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
I own and have read all the Fleming Bonds (as well as some of the post-fleming Bonds) I also own and have watched all the Bond films. Im not suggesting changing the character of Bond. Im just stating that the race of the actor does not change the character because you are portraying a character you are playing a role. When you play a doctor on tv the actor does not have to be an actual doctor. It's no different here. But, changing gears here the only actor of color who would crack even my top 20 choices for the next Bond is Henry Goulding and he's near the back of the list for me.
Even if they perform surgery?
Bonds ethnicity is caucasian, so altering this is changing the characters appearance. Henry Golding looks Chinese. So he’s not Bond. That’s the same as casting Colin Firth as Shaft. It IS changing the character, as race IS a fundamental part of the character.
Standing Ovation!
+1
Draw the line? It has to be at Bond himself. You can change secondary characters to modernise it, by all means. But the reason why the films have survived and been successful for nearly 60 years is because the central character hasn't deviated too much from what Fleming wrote.
Yes, over the years he's had brown hair, brown eyes and blonde hair, which drifts from the literary description, but he's always been white. The character is an old fashioned relic from a bygone era, rooted in a past of Empire Britain, the Cold War and sexist attitudes towards women. The world around Bond changes, but Bond himself doesn't.
Once you change skin colour too, then Bond is a generic action spy, and not the 1950's dinosaur relic that Fleming wrote about.
Hell, he doesn't even need to be from Britain anymore. Why not make him Spanish, and work for the Spanish Secret Service instead? Why not make him American and become an American 007?
You seem hell bent on trying to change the basis of the character to something else that you may feel more comfortable with, and I'm not entirely sure why. Do you think a black actor would bring out something more in the character that has been severely lacking all these years? Did EON get it wrong all this time?
They don't have a clue, they don't care. We shouldn't even be talking about this really.
As a one-off movie, an artist can do whatever he or she wants. As a 60 year old established franchise, an artist doesn't have that much say on such hugely significant things. The producers do.
I can see just picture it now. A director hired on the next Bond film, sitting relaxed in his chair, feet up on the desk, and telling Babs, `Ok, I have decided I want the next actor to be black, or Chinese, or Indian - anything but British white. And what I say goes, because I am the creative artist here. It is all down to my interpretation! To hell with Fleming's original description of who Bond is. I am the person in charge now, and I will tell you who Bond is. And he is anything but white. In fact, I don't even want to audition any white males for the role, because they are simply not right for the character I have in mind.'
I wonder how long that director would last...
I know, its tedious. I cannot believe dedicated Bond fans on this forum are happy to see Bond become black, as though that will give the character a new dimension that succeeds any previous actor in the role, and also dismisses anything that Fleming wrote about.
Did Fleming get it so badly wrong all those years ago? Did EON get it so badly wrong in their casting too?
Exactly... not sure how they would sell the Bond franchise in the Chinese market....
My point exactly.
I don't want to enter a debate regarding where we draw the line. It's nothing we can gauge objectively; at some point, a man just stops looking like a James Bond and sometimes the phrase, "you know it when you see it" makes perfect sense. The notion that people who accept a light-haired Bond but reject a black Bond are weak in their defence is a false argument. In our appreciation of "art"--and I'm using the word in its broadest sense possible--we cannot always deconstruct, measure and archive everything minutely and mathematically. Some things are generally just more sensitive than others. Bond's hair is a purely aesthetical element. But skin colour isn't. It is a cultural and nowadays even more than that, a political thing. The "James Blonde" thing from way back when was something that only kept some internet trolls running. But if they cast a black Bond, you'd have one political side cry "victory" in the loudest possible way, and another posting angry comments in response.
But that's not what I want to know. I want to know what the fact of changing Bond's skin colour will bring to the series that we are now missing in a big bad way. Either the answer is nothing at all, and then there's no point in wanting it; or the answer is something or a lot, and then it's implied that having a white Bond all those decades was a mistake travelling back to Fleming. The latter option would pose a serious problem.
Or by extension an actress could self-identify as the established male character.
I'd like a beer.
Hear, hear!!
You are a breath of fresh air, a thoroughly needed voice of reason. Thank you.
/thread
This makes sense. We've had men playing women and vice versa. We've had white actors painting their faces black or yellow to portray Africans, Chinese, ... We've had kids playing grown-ups and adults playing teens. And we almost always fail at completely suspending disbelief except in a very rare few cases. Joseph Wiseman's Dr No comes to mind, but not much else. In theory, I agree with your statement, @parkert5, but I'm not "there" yet. I cannot yet be expected to simply abstract 007 from anyone --or, why not, anything--portraying him on screen, no matter what the looks, gender, age, physique,... of that someone. For me, and clearly, for many others here, 007 comes as the total package, a collection of things we immediately lock our sense onto and evaluate.
Daniel Craig in CR: James Bond
Tom Cruise in M:I: not James Bond
Audrey Hepburn in Two For The Road: not James Bond
Sean Connery in GF: James Bond
Mickey Rooney in Breakfast At Tiffany's: not James Bond, nor Japanse!
...
I think it's still a tad more complicated than what your statement suggests, though I'm fascinated by it. What am I willing to accept before I cry 'nonsense'? Interesting. :)
Imagine being the first writer to get the chance to imagine a Bond script with the actor being black or Asian.
Do you really think they won't want to make a statement.
If it could be that they just present Bond as they have always done, paying no attention to his skin colour possibly it might work but I just don't think that would happen.
Maybe not a total rewrite of the character but definitely some tweaks that wouldn't have been part of the previous 6 actors and what happens next time round, will it be OK to give the role to a white person again?
Idris in 2005 would have been awesome.
In what role? 😏
Why do we call white people white when they're actually pink?
I feel offended. Boohoo.
Bond is Bond. Hoagy Carmichael but with a cruel mouth and a comma of hair that falls across his forehead and just above his (right?) eye. Variations of this with lots of diversity around him (lovers, enemies and allies)-- of course!! Just like in any multi-cultural city, I want to see that represented in James Bond films. But the character is who he is... as many have said, stray too far from that and he really is no more.
James Bond has been with us, in one form or another, since 1953... update his sensibilities but keep his essence-- yes!!
But it'd be nice to have respect for the history of this character (warts and all, and how he has progressed to still be alive in this very multi-media world of ours)...
(plus, as we see in some markets, they're not quite so open to Western sensibilities to see diversity in their popcorn entertainment (https://variety.com/2015/film/news/star-wars-china-poster-controversy-john-boyega-1201653494/)).
He has many of the qualities required for the role. He does have a lot of stuff in the pipeline so he'd be an outside chance at best.
Been saying this for ages, especially if they want to go for a more humorous take. He's a brilliant comic actor. He's definitely worth consideration.
I'll say it once and I'll say it again.
Fassbender would have smashed it earlier, I said when I saw him in Inglourious Basteds what an incredible Bond he would make and then that opening moment in X-Men First Class cemented it.
If the next Bond isn't turning up for 5 - 6 years then Fassbender will be close to 50, it will depend how he ages, I certainly wouldn't boycott a film with him if they wanted to make it with an older actor.
Although like Hardy he is a name and I don't see them diverting from casting actors that are made famous from the role not they are famous and cast.
Not sure about Hemsworth he certainly would be one way to go if they wanted to lighten things up, although again he's not exactly not had exposure, he has been part of on of the biggest franchise in cinema history.
I don't see BB casting a name, I guess we'll see, although if they are putting the films on a hiatus I would pretty much say even favourites on here are not likely to be cast.
Yes, he’d have made a great Mr. Big in a Live and alert Die reimagining. I agree.
Or a tree.