It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Umm I didn't realize Chaplin favored Hitler as much as that. Must be the angle.
So bets are off on Tom Hiddleston taking the role of Bond #7.
http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2016/05/tom-hiddleston-is-such-a-lock-for-james-bond-that-you-cant-bet-on-it-anymore
I must say at first I was not really seeing it. But based on his terrific performance as Johnathan Pine in The Night Manager I was swayed. I could see him as Bond. He has that certain something. But above all, he's a fine actor. If Daniel Craig doesn't return for a fifth film (and I really hope he does), then I'd be quite happy for Tom Hiddleston to take over.
But i definitly did not see it with Craig before CR so i put my trust in EoN and hope that they know who fits whatever Movie they are producing.
Of course IF there is a recast at all, which i'm not convinced of yet.
Yep.
Felix should have remained a white Texan (but he's a minor character so I'll let that lie - Rick Van Nutter is easily the best Felix) and with regards to Moneypenny, she's a minor character with no clear background specified (so yes, fair game). Bond is circa 35-40, so let's say he was born in 1976 (an Etonian, from the Scottish Highlands and a high ranking navel officer). His father will have been say 30 when he was born. He was therefore a middle class man born in 1946. Likelihood of even a 'modern Bond' being black.....er no and just PC for PC's sake.
I am not suggesting 'white washing' a character at all, I am simply pointing out that 007 was written as a white man and there is no point in changing this tradition.
Bond has white skin.
Bond has white skin.[/quote]
??? I agreed with you. I was responding to doubleoego. Yes, Bond does indeed have white skin.
Bond has white skin.[/quote]
??? I agreed with you. I was responding to doubleoego. Yes, Bond does indeed have white skin.[/quote]
Yes I know, I was just giving you back up.
Agreed.
Better and more suitable than Idris Elba, that's for sure.
That's my problem with it. There doesn't seem to be a tangible reason why Bond should be black, other then 'it's 2016, it's about time.'
I would have less problem with a Black Bond if all characters were considered the same way, and could be played by anyone. But they aren't. The same people who think it's 'about time' that Bond is black cry racism when an Asian, black or Latino character is played by a white actor. It's all a one way street, there is clearly an agenda behind this. This clearly isn't the natural social change that we saw with women in the 40's, blacks in the 60's and gays in the 80's. It's a ideological takeover.
Well spotted.
To add to my earlier post; when you take into account who and what the Bond character is, Bond being white is of no real consequence. If Bond was a period piece character then sure but that's not what Fleming created. Fleming made a character that IS contemporary and a reflection of a man of whatever the current time is; getting embroiled into various extraordinary situations.
Traits like his character development, his response and reaction to things, his relationships, his environment, his mind set, his behaviour, disposition and confrontations are what define and make the character of Bond who he is. Bond was born in Germany, his dad a Scottish, his mother being Swiss. How have these been factored into the movies? What significance have they contributed to the films other than the contrivance of Bond driving to his childhood home in Scotland because it was a techno-free location to mount his last stand against the villain? And as we all know how EoN love sticking so closely to Fleming, 3 years later we get a Bond who had a temporary childhood guardian brother who was responsible for killing his own father, Hannes Oberhauser out of jealousy who grows up to become Bond's arch nemesis, Blofeld. It's a good thing Bond is white otherwise none of this riveting stuff and sticking to Fleming's intentions could have happened.
However, on the flipside characters like Shaft or Black Panther differ significantly, which is why it's so intellectually dishonest and ludicrous to compare these characters to Bond. These characters being black is decisively significant, pivotal and definitive to who they are as characters and why they were created in the first place; a response to a suppressed black society that needed to be unshackled from the oppressive manacles of the white majority.
That said, like I've said all along and to reiterate, I'm not advocating that Bond should be of a different skin colour but he most definitely could be; and especially after being a white character for over half a century on cinema screens; and the racial/LGBT issues being such an issue in the film industry now more than ever, depending on who you ask it can come off as a pointless gimmick and/or an offence to whatever race they switch him to or could be embraced. Some people just don't want and don't like or see the need for long-standing things to be a certain way and change, which is fair and understandable. Ironically enough though, I get the impression based on comments even here over the years, that a number of Bond fans who don't want a coloured Bond would strangely rather have a black Bond than an American taking on the role.
