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
It's a little different but you have a point. It still takes some adjusting for me to see Craig shorter than some of his co-workers (including Tanner) and standing at the same height or shorter than some of his leading ladies.
The colour is similar to the ethnicity to me. However that's just my view and I'm a conservative guy (resistant to change generally). Depending on who the actor is, and how the role is played, I could get used to it.
From my point of view, casting Bond as a non-white actor (no matter what background) is tantamount to suggesting that James Bond is just a codename or number (a long discussion on another thread). It just moves beyond the realm of reality for me (my imagined reality of a character I've known since I was a kid).
I with you on this. Bond was written as a white male. And every actor who has portrayed him has somewhat looked like the character written. With slight changes here and there, but still kept the basic elements in place. Changing his ethnicity is wrong on so many levels. Instead of changing Bond for the sake of PC pandering. Why can't the film industry...You know? Create a whole new franchise and whole new characters to give the world something new? There are some things you just don't do. I'm not okay with Bond's ethnicity being changed. Same with Blade having his ethnicity changed or Sherlock Holmes or any other established. Some are too quick to change a character without considering creating a whole new character and universe. I know Fleming has been dead for 50 years but for crying out loud. Can't people have respect for the character he created and the traits he gave him?
Well said. For me it would be change for the sake of change. That's not necessary for this character, that has such a rich history.
For example, @Murdock, I know you're a big Brosnan fan. Nothing wrong with this, I am too. But I think we can both agree that (despite a few Fleming esque scenes) both Brosnan and his films were pretty unfaithful to the source material. Fleming's Bond was a tortured world weary secret agent with a taste for the finer things in life, he drove Bentley's most of the time. Brosnan's Bond was a cool, flashy action hero who drove BMW's most of the time. Fleming's Bond wasn't a cold blooded killer. Brosnan's Bond was. Fleming's Bond was a heavy smoker, Brosnan's Bond never smoked a single cigarette (although he had a cigar in DAD).
Plus, Daniel Craig looks nothing like Fleming's Bond. Yeah he's white but he still looks absoloutely nothing like him. Compare Hoagy Carmicheal (bet I've got his fucking name wrong :P) to Daniel Craig. They don't look alike, at all.
And Daniel Craig proved that this didn't make a blind bit of difference. He gave one of the most Flemingesque performances of the series in CR despite looking nothing like Fleming's Bond and if he was black it still would've been an equally Flemingesque performance.
In the 50s Bond being white mattered. In 2014, I don't think it does. There's nothing about the modern James Bond that's exclusive to his race. In the 50s and 60s it wouldn't have worked but today I don't see why not.
@bondjames But Bond has always been about change, and I think that's a good thing. You have Roger Moore (a great James Bond) as your profile picture so I'm assuming you're a fan of him. Would making Bond black be as big a change to the character as Moore's Bond was? I'd say it'd be a smaller change. At the end of the day if you change his race you're just changing his appearance, which has happened plenty of times before (even Connery, the original, didn't look like Fleming's Bond). Roger Moore changed the entire character. The ruthless killer of the Connery films (which itself was a departure from Fleming's more reluctant killer) was suddenly replaced by this light hearted playboy. We went from cold hearted spy thrillers to Bond in space.
Can we really complain about a black Bond being unfaithful to the source material when a lot of us sit and enjoy Moonraker?
Sorry for the rant but this is something I'm passionate about. It just irks me a bit seeing people say "Fleming wrote Bond as a white man" then go and heap praise on the Moore and Brosnan eras on another thread. If you're a Fleming purist, fair enough, but if you're fine with all the changes the character has undergone on screen over the last 52 years then I really don't get why a black Bond is a step too far.
I want to make something clear, because this is a sensitive topic.
Let's use the example of Daniel Craig. He was not chosen for his height, or for his looks (imo although I'm sure many will disagree). He was chosen because he is a damn fine actor, and despite his shortcomings (no pun intended) he has made Bond his own. He was chosen for his abilities, given the direction that the producers want to go with the Bond character (i.e to give him some depth).
Now with Roger Moore - Fleming actually wanted Moore for Bond at some point before Connery was cast. So, I think he does fit the bill. The fact that he chose to reinterpret the role to make the film character survive after the great Connery (remember when this change was made - in the 70's - I don't think a major franchise character had been recast like this in the past without a reboot) was something he may have done for other reasons - i.e. because he knew he would always be unfavourably compared to Connery otherwise. I think he did a damn fine job reinterpreting the character to fit the larger than life character he became on film during the 70's. The producers had a hand in it too. I don't think Roger begged them to make Moonraker or TSWLM. That's the direction they were headed. When he was asked to tone it down for FYEO, he did, and delivered a very Fleminesque performance according to many.
