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 why Felix Leiter and Moneypenny were able to be race bent, and Q was able to change his age because they weren't defined as white or as characters of a certain age, just by the roles they played in the stories. So James Bond is defined by being an extremely suave, handsome, and capable MI6 agent, so that'll always remain, but not by being white.
are there no good white actors to be 007? again my issue is Race changing just feels gimmicky much like the Women can kick ass that was in the Batwoman teaser trailer (never watched a single episode) or the Charley's angels films. it's pandering and a gimmick
He also wears flares and smokes a massive cigar: neither of those define him for the next 50 years.
Or less glibly, hitting women, being dismissive of them, smoking loads; these are character traits which actually did define his personality way more than one character pointing out that he's white in one movie 47 years ago, and yet they've all gone. And yet somehow he's still Bond.
Him too but i mean Aidan.
I would love to see ALL of the screentest ever done.
Me too big fan.
I believe it's not just audition that qualifies them, their might be more factors at play.
Yes it would be fascinating. I take it Glen directed Dalton and Brosnan's? And Campbell did Craig's I think. I guess they didn't screentest Brosnan for GE?
I guess they don't really like to come out because the performance isn't quite there yet maybe. Craig's will be the first one we see for a guy who actually got it, is that right?
It’s a good question, if they did I’ve not heard of it. I guess with Moore his whole career had been a test for Bond up until that point (!) so I could understand if they didn’t, with Connery it’s a bit weirder. Maybe they just got him to read for them live?
It's not that Bond's race defines him. It's just that Bond's race is defined in the novels. And I'm a sucker for intelectual property and original sources. But hey, that's just me and a few others apparently.
But I do think we make a valid and fair point.
I'm with you on that and I don't think any criticism of the position fuelled by ideas of it being 'racist' is merited. I understand the resistance and feel it myself; Bond, for me, is an extension of Fleming himself and the two are inseparable in personality and outlook. They are simplistic qualities but they are important nonetheless. It's why he's both likeable and unlikeable in equal measure at times. Naturally his skin colour is somewhat fundamental to my perception of him as a result and why any talk of it not being part of his character doesn't ring true to me.
However, conversely, I do think that the films have deviated from that same source a few too many times in order for it to matter too much anymore. Sure, we had CR in '06, but that is a film that comes along maybe once in a generation and I don't see them repeating it. For me, it's less a case about liking it and more accepting that it is inevitable.
It wouldn't be what I would do, of course - but then again I wouldn't have made half the Moore films the way they were made or made Die Another Day the way that it was made either. Or Spectre for that matter. Movie Bond is what it is - it's its own thing. It's a unique predicament to be in, I think - a credit to the filmmakers that they've created an enduring icon who survives long enough to have to face these questions!
Admittedly, it would be very strange to me if they go smaller scale with the first film of the next guy and take any direct inspiration from the books as they did with CR, especially if the actor was of a different skin colour. Interesting, though.
Has that stance actually been taken though?
Yeah exactly: Bond is indeed defined in the novels as being white. With a comma of black hair, blue-grey eyes, scar down the cheek, living in the 1950s, wearing a shabby old suit, smoking 60 a day, driving an ancient Bentley, suffering accidie, living on benzedrine, thinking homosexuals can't whistle etc. etc. I don't see much of that in the movies. Bond has moved beyond the original source and is, arguably, more interesting than Fleming ever made it. He was also happy to sell Bond off and abandon those details: let's not forget the first screen Bond was CIA operative card-sharp Jimmy Bond. Fleming himself was happy enough so take the cash for that, so I think the idea it has to stay perfectly original to the source has been rendered somewhat moot by the author himself and the idea that we've never seen an accurate Bond onscreen. If anyone thinks we have, feel free to point out the scar. Harry Potter managed it! :)
I'm fine with Bond not being accurate in every detail to the books. I read the books, I enjoyed them a lot, but I don't expect the films to be the same and I enjoy what they add to the experience. Roger Moore isn't Fleming's Bond, but I love him all the same.
