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
And do you understand how that is way more relevant to his character and what he does in the films (in that he's strongly connected to his family and family's roots back in Italy and the whole story is about the Italian mafia in America) than Bond's upbringing or family is in his?
In what way is Bond's Scottish/Swiss ancestry relevant to him gambling Le Chiffre to death? Why do you think Fleming didn't even mention it until twelve books in? Did Corleone get identified as an Italian American a bit earlier than that?
;)
Also: check out James Caan in that film playing Sonny Corleone. He's of German Jewish ancestry.
I respect you enough to give you a full answer and explain my thinking to you.
Oh, I agree with you completely. I tend to think you should stick as close to the original model as possible in order to keep the identity of the character intact. Every so often, though, someone will come along who is just too good (or too marketable) to pass up, regardless of not fitting the model as closely as they might, and then they'll get cast. I do think that there is a danger of losing the identity of the character by saying, after a deviation off-model has worked, that the changed aspect was obviously not important, and that it justifies another change added on top of the last. I think that way you'll drift too far away from the original concept.
I don't have issues with anyone saying that Bond should continue to be white; I also don't mind people offering up non-white candidates for discussion. We're all Bond fans, and I hate that this political stuff has divided us and made the discussion at times so personal and hostile.
Yes I think dismissing candidates out of hand for not matching some seventy year old novels' physical descriptions of a character is not very helpful to the atmosphere.
I don't think it'll come down to someone just happening to come along to break the mould. If they go non-white it'll be a specific choice, and one I'd imagine they'd take a lot of consultation about. I don't feel best placed (especially with what we're seeing at the moment) to say whether they should do that or not, but I would say that if that they found someone great who can personify the important elements of Bond, I wouldn't have a problem with it.
I certainly wouldn't say that Craig has drifted far from the original concept at all.
...and to me James Bond is defined by his Britishness, not his colour.
I think that's the aim, but at the moment it does have to be a conscious choice rather than just hoping it will happen naturally, because it won't.
Whether they should do it in Bond's specific case, I don't know. It's not for me to say.
He's got a Bondy look to me, I just need to see how he does as a leading man I guess. As long as he's vaguely handsome I don't care about looks as much as I want someone who's just really good as a lead.
I agree that there are certain things which different characters are defined by: for example I don't think Doctor Who has ever been defined by his gender so turning him into a woman made no difference to me. Bond on the other hand, is defined by his being a man- it affects his whole outlook on life and how he behaves around everyone, so you could never change his gender. His race however isn't really relevant to his personality to me. Maybe that is racially insensitive of me though: I'm actually feeling like I don't really know at the moment as the point of what's going on is that we're supposed to reconsider our attitudes.
Yeah, the producers are certainly pretty confident about that sort of thing I think, you're right. If they want to do it, they'll do it.
I understand all that. But there is nothing wrong with me (as a Bond fan), wanting an actor who looks typically English/British and not of Mediterranean decent.
Interestingly, the studio wanted Robert Redford for the part of Micheal Corleone, which Coppola deemed ridiculous. Yes, James Caan doesn’t look Italian and admittedly, he still does a great job.
However, it remains my preference to have a white British actor of British decent playing the part. Again, it’s not right or wrong, it’s my opinion.
Anyway I thought it might be an interesting exercise if we each shared our own top 5 lists for who we would like as the next James Bond? Might offer some more variety for everyone, as long as it can be done without too much judgement. Also, please no lists of the same 5 repeated names, I know what you guys are like haha :D
Also, you don't have to offer reasoning or explanation if you don't want to just 5 different names.
So, my top 5 choices for the next James Bond are:
1. Callum Turner: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4360085/?ref_=nmls_hd
2. Sean Teale: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4148614/?ref_=nmls_hd
3. Aaron Taylor-Johnson: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1093951/?ref_=nmls_hd
4. Ben Aldridge: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3198781/?ref_=nmls_hd
5. Oliver Jackson-Cohen: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2719825/?ref_=nmls_hd
Great idea.
1. Aidan Turner.
2. Tom Hiddleston.
3. Richard Madden.
4. Micheal Fassbender.
5. Henry Cavill.
That said I’d have Daniel Craig back for a 6th film.
So it's just preference now, rather than all of the horrible patronising laughing emojis and calling me 'arrogant' etc. for me explaining my thought process. You tried to explain yours and back it up but that's turned into just personal preference that you can't explain now.
That's my point, it doesn't always matter, and it didn't even occur to you when you were drawing your comparison.
Honestly, I really I don't know if it is really okay to just 'prefer' to see a white person in a job. Especially one where there's no really great reason to keep one there.
Genuinely I don't know, especially when it comes to wanting a white person for something over a non-white person. As we're seeing at the moment, I don't know if there is any reason important enough.
Funny thing with that is I don't think I have anyone I actually want as Bond! :) There are only interesting propositions and people I'd need to see more of before I settle for them.
Actually no: the only person I know for a fact would do a good job is indeed Fassbender. But we'd need him next year!
:)
I never called you arrogant, that wasn’t even my post or thread? That was a disagreement you had with another member.
My preference is to stick as close to Fleming and also to have a white British actor of British decent in the role.
I think it’s fine to want this IMO. In the nicest possible way, I’m not asking for your permission or approval. The reason is the tradition since 62 and Flemings novels. Bond has always been a white Brit. It’s not discrimination for a job in business, it’s playing a fictional character and to play that character one has to look a certain way in my opinion.
To change a characters race is to change the character IMO. If they recast Axel Foley, I would not expect white actors to be considered, because the ‘character’ is black.
Exactly.
And a total coincidence that you happen to reach back a couple of pages to quote it and endorse it at that moment? C'mon, have the courage of your convictions at least.
We're discussing it, it's a discussion forum, it's a totally fine thing to talk about this. Nothing wrong with it. It's brilliant that you think it's fine, but perhaps now is the time for us to reconsider about what's actually important about these subjects.
Myself included, as I say above I'm not even 100% sure myself if it would be the right thing to do because it's a decision which doesn't affect my own community.
'Tradition' isn't a massively convincing reason though, I find. There's plenty of traditions in the Bond film series they've moved on from, from sexism to bad special effects.
And in my opinion it's been demonstrated what is important about his looks, and that's that he's handsome, perhaps a bit cruel and tough. The precise colours of his eyes, hair and skin don't seem all that relevant.
In many ways it's more important than a job in a business, yes, because it's way more visible. Some characters do require precise racial characteristics because of their role in the plot, yes; I just see very little in this particular one that does. If James Caan can do it in your given example (which actually required more of a particular racial look) then I'm not really finding much of a reason to think otherwise.
Actually going back to him quickly, he looks particularly Bondian in this show - despite the American accent.
Fine. Agreed. But I personally didn’t say it. That’s a fact.
The whole Bond franchise is built on ‘formula’ and tradition.
If the producers decide to fundamentally change the character (including race) then I can decide whether to watch the film or not at that time. You’ll be happy, I won’t.
But I’m still pretty sure/ confident it’ll be a traditional casting.
But he'd be terrific. He's got a thuggish beauty about him. Quite reminiscent of a young Sean Connery. He has that wily reckless energy of Tom Hardy. I think he'd be very good in the fight scenes too.
But Camera tricks don’t work on the red carpet when he’s touring and representing the franchise brand. He’ll just look very short.
He can sit on someone s shoulder inside a long coat. Problem solved.
Brilliant! 🤣😂🤣😂