Can we seriously say that Naomi Harris is the best actress they could pick for Moneypenny? Seriously? Really? No, she was chosen to pander...to fill a void...to be pc. That's it. period. That's my opinion and I am as passionate about this as you are with yours.
Now about Idris Elba. Or Colin Salmon who was bandied about in the past. Really? They're the best actors you could find out of the entire universe of potential candidates for James Bond? Really? Or is there something else going on here.
That's my point. The minute you can find me a black actor (or any colour for that matter) that is the best choice out of the potential candidates to play the role as envisaged by Fleming, or by the producers (given a direction they choose to take on film), then by all means cast him and let's see how it goes. Otherwise, let's get serious please.
For the record I agree that Naomie Harris isn't the best actress to play MP. I don't know why she was cast (although I read that it was because Danny Boyle suggested her to Sam Mendes, I don't think they set out to make MP black) but I think she's actually pretty wooden.
Idris Elba I do think would be a great choice. Won't happen now because he's too old but he's got the looks, charisma and acting chops needed to play Bond.
However, again, you say "play the role as envisioned by Fleming". Roger Moore, as great as he was, didn't do that. He made it his own (which I agree with you was the right thing to do and was a ballsy move on his part) to be different from Connery but I think he was still very fairly far away from what Fleming intended.
Also, going off on a bit of a tangent here, but I don't think FYEO is that Fleming esque (despite using bits of Fleming). It's a fairly serious film sure but could you imagine Fleming's Bond grinning like an idiot and spewing quips while escaping down a mountain in a citorean? Bond is still very much Roger Moore's James Bond. Not saying that's a bad thing, I just think that FYEO has got this unearned reputation of being a darker film when it really isn't that different to the rest of the Moore era imo.
The difference is that none of those characters have changed like Bond has. I think Bond has changed so much over the years, in appearance and personality, that it no longer matters.
They are still established characters who have appeared in more than one film. While they aren't as iconic or have a rich backstory like Bond it still doesn't change the fact that they shouldn't be recast with white actors. Would it be okay if they recast Uhura from Star Trek with a white woman?
You have a point here.
Yes, I agree that Rog isn't the most Fleminesque Bond, but then who knows what Fleming really wanted on screen. He wanted Cary Grant as first choice, and I'll contend that there is a lot of Grant in Moore. Fleming may actually have envisioned something slightly different than we do when we read his novels - that's the power of the literary word to create impressions in our minds. All the actors who have played Bond have not really hit the nail on the head. Some say Dalton came closest, yet it is Connery who is adored the most.
Changing the colour of the actor is something you should only do if you don't have a better choice within the conventional realm imo, otherwise you're doing it just to be different, which is the Naomi Harris thing.
Now Jeffrey Wright is a different matter entirely. Brilliant Felix and I want him back for B25.
I think any Bond actor from now on needs to have an edge....needs to be dark....not just a pretty boy.
I don't know much about him outside of Homeland, but he fits that bill.
That is a good call! He is pretty no nonsense in Homeland and i like him!
Agreed Rupert is perfect
In that picture above he's got a good blend of Pierce and Daniel in him.
Please refrain from posting stupid comments like this.
As you're from the UK you know who Idris Elba is. I for one have had just about enough of the recent nonsense regarding the talk of Elba taking the Bond role after Craig.
Far too many people getting on their high horses. It causes nothing but trouble.
Certainly don't need to continue it in any other threads.
I'm also all for Jamie Dornan who has been mentioned on this thread and could mature into the role over many years and have a long run which is my preference (my number 1 in terms of potential at the moment).
For a slightly older take, I'm also a fan of Christian Bale in a few years, since some time will have past since his turn as Bruce Wayne. Great actor.
Sorry but no love here for Rupert Friend. In Homeland, I find him a very unconvincing CIA black ops hitman or whatever he's meant to be. Too slight and looks-wise a bit weasely.
Good post.
True, Craig was probably of similar build body-wise when he got the call. No, I meant more his general demeanour, Friend seems a bit fey and lightweight, reminds me too much of Robert Pattinson. Think Bond should be have a bit more heft behind him, although not bulky