exit.”

Republicans defended Trump as taking decisive action against an Iranian government that has long terrorized the Middle East and its own people.

“President Donald Trump has sent a message that those who threaten the United States and our partners will be ultimately held accountable," said Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C.

In Thursday's vote, Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky was the only Republican to cross party lines and vote for removing U.S. forces from the war. Rep. Jared Golden of Maine was the only Democrat to vote against the measure.

The first House vote to curb Trump's miliary action with Iran failed in early March, 212-219.

FILE - The USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier leaves Naval Station Norfolk, June 23, 2025, in Norfolk, Va. (AP Photo/John Clark, File)

FILE - A thick plume of smoke rises from an oil storage facility hit by a U.S.-Israeli strike in Tehran, Iran, March 8, 2026. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi, File)