And that's why I rather love the idea that the latest film is named after a movie that Cubby made: because he's now as much responsible for the success of Bond as Fleming was if you ask me. There's nothing intrinsically more pure or clever about reading a paperback thriller than there is watching a big movie that hundreds of people have spent years crafting, both are artistically valid. James Bond started as a successful book character and he'll always have his roots there, but he's grown beyond that into a movie icon.
I could actually see them doing that doing even more to establish the link, to be honest. It worked for Craig after all. It's unlikely to be a straight adaptation as per CR of course because the cupboard's pretty bare there
This is exactly right, but I feel like I've made this argument many times; you're never going to change anyone's mind in here.
At the end of the day, I think you have to look at the stories being told, as to me, stories are the most fundamentally important thing about film. Black Panther is a story about African culture, and therefore Black Panther's race is inextricably linked to the story they're trying to tell. James Bond films are stories about international espionage and intrigue, one British agent up against a megalomaniacal villain with infinite resources bent on manipulating the world to his or her own gains. Nothing there implies any race must be set in stone.
I'll say this again: one of Bond's characteristics, as written, is that he's white, for sure. IMO, though, that characteristic isn't inextricably linked to the the character of James Bond because it isn't important to the stories they're using the character to tell. Of course an argument could be made for Live and Let Die, where Bond's appearance in Harlem as a white brit is absolutely part of the story. But we've had our Live and Let Die adaptions (film, comic). There's no need to pigeonhole the character that way going forward. We're all huge fans of the character James Bond, but to put the character before the story is to put the cart before the horse.
I'm not trying to convince anyone else, that's just how I see it.
EDIT: As a counter argument, I would never say you could cast a black actor in the role of Derek Vinyard, provided they wanted to make a new American History X. That character must remain white, because of the importance of that character's race to the story. That logic doesn't apply to Bond, IMO.
Instead of working for MI6 he could work at a burger joint and perhaps be an aspiring YouTuber?
What we're looking for is a real life replication of THIS GUY to be the next Bond.................
Oops, I think I made this joke or one similar months ago.
Never mind. Not funny anyway.
Carry on......................
lol, I sort of feels like this helps to illustrate my point; Bond's employment by MI6 is a characteristic that is inextricably linked to the character; take that away, and the James Bond stories fall apart. IMO, the same effect doesn't happen when you change his race.
EDIT: Full disclosure, I know you were joking, of course.
I'm just saying, I'll be happy with whomever they choose, as long as their acting holds up, and the stories are still cracking. :)>-
If Eon were to ever sell, I actually could envision another producer considering changing Bond's occupation to make him more modern. By that point the character might as well be renamed.
Yeah, I agree; if they change his occupation, that's a huge paradigm shift to the character because it heavily affects the stories. Fleming, above all else, was writing about a man in the British secret service. If he's not that, he's not Bond.
Great post, but just on this particular statement; I hope this doesn't sound nitpicky but I've always seen it as the other way round. The characters are the horse that pulls the story and keeps me invested. It has always been the thing that keeps Bond head and shoulders above similar characters like Ethan Hunt. So yeah, I think the character should definitely come first. The stories aren't really that complicated, or at least they shouldn't or don't need to be.
Yeah, that's a good point and very difficult to argue. Hopefully not too off topic, but I've often thought about with Batman, it's his villains that really make the stories interesting, like Batman is this immovable object and the villains are unstoppable forces, and we watch because we want to see what'll happen when they collide. And I would say with Batman stories, the character certainly is at the forefront, and the story revolves around the character to bend him and test his limits, much in the way Bond stories are told, so I think I could agree with you and say the same about Bond. I hope at least some of that made sense...
Likewise, my post too! Just goes to show how much of a balancing act these things can be! :p
It's 2020, so he's likely an aspiring TikTok star, doing the lemon challenge or whatever goofy trend it is now.
Bond’s race is defined the films as well though. Any change IMO would be a gimmick and to prove a point (including provoking a media frenzy, which is great marketing).
But changing the race of a character is to fundamentally change the character, in terms of already established appearance and image.
Although, y’know, the Young Bond books do work if you ask me! :) But it is a different thing to ‘normal‘ Bond, sure.
They are very plot driven films rather than character driven though. Even CR is plot driven over character for the most part. The character is appealing but it’s rarely about his character.
Take the character away and the plots automatically become less interesting, is my point.