What I've said a couple of times on here to sum up the argument is this. If Daniel Craig was black, it wouldn't have at all affected CR (which is thought of as not only one of the best Bond films, but one most faithful adaptations of the series). If the films were period pieces fair enough but nowadays Bond's skin colour just isn't that important a part of his character.
I'm not advocating changing it for the sake of it but if they found an actor who screen tested/auditioned brilliantly and wasn't white then I wouldn't object to him playing Bond. Changing his skin colour would be no bigger a diversion from the source material than some of the takes on the character we've had so far (the Moore era for instance). Bond is always changing, I'd see this as a minor change in the grand scheme of things.
I think Elba would be brilliant and he's my personal choice for the role. I don't think he'll get it though, I'm not sure EON will even consider him (but not because of his skin colour, I think more because of all the media attention in regards to him and Bond plus his age).
This is roughly what I've said over the years when this topic has regularly floated to the top of the pile.
What I find interesting now more than ever, though, is the omnipresence of racial discourse and the inherent complexity and increasingly antagonistic nature of it. The conversation appears constant, but splintered. As a white man I feel like I have only a rudimentary grasp.
On the one hand I hear people advocating for parity with their supposed white oppressors, opportunity being a key word (never in question), and on the other parity, but simultaneous segregation. An acknowledgment of difference; that something be deemed 'black', whether that be cultural, political, social... Only this morning I read of Lenny Henry saying Will Smith had turned 'white'.
I don't really understand what he meant, but my assumption was that Smith's ascendancy into 'popular culture' (as a whole) caused him to shed the labels previously reserved for minorities. In Lenny's eyes he should be at the zenith, but doing it in a distinctly black way. 'The Black Struggle' being another part of that wider rhetoric it seems. It's this notion that seems at odds with Bond, not skin colour.
It's these things that I believe make it even harder now, than perhaps a decade ago, to go down this route. Bond would not be defined by 'blackness', which I assume is in itself myriad concepts that differ from one black person to the next.
If you cast a black man should he act in a 'black way'? If he's perceived to act in a 'white way', after all he is a privileged individual whichever way you cut it, does that make him a 'coconut', as some would say?
Hugh Grant as BA Barakas for a new A-Team film. Jet Li as Sherlock Holmes!!! Ha ha ha.
This is a business after all, and a global one at that - one that must appeal to the sensibilities of people the world over who may not be so open minded about things.
My view as stated a couple of times here is that Bond should remain white. It is how I imagine the character, and it is how the character has been portrayed for longer than I've been alive. Any change in the colour of the character would be just for the sake of it, so why do it? Why should Bond be the poster boy for affirmative action? Only if the actor in question is undeniably the best choice for the job should he be given the role, and that is very unlikely to be the case given the vast pool of white actors out there who most people would probably find more suitable for the role.
If that needle in a haystack actor emerges down the line however, then I'm open to him being cast, but only if there aren't other 'as good' or 'better' choices among the 'white pool'.
Oh, and I was against a blond short Bond too and still am not all that happy about it, even though Craig has been very good.
Finally someone said it. ^:)^
I'm not making any point. I just remembered it was kind of funny. It was also way back in the 90s.
Excellent stuff. The point is that Bond obviously doesn't need to be black, but it shouldn't be an issue if the actor who plays him is. It's not relevant to his character. Ultimately the people who object to Bond being non-white will be judged by history the same as those who objected to a Scottish milkman playing Bond.
Well there is a theory around here that is one and one.
Except Connery its one unknown and one expected by the media.
It was Lazenby ( unknown)and then Moore( expected choice.)
Timothy Dalton (unknown) and then Brosnan a Media's favorite
Daniel Craig (Unknown) and next ............ Its Tom Hidleston or Aidan Turner who have their small tv fanbases
Turne's advantage : just like Pierce and Moore never had a feature film before Bond.
His disadvantage: non of his series are spy themed or scream Bondian, sure he has some traits and used a tuax which made him llok Bondian but its not an obvious extra official audition.
Mrs Doughtfire doesn't count for Pierce because no one knew his name after that film. He was still just a tv favorite like Aidan.
Tom's advantage: his tv series is a spy themed series so that gives him a push just like What Remington Steele was for Pierce and the Saint for Moore.
Disadvantage: He did gain notoriety for his role as loki in the avengers and the obvious chocies are just famous for being in a tv series not a film.